When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Just to clarify, are you guys recommending both the bushing and camber kit? Or just the camber kit? I plan to lower the car with HR springs, but want it done proper. Thanks
At the moment I have the front and rear Camber kits.
K-Mac does offer a rear sub frame bushing kit that aids in maintaining traction.
I have purchased the bushing kit however havent had it fitted yet.
Maybe Kev from K-Mac can chime in to give a better description of what the bushing kit does.
Haha I know, but beats buying tires every 5k due to premature wear.... That will add up fast
Oh for sure it's the right way to go... I wouldn't go any other way, But now were we're at what, $1500 to drop on some springs? Most coilover kits go for that much haha... =(
Oh for sure it's the right way to go... I wouldn't go any other way, But now were we're at what, $1500 to drop on some springs? Most coilover kits go for that much haha... =(
Yeh it's stupid, I don't understand why Mercedes would do this, is this a common problem especially for guys who aren't lowered and will have to change tires every 5K?
Yeh it's stupid, I don't understand why Mercedes would do this, is this a common problem especially for guys who aren't lowered and will have to change tires every 5K?
I went through my original tyres and a second set at stock height.
Fitted the camber kits after the third set inside 18 months.
No alignment adjustment = cost cutting effecting the end user.
Hey Mate! Here is my current spec after the install. Running 1.8 front camber and the rears are 1.5. I was requesting for the same spec like yours but they said it might rub the fenders. They told me to drive and break-in for few weeks . Then they will recheck the alignment again. Also, im a bit concern anout the front caster,am running 7.4 left and 7.7 right. You think it shud be higher like 9.3-10? Thanks
We have been working with my C63S sedan to try and achieve the best numbers we could get . The original posters numbers had us scratching our heads because we were unable to get 1.5 camber without sacrificing the castor which would go positive(11.5) went we brought it to 1.5 camber .We were unable to get even close to that with the Kmac's and we are using the latest alignment bench to try and achieve these.The other questionable thing is the original posters report is very basic ...not what you typically see w/ alignment spec's ...there is usually a lot more detail showing all angles and SAI ,Included angle, set back and such .
When you go negative with the camber the castor will go positive ,there is no way of changing that ... it's a given . As for the other alignment spec's your castor is way too low ,the spec's are Min 8.9 - Max 9.9 or at least that what the factory calls for . I'm sure you are feeling it when driving I would think
Here are the best spec's we could achieve after trying to align it 3 times trying different set-ups decreasing camber and trying to stay within on castor .On the first attempt we went -1.5 camber and my castor went 11.4 & 11.5 which was way too positive and the car wasn't great in turns as it
would fall in . So here you go , this is the best we could achieve w/o sacrificing .
1st attachment is with -1.5 camber but again look at the castor 11.5/11.4 and as I said it drove like crap in turns (too much castor) the second one is what we are at now which gives me more positive camber as initial was -3.0 /-2.9 and keeps the castor within spec ...oh I should mention I'm lowered with KW/HAS ...not sure if you 2 are
don't pay attention to the initial as it was loose but look at the camber -1.7 & - 1.5 but it sacrificed the castor ..it was too high and drove like crap in higher speed turns. I don't not have bushings in the rear but am going to install adj arms I bought later once I install my new wheels to make sure I have the clearance to the inside of the 1/4's when loaded
Here's what I'm at now .....my original camber when we first measured it was -3.0/-2.9 (lowered) and now I'm at -1.9 (within factory spec) and castor is maxed but within factory spec . Again you cannot decrease castor without increasing camber .....now it drives alot better in turns with these numbers
Last edited by C3504matic; Jul 10, 2018 at 11:09 PM.
Just a quick update on my tyre wear after 1 year of having my K-Mac Camber Kits installed.
I pulled my rear wheels off this morning as I’m trail fitting a set of W205 C63S Coupe wheels to my sedan.
Tyres look to be even spread in ware across the width of the tread which I am super surprised at even after a half dozen burnouts at the drags last week.
Camber is set to -1degree on the which has obviously done its job in extending the life of my tyres.
My bushing failed and making more than noise.
I purchased 2016 Mercedes C63s front and back bushing kit this summer.
I installed front bushings runs good for few months. But later I heard front bushing starts to make squeaking noise when I hit bump at slow speed, then later on I felt wheel alignment constants changing by itself. I lift the car checked bolt if its loose, then I found bolts are good, they were tight. But what I found is both front thrust arm bushings have excessive play, I could even easily twrist and move it by hand.
I tried to contact kevin, but no reply.
How about yours?
Only received your email at start of the day here in Sydney ! Spend most of day on factory floor, do apologize the 4 pm reply !
Excess play in thrust arm bushes. This would have actually taken place at fitment time.
The center hardened steel spindles are bonded to the elastomer bush and the internal steel ball (which rotates inside the outer shell ) .
Bushes are compressed in tight for long term maintenance free operation. Instructions do point out to oscillate bush when adjusting. -extreme / excess force can cause what you describe.
It is all about making things bullet proof (catering for all situations). So will send no cost this week latest bush update where have been able to make the actual spherical ball and center spigot one integral unit. Therefore eliminating entirely this problem.
The bush design itself besides incorporating ( precise single wrench) Caster adjustment also resolves / overcomes the long term problem which has plagued the industry for years, the use / application of “steel spherical bearings” with wafer thin teflon style liners in “bush mounts “ – which soon pound out with resultant noise / metal to metal contact .
While the Unique K-MAC design is a generation change - more then two and a half times for both the actual "circumference / load bearing area" and also "shock absorption".
I'm thinking about ditching mine and going back to stock . It doesn't feel the same and it still squeaks although we've tried everything. Mine squeaks lock to lock only when warm which is strange in itself ,doesn't do it cold . I've had 4 alignment shops take a crack at getting it to drive better . My alignment specs are great but doesn't feel all that great at highway speed going into turns , it tends to tighten up and drop into the turn rather than follow it . As I said the alignment has been checked 4 time each time making small adjustments but all the numbers are great its just the bushings . I am running 9.5" wheels up front w/ 255's and maybe that is part of it but it shouldn't be . I'll probably switch back next year as the car is off the road for the winter now . I did speak to Kevin about it and he thought it might be his design something to do with dust covers squeaking and made a suggestion to remove them but I'm not sure what covers he is talking about
So you have to replace all the suspension arms where the OEM bushings were pressed out, correct?
I have them as well front/rear, and have the same findings as you but no noise.
Same issue as Michael. Advise address and will also send pair of these new “one piece” bushes leaving no tolerance for adjusting mishaps.
Background is have been manufacturing performance bushings longer than anyone else (1964), and yes of course are designed to be noiseless, having no metal to metal contact !
With the new car industry doing away with alignment adjusters – other than Toe / directional adjustment, we saw the need and took on the role of reinstating adjustment for ALL THE MAJOR VEHICLE MAKES (currently front and rear kits for over 30 makes / models ) allowing therefore ESSENTIAL CAMBER AND CASTER (ABILITY TO CHANGE TIRE CONTACT ANGLES).
This deletion brought about by the ever increasing speed of OEM assembly lines (with Camber and Caster specs now only being quoted - with very broad parameters).
Taking on this Research and Development does open us up for criticism. But as manufacturers we feel whole lot better then doing nothing flawlessly.
Looking back we have had only two main issues - which have both been resolved :
1. Noise brought about through lock nuts not being fully tight. Majority depend on reverse teeth to secure – not fully tight will inevitably loosen. Several years ago we developed a system where no matter “what the tension” a nut can not inadvertantly come loose.
2 As set out above ( # 66) reply – Extreme / Excess force when adjusting this particular design could loosen center. Also explained center is now "one integral unit eliminating this issue entirely".
This actual “adjustment system concept”- we patented worldwide. Before this, the last 40 or so years bush adjustment required labour and time consuming dismantling of arm / bush - pressing out then trial and error repositioning at a new adjustment setting.
K-MAC design breakthrough is fast, precise, single wrench adjustment, accurately ( under load ) direct on alignment rack.
But it has come with a lot of controversy with many alignment shops at first glance ask - how can this possibly work (after years of experiencing the time consuming requirement to remove control arms and relocate bushes ).
But once they get their head around it and realize “simplicity itself”- that bush can be inserted in any position and single wrench to adjust precisely on vehicle. (the often quoted – “the simplest design is the best design” really does apply here) .
So yes, catering for the requirements of over 30 makes / models with constant design updates –controversy will always be their – but after all .... this is exactly what the new car industry is all about and promotes– constant, ongoing improvements !
Same with Daniel, I have my car lowered, and the bodyshop can do -2.1 degrees for front camber at most, I want something like -1.5, and they told me that's not possible
Background re Front / Rear Camber / Caster adjustment for C63/S, S63/S65 models is that the common "inaccurate - one offset position" fluted bolts (front only) cannot be fitted to these models.
While we have designed the K-MAC front lower / inner arm bushings to be precise / accurate Camber adjustable. Also providing up to 4 times the range - 1.2 degree verses 0.3 of one degree (similar adjustment with the forward facing K-MAC thrust arm Caster adjustable bushings).
As per web site also manufactured is front replacement upper arm inner adjustable bushings. P/N 503216-1 K.
These provide up to 2 degrees "extra" negative Camber for track days / competition or 3 degrees positive (collision damage or if extra lowered suspension).
This upper arm front kit comes with bush extraction tool so top arm does not need to be removed from vehicle.
Unlike the lower arm K-MAC adjustable bushings access from engine bay also needed (means extra fitment time - see link below re instruction sheets both for "upper" and "lower" arms).
Rear kit - Provides up to 2 degrees Camber and also precise single wrench adjustable. Plus extra Toe adjustment necessary to compensate for the new rear Camber facility.
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
