H&R Koni Sports Installed finally.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
2002 CLK55
H&R Koni Sports Installed finally. Updated w/Pic.
After 8 months of sitting in my garage, I finally installed my suspension.
My vehicle is a 2002 CLK55 and I installed the following:
H&R Springs
Koni Sport Shocks set at the softest "0"
#3 Front spring Pad
#2 Rear Spring Pad
Intial impressions is that it looked great, about a one inch gap all the way around and according to the MB tech aliginment within factory specs.
After reading all the posts I could find on this subject I decided to set the shocks at its softest setting "0" which from what I gather most people do to avoid harshness. What I failed to notice was that most of the people with this setup own a 320 or 430 (so I am assuming than both of these set-ups are a lot softer than the factory AMG than came on my 55)
. Coming from the AMG 55 suspension, the car now rides like and E class in my opinion. The car at "0" is much softer than stock (I would say 25%, less harsh). Now I have to set up an appointment to re-adjust the Koni's to the either #1 or #2 setting which from what I have read is 20% at #1 and 50% at #2 stiffer than the "0" setting. Does anyone with a CLK 55 know the appropriate setting to get my car riding a bit stiffer than stock? Thanks in advance and pic's will arrrive shortly.
Btw: With this setting it feels like the car handles a bit worse than stock though it sure is comfortable.
My vehicle is a 2002 CLK55 and I installed the following:
H&R Springs
Koni Sport Shocks set at the softest "0"
#3 Front spring Pad
#2 Rear Spring Pad
Intial impressions is that it looked great, about a one inch gap all the way around and according to the MB tech aliginment within factory specs.
After reading all the posts I could find on this subject I decided to set the shocks at its softest setting "0" which from what I gather most people do to avoid harshness. What I failed to notice was that most of the people with this setup own a 320 or 430 (so I am assuming than both of these set-ups are a lot softer than the factory AMG than came on my 55)
. Coming from the AMG 55 suspension, the car now rides like and E class in my opinion. The car at "0" is much softer than stock (I would say 25%, less harsh). Now I have to set up an appointment to re-adjust the Koni's to the either #1 or #2 setting which from what I have read is 20% at #1 and 50% at #2 stiffer than the "0" setting. Does anyone with a CLK 55 know the appropriate setting to get my car riding a bit stiffer than stock? Thanks in advance and pic's will arrrive shortly.Btw: With this setting it feels like the car handles a bit worse than stock though it sure is comfortable.
Last edited by 55Power; Jul 9, 2006 at 07:33 PM.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
hey i was just wondering if the rims you have on your 55 are 17's currently as i just purchased a pair for my 230k and i think there is too much gap, but on yours it looks much nicer, i think the suspension helps if you are running the 17s. You can see it in the picture thread last or second last page at the bottom. thanks
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
2002 CLK55
Mike, the 997S will be coming soon. Just got to shop around a bit more and get my price.
Orpheus, I am actually running 18's with 235 fronts and 265 rears. I just wanted the stock look so I bought the exact same Mono 2's in 18'.
Orpheus, I am actually running 18's with 235 fronts and 265 rears. I just wanted the stock look so I bought the exact same Mono 2's in 18'.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
i definantly should have gone 18's instead of 17's DOH!
ohh well i hope with some springs riding a bit lower i can reduce the gap, do u recommend the h & r, because if they are better than the amg suspension then it will definantly be good enough for me.
ohh well i hope with some springs riding a bit lower i can reduce the gap, do u recommend the h & r, because if they are better than the amg suspension then it will definantly be good enough for me.
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
From: Las Vegas
2005 SL600 by SPEEDRIVEN
Compare the 997S and the CLK55
Hey, can you compare the 997S and the CLK55 with your setup. My cousin has the 997S and we are going to the track in a month or so. I have seen the stats on the 997S but wonder what the real comparison is from someone who has both. Thanks.
Allan
Allan
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
2002 CLK55
Orpheus: The H&R's lower the car a bit lower than advertised I think, but the ride seems to be really smooth with no noises whatsoever. The AMG suspension is actually stiffer than my H&R, Koni setup at the moment because I set the shocks to the softest setting. I'll have to let you know how the ride is after I increase the dampening on the shock.
Allan: I don't own both YET but plan to shortly. Though I do not have much drive time on the 997S, I just drove one over then weekend and in my opinion the 997S would kill the 55 on the track (course). On the straights though by the seat of the pants the 55 actually felt stronger to me. I am sure it is because of the torque advantage. If you are taking your car to a road course the 55 would have no chance unless the 997S driver was just horrid. Just my .02
Allan: I don't own both YET but plan to shortly. Though I do not have much drive time on the 997S, I just drove one over then weekend and in my opinion the 997S would kill the 55 on the track (course). On the straights though by the seat of the pants the 55 actually felt stronger to me. I am sure it is because of the torque advantage. If you are taking your car to a road course the 55 would have no chance unless the 997S driver was just horrid. Just my .02
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
From: Las Vegas
2005 SL600 by SPEEDRIVEN
Thanks. We are hitting the drag stip first but next year the track courses. He just did one this weekend. I have H&R springs and that is it. I have 17 inch and he has 19 and larger rubber. I really like my handling with the H&Rs but have not driven his car yet. Do you still think the handling is that much worse even with the H&R and your new shocks?
Allan
Allan
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, California
2000 CLK 430
Dont feel to bad, I was told that to always start at the softest setting at The Wheel Supply, and after they wear a bit, then switch it up to a stiffer setting to avoid the shocks from leaking or getting damaged. They said that when they set the up out of the box, they experience leakage on some cars, but on the softest setting then changing it to a more stiffer one, it turns out better. Anyways good luck with ur set up.
Originally Posted by 55Power
After 8 months of sitting in my garage, I finally installed my suspension.
My vehicle is a 2002 CLK55 and I installed the following:
H&R Springs
Koni Sport Shocks set at the softest "0"
#3 Front spring Pad
#2 Rear Spring Pad
Intial impressions is that it looked great, about a one inch gap all the way around and according to the MB tech aliginment within factory specs.
After reading all the posts I could find on this subject I decided to set the shocks at its softest setting "0" which from what I gather most people do to avoid harshness. What I failed to notice was that most of the people with this setup own a 320 or 430 (so I am assuming than both of these set-ups are a lot softer than the factory AMG than came on my 55) . Coming from the AMG 55 suspension, the car now rides like and E class in my opinion. The car at "0" is much softer than stock (I would say 25%, less harsh). Now I have to set up an appointment to re-adjust the Koni's to the either #1 or #2 setting which from what I have read is 20% at #1 and 50% at #2 stiffer than the "0" setting. Does anyone with a CLK 55 know the appropriate setting to get my car riding a bit stiffer than stock? Thanks in advance and pic's will arrrive shortly.
Btw: With this setting it feels like the car handles a bit worse than stock though it sure is comfortable.
My vehicle is a 2002 CLK55 and I installed the following:
H&R Springs
Koni Sport Shocks set at the softest "0"
#3 Front spring Pad
#2 Rear Spring Pad
Intial impressions is that it looked great, about a one inch gap all the way around and according to the MB tech aliginment within factory specs.
After reading all the posts I could find on this subject I decided to set the shocks at its softest setting "0" which from what I gather most people do to avoid harshness. What I failed to notice was that most of the people with this setup own a 320 or 430 (so I am assuming than both of these set-ups are a lot softer than the factory AMG than came on my 55)
. Coming from the AMG 55 suspension, the car now rides like and E class in my opinion. The car at "0" is much softer than stock (I would say 25%, less harsh). Now I have to set up an appointment to re-adjust the Koni's to the either #1 or #2 setting which from what I have read is 20% at #1 and 50% at #2 stiffer than the "0" setting. Does anyone with a CLK 55 know the appropriate setting to get my car riding a bit stiffer than stock? Thanks in advance and pic's will arrrive shortly.Btw: With this setting it feels like the car handles a bit worse than stock though it sure is comfortable.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
2002 CLK55
Allan: I really have not had the chance to push it hard yet. As I mentioned I purchased Koni shocks as well but set them at it's softest setting at the moment (mistake on my part) so the car actually feels like it handles about the same as stock except with a much more comfy ride. I sure it will handle better once I increase the dampening. Regardless of what I do to the 55 though, I think the 997S is just in a totally different class. The handling is just rock solid and handles like what is is, a sports car. If I tried the same things I did in the 997S in my 55 I think I would have wrecked it already. So to answer your question, yes I think the 55 is a much worse handler than the 997S but for being a Sports Coupe I think it handles great after/before the suspension swap.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
2002 CLK55
Curyous: I am hoping the MB tech can squeeze me it for this upcoming Saturday so I can crank the shock up 2 clicks for 50% more dampening. Actually the slightly softer the stock AMG ride is starting to grow on me, decision decisions....
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco
Kleemann CLK 43K
I have Koni + lorinser spring. Koni at soft was way too soft. It will get even softer in time. I think you will like the medium setting more. I have never tried full stiff but would like to know the end result if you try that.
