Rear axle ratio?
03-01-2004, 04:34 PM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Rear axle ratio?
Mercedes Model Spec. site provided by E55 KEV:
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/containe...&rnav=012345678
I was looking at the Rear axle ratio and how much they changed from each E-Class model and year.
In 96
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E320)
In 97
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E420)
In 98
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
In 99
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
In 00+
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
What would account for the differences? There are companies that sell upgrades for example from 2.82 to 3.46 for better off the line performance. Will the rear end from the 98 E300 fit in the E320 and do the same thing?
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/containe...&rnav=012345678
I was looking at the Rear axle ratio and how much they changed from each E-Class model and year.
In 96
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E320)
In 97
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E420)
In 98
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
In 99
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
In 00+
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
What would account for the differences? There are companies that sell upgrades for example from 2.82 to 3.46 for better off the line performance. Will the rear end from the 98 E300 fit in the E320 and do the same thing?
03-05-2004, 11:32 PM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: SFV, Ca.
Posts: 1,810
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W210, W220, W163, W164, C6
03-06-2004, 11:15 AM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
I already talked to Carl from Bergwerks a while ago. They offer for $1400 to $3000 to do the conversion I just mentioned. You end up with the ratio that the E300 Diesel has at 3.45.
So why doesn't the E55 already have the 3.45? it has the 2.82 rear end. Is it becuase it is already quick enough off the line so the lower rear end ratio gives a better top end? I wasn't asking for where to get this done but if anyone has done it and what results they had. If you have an E320 and thought to improve it buy putting an E55 rear end in it, you would actually going to a lower gear ratio.
So why doesn't the E55 already have the 3.45? it has the 2.82 rear end. Is it becuase it is already quick enough off the line so the lower rear end ratio gives a better top end? I wasn't asking for where to get this done but if anyone has done it and what results they had. If you have an E320 and thought to improve it buy putting an E55 rear end in it, you would actually going to a lower gear ratio.
04-13-2004, 06:22 PM
#4
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Murrieta, Southern California
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Late Built 2005 W-211 E-320 CDI
Re: Rear axle ratio?
This listing is NOT correct at least as far as the ratio listed for the '99 E-300 DT.
Mine has the 3.07 ratio.
I'll go out on a limb and say that the '98s are also delivered here in NA with that same 3.07 ratio. It should be the 2.82s that are standard for the V8s.
Mine has the 3.07 ratio.
I'll go out on a limb and say that the '98s are also delivered here in NA with that same 3.07 ratio. It should be the 2.82s that are standard for the V8s.
Originally posted by E-Klasse
Mercedes Model Spec. site provided by E55 KEV:
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/containe...&rnav=012345678
I was looking at the Rear axle ratio and how much they changed from each E-Class model and year.
In 96
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E320)
In 97
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E420)
In 98
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
In 99
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
In 00+
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
What would account for the differences? There are companies that sell upgrades for example from 2.82 to 3.46 for better off the line performance. Will the rear end from the 98 E300 fit in the E320 and do the same thing?
Mercedes Model Spec. site provided by E55 KEV:
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/containe...&rnav=012345678
I was looking at the Rear axle ratio and how much they changed from each E-Class model and year.
In 96
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 2.87:1 (E320)
In 97
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E420)
In 98
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
In 99
Rear axle ratio 3.46:1 (E300 Diesel)
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
In 00+
Rear axle ratio 3.07:1 (E320)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E430)
Rear axle ratio 2.82:1 (E55)
What would account for the differences? There are companies that sell upgrades for example from 2.82 to 3.46 for better off the line performance. Will the rear end from the 98 E300 fit in the E320 and do the same thing?
04-14-2004, 08:56 AM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
For once I might have to agree with Derrel on this one.
At the same speeds my '97 E300 runs at a higher RPM than our '99 E300.
And MBUSA has the same rear axle ratio listed.
At the same speeds my '97 E300 runs at a higher RPM than our '99 E300.
And MBUSA has the same rear axle ratio listed.
04-14-2004, 12:39 PM
#6
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Murrieta, Southern California
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Late Built 2005 W-211 E-320 CDI
Doesn't matter whether or not you "might" agree. 
What any of them have is very easy to verify.
All anyone needs to do is to crawl under with a rag in hand and wipe off the grim in the lower right-hand corner of the differential carrier and read the ratio!
They even supply the carrier part number I think? :p
I cannot imagine MBZ installing 3.46s in the later 98/99 E-300s with their tremendous low-speed torque available at only 1600 rpm. With a 3.97 first gear ratio, that gear combination is simply uncalled for. As it is now, I seldom use first speed, unless there is a steep incline.
The second gear ratio of 2.41 times my 3.07s combined with my relatively "loose" T/C is plenty to get it moving rapidly.
I only wish the 2.82s or something higher would fit. Revs at todays highway speeds are needlessly high.
What any of them have is very easy to verify.
All anyone needs to do is to crawl under with a rag in hand and wipe off the grim in the lower right-hand corner of the differential carrier and read the ratio!
They even supply the carrier part number I think? :p
I cannot imagine MBZ installing 3.46s in the later 98/99 E-300s with their tremendous low-speed torque available at only 1600 rpm. With a 3.97 first gear ratio, that gear combination is simply uncalled for. As it is now, I seldom use first speed, unless there is a steep incline.
The second gear ratio of 2.41 times my 3.07s combined with my relatively "loose" T/C is plenty to get it moving rapidly.
I only wish the 2.82s or something higher would fit. Revs at todays highway speeds are needlessly high.
Originally posted by michakaveli
For once I might have to agree with Derrel on this one.
[ Who cares whether or not you agree here! No one asked you, did they? ]
At the same speeds my '97 E300 runs at a higher RPM than our '99 E300.
[ You mean daddies car out here in California, don't you? When the last time he let you drive it? ]
And MBUSA has the same rear axle ratio listed.
For once I might have to agree with Derrel on this one.
[ Who cares whether or not you agree here! No one asked you, did they? ]
At the same speeds my '97 E300 runs at a higher RPM than our '99 E300.
[ You mean daddies car out here in California, don't you? When the last time he let you drive it? ]
And MBUSA has the same rear axle ratio listed.
Last edited by Green E-300 DT; 04-15-2004 at 01:42 AM.
Trending Topics
04-15-2004, 01:38 AM
#8
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Murrieta, Southern California
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Late Built 2005 W-211 E-320 CDI
Are you upset because your car doesn't have the "beans" to do the job, and needs that combination of 3.97 times 3.46 to get it away from its' own smoke?
You think you know because when you drove daddies car and you could see the differences in the tachometer readings, but are simply too lazy to crawl underneath and check for yourself. At your age, I guess its getting to hard to get out and under?
I've known some young dummies in my time, but you win the prize!
Don't say anything here unless it is constructive. No one here has asked for your stupid comments.
No wonder you have so many posts. There is basically nothing to any of them!
You think you know because when you drove daddies car and you could see the differences in the tachometer readings, but are simply too lazy to crawl underneath and check for yourself. At your age, I guess its getting to hard to get out and under?
I've known some young dummies in my time, but you win the prize!
Don't say anything here unless it is constructive. No one here has asked for your stupid comments.
No wonder you have so many posts. There is basically nothing to any of them!
Originally posted by michakaveli
Hey Durrelll... Suck Noots!
Hey Durrelll... Suck Noots!
04-15-2004, 07:39 AM
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally posted by Green E-300 DT
I've known some young dummies in my time, but you win the prize!
I've known some young dummies in my time, but you win the prize!
You hypocrite. You talk about destructive comments, look at all of your posts on every forum your ignorant melon has encountered.
Clearly you do not have any sense of humor. It's sad that such an elderly man like yourself must always be detrimental to the group.
I hope your joints didn't ache too much from the arthritis you must be enduring while you had to take a look under the car at the rear end. No wonder you're bitter....
04-15-2004, 09:19 AM
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: HK (but constantly travelling)
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
98 W210 Advantgarde
Why TF do u even bother Chris?
Its unfortunate its taken such a wrong turn E-Klasse.....
Its unfortunate its taken such a wrong turn E-Klasse.....
Last edited by Whitey; 04-15-2004 at 09:22 AM.
04-15-2004, 11:02 AM
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: SFV, SoCal
Posts: 5,544
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'04 Silverado Z71 - sold all my Benzes and need another!
Originally posted by Whitey
Its unfortunate its taken such a wrong turn E-Klasse.....
Its unfortunate its taken such a wrong turn E-Klasse.....
07-12-2018, 05:56 PM
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
