K-A

That's what I meant. I'm sure ride quality won't be as affected, since 18's don't really cross that "line" of getting rougher and more damage prone (like 19's+), but I'm sure you won't be seeing any or many blowouts anymore.

220S

While you're at it ask them why they changed the ADSII from three settings to only two with the W212. Obviously they made some sort of design change from the previous Airmatic.

Here's from an Australian blog on the W212:
"On 17-inch wheels and 45-series rubber, the four-cylinder models and 350 CDI to Madrid lumps and bumps in their stride. In contrast, the Airmatic 500 on 18-inch wheels exhibited a choppier demeanor on the Comfort setting, which further deteriorated on Sport."

fwiw, there was a member here who got his W212 E550 lemon'd and bought back by MBUSA due to an airmatic issue. He picked up a BMW 550i. I think it was emliner(?)

Good luck with it all.

ngerstman

Thanks. Regards. Ned.

joev11

Even id the one you test drive does the same thing as ours does, that doesn't make it ok as they seem to think it will.

By all means please let me and the others know what you find out by driving a different car.

ngerstman

Well i test drove another brand new e550 at Morristown Mercedes and that suspension drove just like mine. So I guess that is just the way the airmatics are. They are made for better handling, not comfort, period. Better handling means that the air shocks stiffen up when the sensors pick up an increase in vertical motion to reduce any additional bounce which unfortunately then gets transmitted through the stiff frame to the passengers. It's interesting when you think about the fact that the forever improvements in frame integrity and stiffness actually transmits even more of the road to the passenger compartment. You can think of the frame as a spring and the stiffer the spring, the stiffer the ride, all other things being equal. The sensors for the front air shocks are mounted in the engine compartment. You can see them when you open the hood. I do believe that the way the system is designed, you do get less travel with the air shocks than with conventional shock and spring system. With conventional spring/shock system, the range of motion is mechanically determined by a combination of the external forces and the size and stiffness of the shock/spring system. With the airmatic system, there are sensors that measure the speed and size of the vertical motion and then control the valves that seem to put more of a quicker limit on travel to improve handling. Interesting idea that is not well executed for comfort, IMO. I think that is why I get the sensation of the air shocks "bottoming out" when I hit even a medium size pot hole. The sensors pick up the extreme vertical motion and move to limit it as opposed to a conventional suspension which continues to travel toward its mechanical limits, which I would think should be right before the car bottoms out. You don't have any where near that travel in the airmatic system. This would definitely lead to more blowouts as the force of hitting a pothole is not as absorbed by the suspension but by your tire and rim. Now on high frequency lower severity rough roads, the sensors also seem to stiffen up the air shocks as well, thus transmitting the road to the passengers for the sake of handling. The comfort setting only mitigates the character of airmatic modestly. I suppose that Mercedes could try to reprogram the airmatic system. I'm not sure they can and won't hold my breath waiting. So it goes. Regards. Ned.

Wig

All very disappointing Ned.

It sounds like they need a third, more comfortable setting? I think the W211 Airmatic had three settings, and maybe the comfort setting was 'softer' than the W212 comfort setting?

ngerstman

Maybe that would help. Or some reprogramming of the logic in the system. Regards. Ned.

EmE247

I drove my bro's 2011 W212 on 18's and couldn't tell the difference in ride quality w/ mine and the 19's.

ImInPA

I have always preferred a properly configured mechanical shock/coil spring suspension over air suspensions. In my experience, the air suspensions are either set very soft for almost floaty comfort with lots of travel, or, as appears to be the case with the E550, shorter travel and very firm damping. I see a purpose for adjustable air suspensions in the rear of station wagons or vehicles designed to load more stuff. It is interesting to me that MB is doing away with the Airmatic on the 550. I think it will be a better car without it.

K-A

Very true. What concerns me, is since the suspension is so bad at absorbing harshness, and since the frame has to literally be forced to deform itself little by little so some stupid level of "Sporty ride" is felt via terrible absorbing, how stiff and perfect the outstanding initial structural integrity of this car will last?

After reading this, I think I'm gonna give M-B a for eliminating Airmatic on the E. To be honest, Airmatic has always been a turn-off to me (one reason why I didn't get a V8), as even under Warranty, I don't like the incredible cost that can come up from it, and it can get fussy (things like misaligned stance, with one side being higher than another, etc. are all common enough).

K-A

Bringing this back to light.

I had a 2012 C250 Loaner for a couple of days. Yes, the 4 banger is a complete DOG, man that thing was slow. I am a conservative enough driver to where my E350 feels effortless and even sprightly to me, but I need effortless, and the 4-banger in that car was not. Yes, the motor sounded like crap, and yes my E looked like a billion crisp and shiny dollars when I saw it next to the Loaner, which is very nice itself, when I was swapping back....

.... But, what irks me is how much better resolved the C's ride and chassis was over rough surfaces. The E has a smoother, more luscious ride, except for on rough patches. I think the factor here, or at least a big part of it, is that the C had 17" rims. It was INCREDIBLE as to how much more absorbing power the less 1" wheel has over my E's 18's. All the while, my E's suspension and wheels transmit so much shock to the chassis and cabin, I could have sworn the C felt even sturdier than it.... which is not good, as the E has a higher torsional rigidity and a more advanced and stronger chassis and safety cell. Two other factors here are that the C is a shorter car, which naturally will feel "tighter", and it only had 20 miles on it, yet my E only has 11K on it, and the fact that I'm freaked that my cars Award-Winning Bodyshell for being the best on the market in 2010 (over the Jag XJ, Audi R8, BMW 5er, amongst all others) frame is already being compromised because the suspension isn't doing its job to absorb harshness, is just uncool.

I looked at my car today and said "You're lucky I think you're hot". If it weren't, I wouldn't stand for this "ride like a race car over rough patches and like a luxury-sublime cruiser over smooth roads" Jekyll and Hyde confusion of character.

////RANT.

thekurgan

Same as the Bluetec, even though they are RFTs, the ride was better than the E driven with the 18". Not only was the NVH higher, but hitting potholes jarred my teeth, all I could think was: "there goes the wheel, crack, or something". Luckily, the wheels are tough, but around here, are tax dollars are NOT going into road repair.

K-A

Same here (regarding the roads). Amazing how much of a difference 1" on the wheel makes. I have no idea how some people can justify 19" or 20" wheels that will make this car a filling-knockout fest over rough pavement, whilst it's still not a good handling car (nor is it intended to be, it's supposed to be comfortable over all pavement).

The suspension on the E Sport is seemingly beautifully formulated for the Autobahn.... they obviously didn't test it over "3rd world country" type roads (which we now have in the U.S of A.

MinnBobber

timely topic for me on this old discussion.
I'm about to order 2013 E Wagon and the ride is a big concern.
It comes with 17" wheels BUT I love the look of the 18" AMG opt wheels and they seem like a steal at about $750.
How much stiffer does the ride become with the 18s?? There is not much sidewall rubber on the 18" tires. Salesperson (of course) says no difference in ride/ get what you like.
What have board members found???

Also, is it true the 2012 E class susp has a smoother ride than the 2011? I have heard it was mysteriously changed to smoother ride/ not officially announced but it is smoother. Any experience with this?

I dragged my wife along to test drive new E Wagon and ML and her comment was, "how come the more expensive one (E) rode rougher than the cheaper one (ML)?" Ouch.... That ML really soaks up the holes and it's mighty quiet in the ML interior.

alsyli

I wouldn't be THAT harsh on the C250 (which is what I own). I'll admit that even my parents' C300 now actually feels jumpy accerlerating from a standstill, but putting the car into "S" mode actually helps a lot.

As for the NVH of the motor, I think it's pretty good for a 4-cyl. Not sure what the E350's engine is like, but I think prefer the exhaust note of my C250 over the C300 (which is obviously smoother but has an unpleasant mechanical thrum).

Also surprised to hear how much more you liked the ride. I think the ride in my car is worse than in my parents. I have Michelins, they have Continentals. Also, their recommended PSI is lika 28/32, whereas mine ONLY lists the max (31/38). My car handles better subjectively but doesn't absorb the speed bumps or potholes nearly as well (although I'm assuming that could just be a tire-pressure thing).

If I ever get an E, I'm getting the luxury trim....

K-A

The 2012's apparently "mysteriously" (based on what a Member here said and said he verified) do have smoother suspensions, but the tradeoff is they have higher ride heights and less aggressive stances. The ML absorbing road imperfections is also a given, as it's an SUV which is technically meant for off roading (i.e imperfections are supposed to be big rocks to it), and it has more tire and more suspension travel than the low Sport E's (the E will also handle much better than the ML as a tradeoff). However, I fully agree that an E even in Sport trim should defy some kind of logic and still ride smooth with a sporty stance. I'd drive a Luxury and Sport E to tell a difference, but 17's absorb so much more than 18's, it's crazy.

Yeah, it was just pretty lethargic to me, and keep in mind I'm not racing around, and I'm someone who finds the E350 to be plenty fast. Just a bit sluggish and the Turbo lag was quite noticeable especially when I had to hit it fast to get moving, and there was a nice long pause/delay. However, for a driver, it's totally fine, just wasn't as "effortless" as I like my car to be. Actually, about the NVH, the motor was VERY smooth, I was just referring to the sound at idle, which was very unbecoming IMO.

Wow, that's interesting about your impressions on the ride! Could the E Sport with 18's really be that harsh over uneven pavement? Do you have 17's or 18's? That could be all the difference right there. The suspension just absorbed a lot of harshness that my E transmits into the cabin, and I feel that (hopefully) most of that has to do with the 17's VS 18's and maybe the lower suspension my E seems to have over that C.

jvc300

++1
My E350 Sport is smoooth and I'm not old enough for the Luxo version.

Try the ride in Porsche 911 and you can feel every pebble and then get back in your E. Sure the E may ride a little rougher here and there, but thats the price we pay for the lowered Sport suspension.
Now, I have never driven the AMG E and I would be curious as to how that rides.
I do travel every week which gives me the pleasure to drive all types of cars and I have not found one that is as smooth as my E-Sport.
Sorry to hear that you all have these issues . . .

K-A

A salesman I spoke to at the Porsche Dealership who just bought a new 991 911 CS said that the 3rd World roads that we have here has forced his NEW 911 to already start squeaking and rattling. Basically, owning a sports car in many even upper scale parts of the country (the area he drives in is supposed to be a wealthy area) is becoming an obsolete desire due to how much its benefitting factors will actually work against you in the real world.

What I've found is that, yes, any car with 18's or higher, they will fumble generally on rough patches. Why it's so noticeable on the E is because it drives PRISTINE on smooth roads, just a perfect balance, so the shock from how it fumbles on rough patches is extra noticeable.

The cars that I've noticed that handle rough patches better than my car are ones with 17's and smaller (wheels), the amount of extra absorbing becomes very apparent.

No, I won't trade off the styling, as the Sport is in a different dynamic league than the Luxury Package, and to some even 18's are too small looking.... I don't even want the raised ride height of the 2012 Sports, as I like the tight stance on mine, but when driving on some roads I wish I can have my cake and eat it too.

Kar don

I hate to say it because I love MB, but the BMW F10 with 19inch runflats spanks the W212 sport in ride quality. Even my bluetec with 17 inch runflats rides stiffer/choppier than the F10 w/sport package and 19s. My E has 400 miles on it and has already developed 2 rattles. F10 has almost 10k, not a single rattle. Same roads, same conditions.

K-A, sounds like you need to get the 535i next . BMW did their homework with the F10 suspension and they got it right.

K-A

Yikes. I test drove an F10 Sport (with 19's) extensively and found the right to be slightly busier and not as smooth and serene as my E Sport's suspension, HOWEVER, this was only over smooth roads. Over rough roads, I dunno, though a Member here who had (or drove) an F10 with M-Pack stated that his 5er was much rougher than his E over rough roads and smooth roads. Maybe some of this stuff is specific model related, i.e individual cars.

I'm gonna do an extensive test drive of a 535i with M-Pack soon and make sure to go over rough roads to see how the differences feel.

jvc300

Which is why I optioned out of the 911 K-A. I drove the ML and it reminded me of my GMC sierra Crew Cab (For the boat).

I have to admit that I refuse to believe anything negative about my E. It's definitley my passion. Like you, I love the sport styling and all that comes with it. My wife is getting jealous....

I agree 100% that the roads are 3rd world and have been a real drag to drive on. I've noticed the noise levels on some roads are incredibly high lately too.

+1 on the cake!

Kar don

Small difference I just thought of... mine is an Xi with all season tires (still RFT). In LA they are all RWD and have summer tires; however, since they are both RFT I'd assume sidewall stiffness differences are negligible.

MB uses All season tires regardless of drive setup or region, correct?

K-A

Yeah I believe so. Forgot about the RFT's. On the F10 Boards, owners can't say enough horrendous things via their hatred for RFT's. If BMW managed to balance out a smoother suspension WITH RFT's and bigger wheels, then that's something. From my noticing so far, I didn't think that was the case, but I want to drive an M-Pack F10 again for the hell of it.

Totally agreed about the passion. I love my car, and couldn't think of anything I'd rather own right now. I've had this bodystyle for going on 2 years and I take pictures of it and act toward it the exact same way as when it was brand new. That says a lot from someone who has bought 5 cars in 4 years.

alsyli

I actually think the ride of the RFT (at least on the last-gen, NON sport 3-series) was fine. The problem (for my parents) was that the tires developed this horrific medium-pitch whining sound at highway speeds at around 20,000 mi. It was fixed once they replaced the tires, but the tires are rather expensive.

I drove a 330i loaner w/ sports package. Thought the low-speed ride quality was FAR better than the standard RFTs but thought the highway ride was unacceptably harsh. I'm actually kind of surprised at the number of sport-package equipped BMWs out there....


I have virtually no options on my C250, so I have the standard 17" wheels.... I really do think the difference might be the tire pressure....

Consumer Reports tested an E350 Sport (gas) and an E350 Luxury (Bluetec) and found that the Bluetec had a much better ride....

K-A

Not surprised at all that they came to that conclusion. The Luxury ride will probably be a bit too loose and cloudy, but it'll be a better resolved and all around (and more appropriate) ride than the Sport.