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.
I am in the same boat.....camber is slightly out of spec on driver’s front side (too negative; need little positive adjustment). But perfect on front passenger side. Am I understanding it right that I will need 2 bolts on one side as outlined in the diagrams? I.e., both bolts are needed on one side to adjust camber? Seems to me that maybe only one bolt is needed on the lower arm....the other bolt is only to adjust caster?
Depends on how far off you are. The bolt in lower arm will directly affect camber. The bolt in the thrust arm will affect caster but also camber.
I have three bolts replaced. Initially I did all 4 of them but I had a slight pull to the right so I put the OEM bolt in driver thrust arm and it fixed that.
What i find bizarre is how your passenger side is ok with OEM bolts. Mercedes didn’t set it up that way.
Attached are the results of my alignment check. Front driver camber is off, but passenger side camber is good. So I’m thinking that I need only need camber bolts on the drivers side. Not sure I understand your comment about how Mercedes set it up?
Surprised that passenger camber is that close to neutral from the factory but ok.
Yes have a camber bolt put in on driver side and mark it with a paint pen so someone knows not to spin the bolt head like what can be done with the others.
Good, thank you. So I’m thinking to install just ONE camber bolt on the lower control arm on that side. In contrast to TWO camber bolts on that one side. Or should I do BOTH control arm and thrust arm on that side.....I’m still confused on 1 vs. 2 bolts. Any thoughts on that? I think my target camber is -0.8 —sound about right?
If you're doing thus yourself, it's cost-effective to replace both bolts to help ensure current and future camber and caster alignments are within spec. If the dealer/shop is doing it, then it's up to you if you want them to install anything beyond what's needed at time of alignment. A good tech can identify exactly what's needed.
Footnote from my initial post:
I had the chance to compare the Febi bolt kit with oem MB bolt kit. I know that MB doesn't make bolts, they are sourced as first quality from various mfg. However, the Febi bolts did not have any grading marks - the oem bolts did. I've used Febi parts on the VW bug I restored but you know how it can get with personal comfort level lol. I returned the Febi bolts and am getting oem MB bolt kit from mbpartsdirect. The difference is $6 more per kit (I'm getting 4 kits), so for $24 it's worth the warm fuzzy feeling. My dealer will install the oem kits I provide for $100 per side plus a reduced cost of second alignment. For the $200 extra labor it's worth it to me. The particular tech that always works on my car does a great job, very detailed, all clips and fasteners back in place, etc.
Footnote 2:
Sorry I know this bolt selection bingo sounds crazy but I decided to install the oem bolt kits myself. In the process of looking up info I also came across a local indy garage specializing in the german cars. Decided to give them a try on the alignment as they were reasonable on cost and knowledgeable when I talked with them. Shop clean and neat, lots of cars. That's the final plan lol.
Good, thank you. So I’m thinking to install just ONE camber bolt on the lower control arm on that side. In contrast to TWO camber bolts on that one side. Or should I do BOTH control arm and thrust arm on that side.....I’m still confused on 1 vs. 2 bolts. Any thoughts on that? I think my target camber is -0.8 —sound about right?
Google a pic from under the car. You will see that the lower arm 100% impacts camber when the bolt installs. Then look at the thrust (caster) arm. It is on an angle and will affect camber but will also affect caster.
I first installed all 4 bolts. It helped camber a lot but I also retained a slight pull to the right that was from factory and is on many cars. I put the driver thrust arm back to original bolt and fixed that.
Understand that these are fixed adjustments so it helps but is not perfection. Somewhat expensive solutions allow you to dial it in but not without drama.
Just to wrap this post, I will put the bolt kit installation process in a separate diy post.
The oem bolt kit:
Thanks especially to 95Viper for his comprehensive info.
Have you put them in yet? I just took my car to the local tire shop for any alignment and it is -.8 vs the spec limit of -.7 on one side the other is barely in spec at -0.7. They want $120 to put the bolts in.
They said that they would redo the alignment if I brought it back with the bolts in place or if they installed them. Obviously I would like to put them in myself but don't want to screw things up.
Would lowering the negative camber improve the straight line tracking? My car is ok but it is not Mercedes on rails good.
2011 E350 sport, I'm posting from my phone so maybe my signature doesn't show.
Yes I know that's the lower control arm and I see from info here and WIS that side to side movement on rear arm yields +/- camber, front to back movement on forward arm yields +/- caster. Like you mentioned once you see the installation its fairly straightforward. I've done front end work before (not on MB) but I've had to lever control arms a bit to get bolts installed.
Are you saying that the caster is adjustable? The tire shop guy told me that it wasn't
It is if you install the bolt kit in the front arm. That's why I'm installing the kits on both arms each side. Camber and caster. Not a ton of adjustment but will provide additional latitude to bring the car into spec.
I'm planning to doing this installation. Tried this week but looks like next week.
Yes mbnut1, The bolts provide a minor “fixed” adjustment to caster if installed in thrust arms. That will also slightly affect camber too. Looking from under the car it is totally obvious as it pulls the arms inward and that pulls the tires forward.
Or pushes out depending on which way you install the bolts.
yes, target camber left is -0*35', right is -0*36', +/-22'. My car is at -1*01' right and left camber readings. Caster is slightly off, barely outside +/-30' allowance. Toe and rear axle are ok.
(* means degrees, ' means minutes). It's not terrible, but worth installing the bolts to gain more adjustability. I was actually a bit surprised to see that the factory camber setting is less than a degree negative, I've always thought about 1 degree negative yields generally decent handling without excessive tire wear but I've been wrong before lol.
I did check the EPC and WIS closely and they focus on lower rear control arm to set camber and front lower control arm to set caster. Both bolts are the same A 000 333 10 71 part number (or aftermarket equivalent).
Hi Mud,
I know this is an older post, but I am heading into Caster adjustment , so this Camber post is very useful. Thank you.
I have also read the https://mbworld.org/forums/e-class-w212/725597-camber-bolt-confusion.html , where 95viper shared very good info too...thanks to him too.
So I might as well get 4 bolts and have future adjustability for Camber.
Looking at your spec : target camber left is -0*35', right is -0*36', +/-22'.
How come I can't find your spec in the AR40.20-P-0263EW Adjust camber and caster at the front axle version 28.02.2018
My W212 RWD, with 677 suspension called for : 0° -33' ( +-21') , I just want to be sure me is looking at the same AR40.20-P-0263EW as yours and I think your WIS probably is newer than mine.
Attached my version of AR40.20-P-0263EW
Hi Mud,
I know this is an older post, but I am heading into Caster adjustment , so this Camber post is very useful. Thank you.
I have also read the https://mbworld.org/forums/e-class-w212/725597-camber-bolt-confusion.html , where 95viper shared very good info too...thanks to him too.
So I might as well get 4 bolts and have future adjustability for Camber.
Looking at your spec : target camber left is -0*35', right is -0*36', +/-22'.
How come I can't find your spec in the AR40.20-P-0263EW Adjust camber and caster at the front axle version 28.02.2018
My W212 RWD, with 677 suspension called for : 0° -33' ( +-21') , I just want to be sure me is looking at the same AR40.20-P-0263EW as yours and I think your WIS probably is newer than mine.
Attached my version of AR40.20-P-0263EW
Thanks
Hi S.P. (quick side note - I saw your post on track driving, it was quite interesting).
This will sound like a weak excuse, but when I tried to bring up the WIS I get a server access invalid message for the instructions part, EPC and manuals seem to be functional. Short of reloading the 4 cd's of 37GB, I would offer some thoughts on your post.This WIS was purchased several years ago so perhaps your may actually be a newer version.
My car is a 4matic, with 677 (standard) suspension and 321 sport package. Other than the cosmetics I believe 321 equates to slightly lower springs and 18" rims. Tire size is 245/40/18. I would also assume that the spring rate may be slightly different than the "regular" standard suspension.
With this in mind and unfortunately without actual WIS verification,I'm wondering if the very slight minutes differential may be due to the ride height/wheel size combo.Not sure if front axles may have a play in this but I lean more towards a difference from height/wheels. The difference in target setting is so very small, especially considering the +20 min range, and I think perhaps accommodates my driveline/suspension that is different from yours?
This also reminds me of the importance of a good alignment tech. All cars tell a story - bought mine as second owner at about 25k miles. Drove straight, zero issues. As I inspected the car I saw that the underbody sound panels needed replacement, especially the passenger side which had been torn up. Sheet metal below was slightly scraped but not dented or banged up. Nothing else showing on the underbody or suspension components, but it told me at some point the car went over something. I replaced the panels, no big deal. Panel Replacement
After a bit of time the car developed a slight pull and I took it to local recommended MB Indy shop for an alignment. The owner also does a lot of the work and he sat down with me to explain final results (this was after I had installed the front control arm camber bolts, so there was adjustability on both sides). Turns out the passenger side front strut has a very slight tweak - probably related to the reason the passenger side underbody panel was torn up. No noise or anything. I don't have the final specs offhand but I do remember they were set within but barely within range to accommodate the tweaked strut.Car drives great, currently at 58k miles. I rambled on about all this to highlight that had he just set to target range, the car would still have had a pull. His value was that he thought about the big picture and took the time to look at bushings, control arms, struts, etc. I will eventually replace struts/shocks with Bilstein B4 components. Every owner should ensure that alignment includes real world factors. I notice that in your posts you also look at the overall scenario but also break it down into smaller details - the roadmap of how that bigger picture is developed.
So to summarize, my view is that yes there may a slight difference but perhaps not an issue given the difference in model year and equipment package. Interested in your thoughts.
In the meantime I guess my future holds a reload of the WIS CD's with the hope that I can get to the most important part of them.
Yes, indeed small differences in the value you mentioned -35' +-21 vs 30' +-21 as per my WIS for a 677 4-Matic
MB suspension option codes is a puzzle for me... I get confused sometime. Some said 677 suspension is a standard suspension but lowered by 15mm.
What worries me is the Romess angle which I can not verify. Unless official MB workshop, regular tire shop will probably not invest in that crazy expensive Romess inclinometer tool. https://www.mbusassep.com/equipment/product/3234
That Romess angle data for me is a confirmation if a suspension is an official lowered model compared to standard 485 suspension.
Since 486 is a confirmed sport suspension, and my data card showing mine as a 677 AVANTGARDE/STANDARD SUSPENSION,
below data from the AR40.20-P-0263EW of 28.02.2018 version seems to group 486 and 677 together since they share the same Romess angle of +0.12* ( front axle ).
Compared to 485 supension with Romess angle of +2.56* ( front axel ).
So I have to assume that height wise 486 and 677 is indeed 15mm lower than 485.
MB is smart, I have to agree that Romess angle will tell a lot of information at a glance is something is not right with chassis or suspension.
If someone has complete suspension geometry data and good at math ( unlike me ..LOL ), he can decode a lot of information.
I laugh sometimes looking at the WIS. The way they name parts is not the same as in EPC. That have confused me too.
I went back and looked at the alignment data from my first alignment at the dealer - interesting that their mfg data card shows my car as 677/486 suspension coding. Therefore it appears that my car has the slightly lowered suspension. Informal observations to other MB seem to confirm my car seems to sit just slightly lower, still realizing impact of rim/tire selections.
Height measurement was -2mm (out of range) , I take this as confirmation of a slight 2mm of spring sag, which is not entirely unexpected. It also showed a deviation of -1*.01' from target spec of 0*35' on left side and within range of target spec of 0*36' on right side. Both sides Romess angle is 0*22'. So it appears that for this 486 suspension they are using those particular targets.
I can see that application of Romess angle can give a central basepoint for suspension info/calibration, but as you mentioned, for the average guy it's not affordable and there's also confusion at times in figuring out exactly what suspension codes are applied. This is the era of phone apps - I happen to have a pretty good 2-axis inclinometer on my phone that has actually worked quite well in setting rear control plates and traction bar angles. However, those are cruder applications that MB suspension, and I think there would be difficulty in getting an accurate reading from the MB designated suspension locations, especially since the calibrations are to the minute double-digits.
I also need to re-load the WIS package into my laptop, I'd really like to get to that particular WIS instruction/spec to compare.
You're quite welcome, I learned something here.
Unfortunately my WIS (eBay 2014) has suddenly given me an unauthorized server access message. I suspect it had an expiration built into it as I've not changed anything on my laptop. Reloading gives same results.
I'm going to get another version, cheap enough to try that route. Not only for this topic and general work instructions but especially for wiring diagrams. Dead in the water to diagnose without diagrams.
I got 2 low cost inclinometer which uses cellphone inclinometer chip, but I have not really test its accuracy yet. Supposedly 0.1 degree or 12 minutes accuracy, not bad.
Romess as used by MB the spec mentioned accuracy of 0.1 degree too, but its special adapter makes it easy to be placed in accurate way... this is super important.
One thing for sure, the ACCURATE placement of the inclinometer chip on the low cost unit is VERY important and I doubt the low cost manufacturer bother doing so... LOL.
Romess sensor is not on the unit, its on the measuring base plate. So it is pre-calibrated well.
Here are my cheapo inclinometers, thanks to cellphone wide use, inclinometer chip is so cheap today.
I will someday test and make an adapter for my front lower control arm twin protruding dots....if my meter can't sit well there magnetically.
For rear shaft no worry as shaft is round, should be easy.
Trying to zero the damn thing by hand. This particular one I know its inclinometer chip is probably not at proper ZERO placement inside the body.
With all the phone attachments available I'd hope to soon see a Romess-type attachment that plugs into the phone jack. This could allow the attachment to be placed firmly on whatever it is that's being measured.
It seems this post of yours will grow longer/bigger over time
U mentioned probable 2mm spring sag, that got me thinking...yes, springs will eventually sag no way to prevent that.
I guess aside from aligment values to keep in check, I best record my car actual height over time to detect spring sag as it will cause some alignment value/s to change.
Assumed equal tire pressure and fuel level at time of height measurement.
What do you say if my height measuring point is a fix spot at fender towards wheel hub zero center ( or similar ) ?
Like below, but not at painted surface of fender but at the fender fold.
This way I do not read tire thread depth which can vary 4mm between new and good to replace.
Surely I can't remove all 4 springs to "dyno" it... LOL
One note I want to share.
After I abuse my tires and suspension at the track and before 29th july rear toe correction, I had the chance to drive approx 500 ish KM on the suspension with 2 new front tires and 100KM ish on the new rear tires.
The rear "suspension" when I hit road repair ( tarmac repair ) of this size and protrusion level like the photo below :
So the rear, generate a kind of weird poor straight line recovery. I don't know how to explain better in words, but imagine a front steering ball joints and/or steering tire rods being worn out and
you loose that straight line accuracy when you hit road repair surface.
Big trucks ( 20 footer container carrier ) I seen often loose straight line motion stability when they travel over bad road surface. Not this bad in my case but I hope that explains better.
Rear toe values BEFORE correction, in cyan-blue circle.
It is so amazing, a mere 1 degree 12 minutes of out of spec of rear toe and 15 minute of thrust angle out of spec can generate such weird behaviour.
I am starting to really appreciate how these small out-of-tolerance values are so amplified by a suspension system and 4 wheel alignment ( 4 wheel at one scan ) I think is proved to be worth the cost.
So yesterday 7AM , moslem holiday in my country, I tested rear toe final correction at a highway known for not so smooth road surface ( that describe 90% of Indonesian highway quality ...LOL )
It is a 4 lane, I am a right hand steering country, so 1st and 2nd left lane is the worst , all trucks worned out tarmac surfaces.
Mini hills and valley you can get on such surface, yes that bad. Corrupted construction, poor sub-structure/sub-surface...the usual 3rd world county issues.
These mini hills and valley are created by truck braking ... LOL
Above is not the higway I tested, but the kind of hills and valley is similar.
So 3rd lane is decent, 4th fastest lane is supposedly the best......except in some location where I think exist small water canal under the road.....the expansion joints can be worst on the 4th lane most right side and 1st lane most left side.
The rear suspension straight-line recovery behaviour has recovered back to normal now after rear toe correction. Yipee.
I tested steady 100 and 120 KM/H on the 2nd lane. Good result.
For final straightline stability and staightline tracking I done a short burst twice to 210 and 220 KM/H when zero traffic exist for 1,000+ meters ahead of me.
It is good now, car track very straight even when road surfaces not so perfect.
.
That road repair is similar to what I've seen at times - 1 guy working, the rest watching him lol.
By no means am I any sort of suspension expert, so take my comments with a grain of salt fr
Yes, I think that measuring from center of rim/spindle to fixed fender point should give you an accurate height measurement. I've used this method in the past, along with measurement from lower ball joint to ground.
On essentially what I call bump steer, I think that jump you described is factored by alignment settings, tire tread/condition, and shock setting/condition. Typically (a broad term, I know) negative camber and positive toe-in front or rear is better for overall straight line stability, with settings that vary of course from car to car. Most vehicles I believe are set up for mild understeer from the factory, and a lot of them have minimal adjustability in the back. So as you moved to more positive or neutral rear toe settings, the bump steer you experienced was reduced because you improved straight line stability.
Tire tread/condition can affect all this - as tires age the tread typically hardens. Combine with lower tread, there is less wiggle and ability to soak up bumps, so when they hit a bump, there's a bit of slip until they recover full traction. I know that the Continental PureContacts I have on the car (all wheels same) have become quite noisy as they have aged and I've experienced a bit of this slip sometimes. Tread is at 4-5/32 so replacement is coming up.
Old struts/shocks also lose ability to dampen the bumps so you wind up bouncing more on the springs, thus more bump steer or slip as the car loads and unloads the suspension. Much stiffer struts/shocks can also contribute to more harsh ride as they can bang into road bumps.
With that said, I am a conservative driver, I go with the flow, not fastest not slowest. Other than purposely in a parking lot, I've not taken my car to any sort of a cornering limit, and the traction controls kick in pretty fast on the AWD, so even the parking lot test was more messing around than a true test. So I can't speak to suspension setting/reactions at track conditions or driving at true high speed other than very infrequent short 100 mph blasts on an open road, like once per year lol. So I look more to the everyday regular driving conditions and the factors I mentioned above that impact them. My most basic approach is does the car track and steer without drama and are tires and suspension components in good shape.
So I remain confused on the number of adjustable camber bolts per side? I got three from Mud and when I went to have them installed I went to the dealer parts dept to buy a fourth one and the dealer and indy who was doing the installation said one per side.
Quote from 95 Viper:
"The bolt in lower arm will directly affect camber. The bolt in the thrust arm will affect caster but also camber.
I have three bolts replaced. Initially I did all 4 of them but I had a slight pull to the right so I put the OEM bolt in driver thrust arm and it fixed that."
I've also got 4 of the adjustment bolts installed. I was really glad I did since my car needed a bit of extra adjustment to compensate for slightly tweaked strut. Installing the 2 bolts on each side provides as much alignment adjustment as you can get with stock parts.
Which location is the dealer thinking that they belong? It was my understanding from the tire shop that did the alignment that they provided the ability to adjust the caster.
01-07-2019, 10:28 PM
Some said 677 suspension is a standard suspension but lowered by 15mm.
fr
