Mark this thread as Unsold
FS: Stock OEM MB C32 AMG springs
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 587
Likes: 6
From: Boston
12 E350 4Matic Sport
They do lower the ride about an inch or so but leave a large gap in the front (the size of a fist).
It definitely improves the quality of the ride though which is why I am still interested. Just gotta do a bit more research.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 0
Stff?
As to the C32 springs here are comments that I found:
The springs will fit don't worry about that.
US spec C32 front is 1-1.2 inch lower btw then the C240/320 at that time. US-specification C32 springs have ~20% higher rate than other early V6 versions.
Anyhoo, the car now sits 1" lower at the back bumper and 3/4" lower at the front bumper. Front wheel gap is a little less and it seems more level than running downhill. Ride is stiff but not overly so and the handling is greatly improved. (I know, I know, pics - when it stops raining )
See lowered pics with c32 springs here:
https://mbworld.org/forums/c-class-w...pension-3.html
stock C32 ride height is lower than the C320, but when you put it on a C320 it won't be as low as the C32. there's 90+ lbs difference up front.
Now I have springs, struts, shocks and sway bars from a C32. The car sits very close to stock height (big gap up front) but no more premature tire wear and the ride is awesome. It it much more comfortable and handles much better than the H&R/koni setup. There is a reason Mercedes spec'd the C32 the way they did. At this point, I'll take the bigger gap up front in exchange for great handling and longer tire life.
As pointed out above, the handling is improved though.
As to the C32 springs here are comments that I found:
The springs will fit don't worry about that.
US spec C32 front is 1-1.2 inch lower btw then the C240/320 at that time. US-specification C32 springs have ~20% higher rate than other early V6 versions.
Anyhoo, the car now sits 1" lower at the back bumper and 3/4" lower at the front bumper. Front wheel gap is a little less and it seems more level than running downhill. Ride is stiff but not overly so and the handling is greatly improved. (I know, I know, pics - when it stops raining )
See lowered pics with c32 springs here:
https://mbworld.org/forums/c-class-w...pension-3.html
stock C32 ride height is lower than the C320, but when you put it on a C320 it won't be as low as the C32. there's 90+ lbs difference up front.
Now I have springs, struts, shocks and sway bars from a C32. The car sits very close to stock height (big gap up front) but no more premature tire wear and the ride is awesome. It it much more comfortable and handles much better than the H&R/koni setup. There is a reason Mercedes spec'd the C32 the way they did. At this point, I'll take the bigger gap up front in exchange for great handling and longer tire life.
As pointed out above, the handling is improved though.
Trending Topics
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
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
