Sounds like I should get the 5.0 and manual trans in that SLC pretty fast so I can at least feel the fun before downgrading to the stock 5.0 2.72 LSD.

I am pretty sure the 300td (non-turbo) our back has a 3.46 rear end in it. So hopefully that will buy some time.

Lowering... as you now respect the original engineering more, and since the rear end already has stock springs, and since you will probably very often have a heavy load in the back, why not first make sure the rear end is high and stiff enough for the duty this wagon will be performing? I’ve definitely seen at least a few cars lowered focused right around how they look at the time they are lowered, only to later realize they settled down even lower in time.

With fixed control arm mounting positions, shorter springs just end up making the control arms ride around in the compressed position all the time, sideways force pushes up on the springs (more) instead of transferring all the sideways force to the subframe.

So, the spindles you are talking about... you want to raise the position of the wheels (to lower the car) without changing the suspension geometry that (let’s face it) the engineers got pretty damn right to use it on 2 of the most legendary Mercedes tanks of all time, the w126 and w123. You yourself spoke of just how well that 280se 4-speed handles the highway on/off ramps.

So if you could just raise the position of the actual axle on the spindle, that would probably be most ideal. Right?

Or, would you simply be looking for the stiffest spring that would put the static height position at the most stable position?

Obviously you don’t want to keep the existing spring rate and simply put the suspension in a compressed position kind of like riding around on an upside down wishbone with all the weight at the bottom center, the wishbone with have a tendency to compress the springs with its own weight.

The camber that has been designed into the suspension surely consider the weight of the front end of the vehicle so it reacts to the forces of a turn. Is that worth messing with?

I imagine that the w126 and w123 (and w116?) probably don’t have the performance tuning following to justify someone casting shorter spindles that would simply raise the wheel height with respect to the stock suspension.

I suspect that the challenge will be finding the shorter stiffer springs (and maybe shocks) that bring the static front end height down just enough to make you happy with its looks while not causing the springs to enter the compressed geometry until it’s needed. You don’t want to be so stuff that the car understeers, nor do you want it to oversteer. Right?

Am I following?


P.S. isn’t the level of the rear end without SLS going to affect the castor on the front wheels depending on the load on the rear end? That’s one reason I wonder if you are going to discover that the rear end may be where you want to set your “tuning” focus. You are probably going to want some heavy duty springs and shocks that will have your rear end looking quite high when it’s not loaded. All sorts of tools and wheels and maybe some significant tongue weight on the rear, and I could see the rear end easily carrying around an extra 1000 lbs on occasion. This will surely be “nose up” situations if the rear end springs aren’t super-stiff.

__________________
Past mb: '73 450sl, '81 280slc stick, '71 250, '72 250c, '70 250c, '79 280sl, '73 450sl, parted: '75 240d stick, '69 280s, '73 450slc, '72 450sl,