Hey! Scott's site is back up! Why didn't anybody tell me! Here's the link: http://www.500ecstasy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5998&page=6 Start at post #89 and you'll see all the trial and error involved. Read any links as well. You should remember that thread. Regards, Eric

Here's that time slip: Attached Thumbnails http://www.clubtitan.org/forums/atta...1&d=1236989324

Eric, I ran the E420 (bone stock) at Sacramento Raceway last night. Tire pressure was 28psi for the first two, dropped to 25psi for the third. The third run was not WOT all the way, I was bracket racing, and backed off the throttle near the end, which is why the speed was 5mph down (and the ET is slower than it would have been).

15.022 @ 95.184 (no wheelspin)
15.137 @ 94.652 (wheelspin, ASR engaged & slowed the car down at launch)
14.866 @ 90.912 (slight wheelspin, but ASR did not engage)

If I hadn't lifted on the last run, it likely would have been 14.80 @ 95.5mph (I broke out on my 14.95 dial, d'oh). On the first two, I also used my AP-22 meter and captured 0-100mph data (kept it floored past the lights until I hit 100). I'll have that data downloaded next week. Wish I had done the same for the last run since it was a pertty strong run overall.

The LH module I ordered was a bust, the place sent me the wrong module, I had to return it. Now I have to order another one. Further testing will be at 2700' elevation, so the numbers won't be directly comparable to the sea-level data shown above. Either way, while I was happy with the 94-95mph trap speeds, the ET was slower than I'd like. I'm curious how much the 2.65 gears will fix that. Expect a full spreadsheet with all the data posted to my website by the end of April.

:hat:

CTS mod update
 

Hi all. Was able to do some back to back runs dummy CTS vs. normal CTS. 14.973@95.63 with dummy CTS vs. 15.146@94.57 w/o dummy CTS. (Corrected: 14.669@97.658 vs. 14.838@96.575.) The car was slower than usual because I went on a day that was seemingly added at the last minute and as a result they had a low turn-out. That meant no cool down time between runs. Many of my time slips are only 6-8 minutes apart! It's important to note that even with the dummy CTS the car will still slow down as it gets hotter but it is still faster with the dummy than it is without the dummy. (I guess the dummy isn't so dumb after all!) With the car so hot now my Jim F "resistorized" fans were running, I put dummy back on and ran a 15.052@94.59. Pulled it again and ran a 15.233@94.05 with the car a hair cooler. The car is so rich with dummy in place it's actually hard to start---kind of like a carburated car that was shut off while still very hot and then tried to restart after about 15 minutes of "heat soak" and the resulting fuel perculation of gas into the manifold. I need to rig up one of those "A/B" switches so I can switch back and forth between stock and modded at will. If any of you don't know what I'm referring to, then you haven't clicked the link I provided on the previous page. Regards, Eric

Here's some info from JayRash on that other MercedesShop thread: "Any way i have the switch on my C36AMG, when the car is at 90 the scanner will show about 60 C deg if the switch is flicked on, annoying thing is if the car is running and u want the lower reading temp you need to turn the engine off then on. where as if the low reading is on and you want to switch back to normal it will do so with out having to restart the engine."
This is what I wrote back: "Thanks for the tip about turning the car off before engaging the dummy. I was turning the car off each time I changed sensors, but I doubt I would have thought to do that once I had my switch in place."

Just a word to the wise if any of you are planning to do a switchable CTS mod like I am. Regards, Eric

If all you pre-96 M-119 owners aren't running a 92 LH ECU already, you need to be. All M-119s up to and including the 95s will benefit.

For a full update, check here: http://www.500ecstasy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5998&page=14
and here: http://www.500ecstasy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6323&page=6
Regards, Eric

I forgot to mention that there are links to pictures and a video at that second link. Regards, Eric

hey Eric,

its gr8 to hear from u again, and its gr8 to see my name on another thread :)

regarding the temp trick on the 36 amg atleast, it seems you can fool the ecu to read a very low temp and the ecu will still use it without going to limp mode, or revert to reading the other temp sensor.

i have noticed that the ecu will only read the other temp sensor only if the main one is unpluged. but i need to further test this for confirmation.

Guys i might be getting an E500 W124 1994 model in a week or so. I need some lowering springs, can someone point me in the right direction?

At the risk of starting a flame war... I don't recommend lowering the 500E/E500. Excluding unobtanium tuner springs, the only lowering springs made for that car were the AMG E60 springs (no longer available), or the H&R (not sure if they are still available or not). The AMG springs only lowered the car a half-inch. Problem is, the H&R springs lower the car a bit too much (an inch or more). The car already has limited suspension travel, and if you drop it 1+ inches, it will be sitting on the suspension bump stops. Bottom line, for a street car, leave the stock springs but switch to thinner spring pads for a slight reduction in ride height. If this will be a race car, that's a different story.

On a side note - the stock 500E struts & rear hydro-legs have internal extension limiting springs (click here to see a cutaway view). These are tuned to the stock ride height. If you lower the car with H&R's, these become less effective. In the meantime, check out the two E500E forums, www.*********.com and www.500Ecstasy.com , all the 124.036 crazies hang out there (myself included).

BTW - here is a photo of my car, which is not lowered. I have STOCK springs. If the ride height were any lower, the tires would be inside the fenders, and - well - I don't want it to look like a BMW, lol!


http://www.w124performance.com/image...exterior01.jpg


:euro:

Good advice for daily driving Dave. For track or competition, the stock suspension MUST be lowered and tightened up. You wouldn't believe how much this heavy car wanders and wallows at speed :eek:

Don't forget that Bilstein makes a Sport front strut for the 036 that compliments lowering springs. And of course the rear SLS can be adjusted down. So far, I like Austin's RDM TEK camber solutions, but have a bit of noise from the front camber plates that we are trying to work out.

Dean, yep, I agree... for serious track or competition use, or for extended high-speed use, modifications make a lot more sense. Probably less than 5% of .036 owners fall into this category though. I've got the RDMTEK rear LCA's on my car now, btw - seem to work fine.

I suspect the stock suspension is pretty competent if all components are brand new. But it's likely a noticeable difference comparing a stock setup that has ~100kmi, with a lowered / aftermarket setup that has brand-new components. FWIW, I didn't have any issues with my stock suspension at warp 9 in a straight line, but I wasn't going around corners at those speeds either, lol!

:batman:

I have the H&R Sport springs on my 500e without any issue. A four wheel alignment has the car withing OE specifications. If I remember correctly the front is lowered 1" and the rear 3/4". No issues with suspension travel, uneven tire wear and no need for any camber correction devices but you do need a good four wheel alignment.

Any lower and you are going to have camber issues and uneven tire wear without aftermarket camber adjustment.

http://www.2phast.com/500e/newside.jpg

Rik, could you please provide a little more info:

1) What size (rear) wheels and tires do you have mounted?
2) How many miles have you put on this combo with the wide tires and H&R springs?
3) What was the measured rear camber from the 4-wheel alignment printout?


:euro:

Well I finally found the source of that front-end noise...loose lower control arm bolts! Another annoying noise was traced to valve stem nuts rattling around INSIDE two of my tires :mad: