KYB shocks........its got to be said

[Vince Canepa]

Arthur - I received all my parts yesterday and the hanger mount is not updated as you describe.  The new, factory mount is identical to the one I pulled out.  The outer sleeeve (with rubber bushing) is in two sections.  This is a factory bushing from the dealer and appears to be recent production.  I took a picture, but haven't had much luck reducing it in size to the required 80kb (I'll work on that later).

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[A Dalton]

I would like to check that out .
 I always bought ones from guys like Ray P and they are solid, one peice rubber between the inner/outer casings..but they may not  be Benz OEM..
 My old notes show the original 110 350 12 75 being replaced by a heavier 110 350 13 75.
 If you can't get it up , send a jpg to me , if you would
Tnx

[Vince Canepa]

OK - finally figured out how get the image size right.  The photo is the hanger mount - the lower one is obviously the old one.  Now that I have examined this mount, I think it is a poor design.  There is not enough rubber to allow for the twisting action that must take place in the long term.  This is the second mount in 146K miles and frankly, I don't expect this one to last more than 60-70K.  What is really annoying is that this mount is critical to the locating of the rear axle assembly and it is downright difficult to get to.

Download Attachment: 250SL-Hanger-mount.jpg
81.51 KB

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[A Dalton]

That is the orig crap one.
 Go here and click on  Rear Axle pic , then click on part 151 for blow up.

 That is the one you want.

 http://www.sls-hh-catalogue.de/bin/dbframes.phtml?mid=IN02

 **Added note.
 In case you do not have longtitude spec for distance "a" from the flange face to the face of the carrier mount support, it is 158 mm, +/-1mm.
 You know about the lateral 90 degree of same support.
Set both of these measures before cinch bolts are tightened .....

[Vince Canepa]

I don't have time to search for another one - the car has to be ready to show in Philadelphia on September 11.  I don't want to be argumentative, but I'm not convinced that an additional 17mm or so of rubber in the lengthwise direction is a solution.  I think the problem is that there is only 5-6mm of rubber between the inner and outer sleeves.  My eyeball estimate is that the rubber is under very high shear stress, especially where it is bonded to the sleeves (where both of mine have failed).  Sometime I will calculate the range of motion and compare that to some data I have on rubber coupling elements.  I'm curious how this bushing compares to the angular limits we use for coupling service.  I know that this might be an apples/oranges comparison - just curious.

I do have all the other data for correct assembly - thanks again.

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[JimVillers]

Vince .... I have a new solid bushing for a 190SL that you are welcome to if it will work.  It will be on the bench when you come over for the Driveway Gathering on Saturday.

From the looks of your old bushing, it appears that the left side was slipping in the bracket (warn steel).  That could have contributed to premature failure.


Jim Villers
190SL, 230SL 5-Speed, 190E 2.3-16 Kompressor

[Vince Canepa]

Jim - I think the appearance is deceiving.  The surface of the inner sleeve still shows machining marks and is not galled at all, as it would be if it had been slipping.  There is no evidence of slippage on the female part (the front cover for the differential with the eye for the front of the bushing).  I think the new part is coated with something that was not used on the old part some 25+ years ago when it was installed.  The rubber has sheared at the bond with the inner sleeve and I can actually pull the aft outer sleeve (the right hand portion) along with the relatively intact rubber off the inner sleeve.  This is exactly what happened back in the seventies when this failed for the first time.  Maybe I'll post another photo with the old unit pulled apart for the record so that others can see what to look for.

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[A Dalton]

<< but I'm not convinced that an additional 17mm or so of rubber in the lengthwise direction is a solution.>>
V.,
 Except for leaky rear pinion seal damaged ones , I have never seen a solid core one fail , but I have seen all the original 2 piece fail, leaky seal or not.
 The solid core ones may also use a better bonding process, but I do not know that for sure , I only can tell you that they have seemed to have rectified the known problem of the 2 piece with the solid core design.
 Not to say they won't fail.... just posting my experience/observations w/swing axles .
It would be interesting to see the results of your coupling calculations and test.
Also of interest would be the actual difference with the 110 350 13 75. You have an early .043 and according to 250sl Chassis Edition "A" , [ Early 250 specific],this part was an Option . I would think that means it would be part of the  package when requesting the heavier suspension .  There is probably someone here that would know
more on that  than I do.  Might even want to mention that part# to the outfit you got the 12 75 from. They may know the exact difference.
I am only familiar with aftermarket solid case .
These are also available here at K&K, so you may still have time to get one overnight, if need be.

 Jim.
 The 121 chassis is a different part.  The front sleeve uses a seperate  design.

[Vince Canepa]

K & K is trying to find one - they don't have it in stock.  In the overall scheme of things, it may not matter that much.  I doubt I will have the car another 60K miles.

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[Vince Canepa]

Arthur - Aren't you in Florida now?  Were you affetced by Katrina?  My son has my C280 in Miami.  A large branch fell on the car.  Damage to the fenders, hood, and a broken windshield.  He tells me the Miami-Coconut Grove area is in tough shape.

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[A Dalton]

quote:Originally posted by Vince Canepa

Arthur - Aren't you in Florida now?  Were you affetced by Katrina?  My son has my C280 in Miami.  A large branch fell on the car.  Damage to the fenders, hood, and a broken windshield.  He tells me the Miami-Coconut Grove area is in tough shape.

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

 Ouch !!! ... At least he was not hurt.. there were actually a couple of people killed  from falling trees of this storm.
 I am in N.Central Fl area, so I have not seen any of this one. Will be going back to New England shortly for the Fall Season, so I may miss whatever else Mother Nature has in store for the remainder of Hurricane Season ..Last year was a mess !!!!

[Vince Canepa]

I received the hanger mount from K & K yesterday.  Now I have two genuine factory mounts, neither "updated".  Fortunately, K & K is a stand up company and will take the second one back.  They don't know of an aftermarket version with the one piece outer tube and solid rubber.

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[A Dalton]

Does the KK one look like this

http://www.sls-hh-catalogue.de/bin/dbframes.phtml?mid=IN02

 part 235012

[Vince Canepa]

Arthur - The pictures may not reflect the actual part (as they did not with the K & K website).  I spoke with Cheryl at K & K before they sent the part and she indicated they had one that looked like the drawing.  When I received the part it was the same factory part.  When I spoke with her about returning it she said she knew of no aftermarket part.

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[A Dalton]

As my other post states, the ones I bought were from Ray Paul and they were exactly as pictured in the SLS site.
 The only other thing may be that the optional one in the 250sl parts book is the solid one , which probably came with the heavier spring suspension .
 That part # is 110 350 13 75, whereas I see K&K using the original
 110 350 12 75 part #.
 I will do some further checking, but I can assure you that mine were solid as described, that's for sure......
 

[Vince Canepa]

Arthur - I had my dealer check the M-B parts system  (as opposed to the dealer parts database) and the -13- number doesn't come up.  Another mystery of the pagoda!

Vince Canepa
1967 250SL
113.043-10-001543
568H Signal Red
116 Caviar MB-Tex

[waqas]

Some months ago, I ordered and installed part #110-350-12-75 (Bushing, Axle Pivot) from Ray Paul and it was the single piece unit as pictured in the SLS catalogue...

A. Dalton, are you sure about that part number? (110-350-13-75)

WAQAS in Austin, Texas

[A Dalton]

quote:Originally posted by waqas

Some months ago, I ordered and installed part #110-350-12-75 (Bushing, Axle Pivot) from Ray Paul and it was the single piece unit as pictured in the SLS catalogue...

A. Dalton, are you sure about that part number? (110-350-13-75)

WAQAS in Austin, Texas

W,
That part # is listed in the 250sl chassis parts book as an Optional mount for the 12-75, but it has probably been long ago done away with. I only mentioned it as being a possible heavier suspension option at the time to go along with the heavier springs available as an option then. The 12-75 is ther correct one , and I have used them and the replacements have all been the single/solid piece.  Those also came from Ray P, so I will find out which supplier he uses. K&K seems to still use the OEM 2 piece ones , but I have never ordered from them.  I would be interested in what would arrive at the door if one were to order from SLS ??
 I just did one a few months ago and the old one we took out was also the single unit, so I assume it not to be original.[ oil soaked from bad pinion seal]
 At least we are on the same page as the replacement being available as the single unit, which I think is a better product.