If I could take the steering from my '95 and put in in my '99 I'd be a lot happier. It really is the only thing I think could be improved. The recirculating ball sterring was fantastic. I think the feel was a lot better too.

__________________
Jason Priest
1999 E430
1995 E420 - retired
1986 420SEL - retired

Some people say the opposite about the current rack and pinion system vs. the old-school recirc ball. That they prefer the new stuff, that is.

In my opinion the older system is better, but it was more expensive to produce, so out it went in the scrap-heap of little engineering tweaks that made the Benz the Benz. Now the Benz is more like a Toyota than ever before, and the elimination of things like the recirc ball steering is a key example of why this is....

Cheers,
Gerry

I like the currant rack and pinion system's, much more precise, the old recirc ball is very umm well not precise! All modern cars have rack and pinion, MB had to adapt thats what the public demands.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

"All modern cars have rack and pinion, MB had to adapt thats what the public demands."

Challenge. "thats what the public demands" What does that really mean?
I'm trying to picture people calling, e-mailing MB demanding rack and pinion steering. I don't think so.

As another poster stated, it's purely a cost thing. Rack and pinion is cheaper and easier to source than re-circulating ball.

It may be more precise, then again maybe not. My '92 300E Sportline is pretty precise. To me the biggest drawback to rack and pinion is reliability versus the older re-circulating ball system.

Just my contrarian nature coming through,

Steve

well now that I have an e430 I guess I can compare the w124 to the w210 as well
agree with the initial post. Less road feel but at the same time very lexus like. The only thing the w210 can't come close to is the isolation of cabin from outside noise that lexus does an awesome job with.

__________________
Whether you think you can or cannot, Either way you're right!. by Henry Ford.

Because MB is a high end cutting edge car and must keep up to all the other high end cutting edge cars? I found the old system to be rather numb, rack's a lot better. Car & Driver agrees with me to...

Cost seems to be about the same. Old gearbox for my W126 is about $1,500 new, whats a rack for a W220 cost? I bet about that.

People are so quick to jump down MB's throat for any little reason, time march's on and things change. The Model T was a fine car too but I certainly don't want to commute to work in one.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

I'm just trying to pass some time and not start working. So let's explore this cost idea.
"
Cost seems to be about the same. Old gearbox for my W126 is about $1,500 new, whats a rack for a W220 cost? I bet about that.

I have often wondered about how, and when replacement parts for older cars are manufactured. Are decisions made to produce a guesstimated number of parts or assemblies at the end of the run and put in a warehouse? I don't know. Said another way, is the $1,500 cost for the replacement actually the cost of the gearbox when it was being manufactured during the product run?
Or is it simply priced at a loss to satisfy the requirement to provide spare parts for X number of years. I really don't now.

Using basic logic, if a '95 E320 was 50K and a '07 E350 is 50K'ish, then even not adjusting for inflation , something had to give. Therefore, it may be that Rack & Pinion is cheaper simply because of the sheer volume of production around the world.

Steve

Here is a well written clip from another forum.

Rack and pinion was generally associated with "precision" many years ago; that is, until 35 years ago when Ford and GM began using it on everything from trucks to Cadillacs to Pintos. It is cheap and simple. Long ago, most european cars had rack and pinion while most american cars did not. For this reason, american car manufacturers used the rack and pinion moniker in their advertizing like some kind of "feature". Some assumed the rack and pinion gave the euro cars the edge in handling & marketers exploited this fallousy. The difference in feel & handling was due to hundreds of factors, not just steering gear technology. GM, Ford and Chrysler used recirculating ball almost exclusively before 1970 and believe me, their nasty handling had nothing to do with a lack of rack and pinion. It was the thoughtless suspension geometry with terrible bump steer & camber curves, low caster settings, high scrub radius, high center of gravity and roll center, $5 shocks, pillow soft spring rates, grossly overassisted power steering pumps and 60/40 weight distribution.

Many folks associated McPherson struts found in the 5 series with great handling too. Fact is, SLA suspension found on the Lincoln LS and Michael Schumacher's race car are inherently superior. This twist serves to illustrate that McPherson strut cars can handle better and non-rack and pinion cars can feel good....or even better, despite their inherent design.

The 540i steering has excellent on-center feel and sensitivity. As an experienced track driver, if I hear or didn't crawl under the car and look, I would not have known my 540i car does not have rack and pinion. Rack and pinion would have required BMW to raise the motor for clearance. I run my 540i regularly on large SCCA, CART and NASCAR tracks. My only complaint is the ratio is a tad slow, but I'm used to my Corvette with it's "darty", quick 13-1 steering.

My 540i has FAR better feel than my other cars with "superior" rack and pinion, including my Corvette, Lincoln, Mustang and an Aerostar 4WD minivan. The steering technology isn't going to slow you down...& the extra 2 cylinders are a welcome addition. Does that help (lol)??

Steve

Here's my last contribution on this subject. From a Google search.

Volvo, like many other European automobile manufacturers, has adopted rack and pinion steering systems for its cars since 1975. Prior to this year, however, Volvos had used recirculating ball steering.

The advantage of rack and pinion steering systems is that road feel is improved for enhanced control. Performance comes at a price, however, as the precision machining of rack and pinion steering systems require excellent lubrication. Even if high-quality lubricants are used, the presence of dirt can score bearings, damage seals and render a $1600.00 steering rack inoperative.

Recirculating ball steering systems isolate road irregularities from the driver and generally provide longer service than rack and pinion designs. Nevertheless, marginal lubrication and dirt can just as quickly destroy this mechanical component. While replacement of a recirculating ball steering box costs less than would be the case with a rack and pinion system, parts availability for vintage cars is always a stressful affair.

Cost and availability are two important reasons why your should conduct periodic maintenance on your Volvo's steering system.

End Clip

So I guess RB may actually be cheaper.

Steve

You hit the nail right on the head with this description. The W210s under damped suspension makes me sea sick, literally. I would consider a W210 if I could find a report of someone fitting HDs and seeing an improvement or comparing it to a W124, or W123 (my favorite riding chassis)...

__________________
1977 Mercedes 300D

The W210 suffers from the same poor performing main rubber bushing on the lower control arms.

I located a source in California (Duarte, CA) and ordered a polyurethane bushing for my W208 CLK55. According to their website, the bushings are also available for the W210 and W140. www.lpdauto.com

Mine should be arriving soon and will give feedback after install.

I did put Bilstein HD's on my W210, and it helped a lot, but not completely. It is about a 70% improvement.

I've been thinking about putting on a thicker sway bar.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

Guy's, I own a 97 E420 and while the steering is a lot lighter, it is very precise. The W210 rides very well, better then any car that I've owned or driven. It does feel like it floats on the road, but I have also had to hustle it around corners and it's pretty well composed.

I also own a 6.9 which was the flagship from 20 years before and it's a hoot to drive. But the E420 pretty much does everything better if not through power, then through gearing.

I drove a CLS500 a short while ago when I helped a Mechanic friend who had to collect a car from a customer. This one had 20 inch rims on it and drove like crap compared to my E420. I can say that my car is better then the CLS but the reality is that it was probably the wheels

The fit and finish on Mercedes is excellent, it was 40 years ago and it is today. I have friends who own 97 BMW's with similar mileage and bits are starting to fall off and the scuff. Another friend has 2001 A6 2.7T and you wont believe the crap he's had to deal with.

The A6 feels like a bank vault when you sit it in, but IMO it's not as nice to drive.

__________________
With best regards

Al

Do you really believe it's the lower control arm bushings that are the source of "wallowing"?

I might have to look into this.....

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

The lower control arm bushings cause a shimmy between 50 and 70 (as if the wheels are out of balance)

__________________
With best regards

Al