Tweet
The change to coil springs on the front was a bad one, obviously brought on by sales people and not by engineering. Resulted in millions of broken coil springs and tremendous cost for Mercedes and owners.
-
-
Why the change is anyone's guess. Cheapness at manufacturing change the usual reason. Don't buy the sales people driving the change. They sell cupholders and the like - and finance.... Most prospective customers haven't a clue about the mechanical bits beneath the skin. The internet has shown us that.
The broken coils were expensive for Mercedes no doubt. But a drop in the ocean relative to what the leaky Roadster cost them. Then along came BMW with mini and game over for smart. Innovation takes decades to become accepted - Audi's experience with the A2 demonstrates that. Mercedes' retreat to conventionality with its A-Class another casualty.
Would still love to know who the engineers were who laid out the 450 and Roadster. So many elements of previous small cars of the 1960's I'll wager some were drawn out of retirement after working for the likes of Fiat, DAF, etc. Leaf front springs were a Fiat staple.Comment
-
Yes cost may have been a reason since two cheap coil springs that only last a year or two plus associated jewellery only cost a fraction of the far superior leaf spring assembly.Comment
-
I've never seen the suspension on a leaf sprung 450, did they use the same lower ball joints as the coil spring versions?Comment
-
Every thing is same except no coil spring and no lower cup to support coil spring.Comment
-
That's interesting... when did they stop using leaf spring on the 450?
Comment
-
That's interesting... when did they stop using leaf spring on the 450?
Comment
-
Early 2001 according to Evilution in his guide to marks.Originally posted by THEDON View Post
Comment
Comment