W210 Pre 2000 suspension vs post 2000

[Mohnish]

Hello, I recently traded my '98 W210 E250 for the 2000 W210 E220 CDI. Hence the comparison...

Are there major changes in the suspension setup between the upgrade? I find the ride much firmer/harder on the 2000 E220 CDI compared to the '98 E250. Is this normal or is there somehting amiss with the car I purchased?

Also, the E220 CDI has Good Year tyres (standard issue) and they are exptremely 'noisy'! Slapping sound when crossing road strips. Could the tyres be the reason for the harder ride quality?

Your opinions...Thanks in advance.

 

[lynall]

Both same spec? ie avantgarde has lower susp as std.



Lynall

 

[W210 Fan]

Are you comparing apples with oranges as Lynall says, are the wheels the same size and type, are the tyre pressures right?

 

[Dieselman]

I suspect the car was changed because the old car was higher mileage and worn out...

 

[Mohnish]

Both same spec? ie avantgarde has lower susp as std.Lynall

Both are not the avantgarde. In the older 210s the avantgarde was not an option. The current one is an 'elegance', not the avantgarde.

Are you comparing apples with oranges as Lynall says, are the wheels the same size and type, are the tyre pressures right?

Older:215/?65?/15 Not sure if the aspect ratio was 65.
Current:215/55/16

Tyre pressures are the same...I always ride in lowered pressures to compensate for the horrible roads.

I suspect the car was changed because the old car was higher mileage and worn out...

Changed not because it was old and was'nt 'worn out' as I have maintained it well, but the new cdi engine is a vast improvement over the older 2.5 non turbo. Also nicer looks and creature comforts in the post 2000s.

I think it has to do with the tyres...The Good Years are known to be 'firmer' and with a lower aspect ratio to compensate larger rims to maintain the ride height .... that would vastly firm up the ride...correct?

 

[renault12ts]

avantgarde was available from the off in 1996. My first 230 was an elegance in 1996. This photo was taken in March 96 ( in the non digital era ).

 

[Dieselman]

Probably not available in India though..

To the O/p. There will be two aspects, firstly the later car has lower profile tyres which will transmit more shock, secondly, even though your car was well maintained the springs and dampers would be worn so softer.

 

[V12]

Probably not available in India though..

To the O/p. There will be two aspects, firstly the later car has lower profile tyres which will transmit more shock, secondly, even though your car was well maintained the springs and dampers would be worn so softer.

I agree...i've never heard anyone refer to the 16" wheels on any 210 as giving a "harsh" ride.

The springs and shocks must have been nicely worn in on the old car.

 

[Dieselman]

Is that rust I can see on the front wheelarch..

 

[Mohnish]

...firstly the later car has lower profile tyres which will transmit more shock, secondly, even though your car was well maintained the springs and dampers would be worn so softer.

Yes, I am inclined to go with that.

Additionally, the CDI engine is way more powerful (about 50BHP or more) and hence better acceleration and top speed, considering the weight of both vehicles are about the same. Having said that, wouldn't it be correct engineering to go with a firmer suspension design.

 

[Dieselman]

The 220 CDi engine is lighter than the 250 so tends to ride less well anyway.

 

[Mohnish]

The 220 CDi engine is lighter than the 250 so tends to ride less well anyway.

Yes, that does add to the explanation. All said, drive a bit more gingerly in accordance with the road conditions!

 

[renault12ts]

Is that rust I can see on the front wheelarch..

No, that's my wife!!

I had my present car up on a lift last night ( thank-you 230K ), my low ride height is because both front springs are broken.