For my 1968 250S, which was actually built in 1967 was the last year built, but sold into 1968. AutohausAZ which I buy lots of parts I have to select 1967 or else the 250S does not show up....
I ordered 111 413 00 12, which is on my old one. They shipped 108 413 00 12.
the difference is 111 had hole centered and 108 hole is offset. Interesting because my chassis is a 108.
desc often say hole for grease nipple, but there isnt one on my car. It appears that earlier versions had the nipple and were now upgraded to a sealed bearing.
Read the link ,A Dalton .A. gentleman with a vast vintage model knowledge has metioned rubber bushing are interchangable right across the range. Driveshafts are model specific.
Early 111 were mostly fited with grease access point later models had a sealed bearing . I had modified the one on my 62 220S to sealed bearings .
Completed rebuild of driveshaft including 2 new u-joints and rubber center support. Got the 111- version that includes a hole to access grease fitting. Since I have sealed bearing I put the rubber donut with the hole up, this leaves more rubber on the bottom to support the weight of the driveshaft.
Finished up by changing rear diff oil.
Started to replace brake fluid, did back brakes just fine. Went to loosen bleeder on front brake and twisted it off :crybaby2: Now I get to remove caliper and try and get broken part out.
While car is lifted in front with wheel off I could easily see that sub frame mounts are bad. I just purchased some with last parts order.
Looks like next week will be fixing bleeder and doing sub frame mounts!
Going through the exact same thing now. I know it's been a few years since the OP but this may be of help to others that come along. I decided to re-use the original one, which was still in quite good shape for something 48 years old. I think the PN was one digit off from yours.
I think really the only two cents I have to contribute is that at first I had thought that the hole was centered, but I now think that it isn't, but that the years have made the difference seem less (compressed rubber). I wish I had noted which side was up before I removed it from the support (in anticipation of replacing it). My intuition tells me that the thin side would be on the bottom rather than top. Not sure why. In my head it would keep the driveshaft straight, but fat side down would make it rise slightly at the support. I could be imagining things.
I do have a photo of it out of the mount. Notice the flat edge on the metal bearing housing toward the left of the photo. This is on the side of the bearing that faces aft. I could swear the rubber has a corresponding flat side there too, but it may have formed to it over the years. The bushing they sent doesn't have a flat side. On the flip side of the bearing housing there is no flat side on the metal, it's just round. I'm not sure what function this serves if any. Doesn't seem like they'd do it for no reason. That's not really a MB thing...
Regarding the shape of the bushing in the photo, I think that the section that runs from about 10 to 11 o'clock is thinner than the opposite side.
I kept my old one as it was still in good shape also!
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mercedes-Benz Forum
7.6M posts
693.6K members
Since 1999
BenzWorld.org forum is one of the largest Mercedes-Benz owner websites offering the most comprehensive collection of Mercedes-Benz information anywhere in the world. The site includes MB Forums, News, Galleries, Publications, Classifieds, Events and much more!