Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

Best Mods you can do to you W210?

79K views 67 replies 31 participants last post by  260e crusier  
I prefer stock, except for the wheels. I hate the stock wheels on my 2002 w210. If I ever do get different wheels though (hard to justify the cost) they will be the same (or close to stock) size, just not as ugly. I can't stand the look of massive wheels with super-low-profile tires. I also think lowering is just dumb. If you want a sports car, buy one. These cars were not meant to be so low, and I have no patience for people who lower their cars and then can't get in/out of driveways at normal speeds without bottoming out and destroying all their ground effect black lights. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, if you modify to actually improve the performance of the car because you take it to the track on weekends, that's different. Lowering for looks is just silly. Any mod that makes the car perform worse is absolutely lame, IMO. For example massive spoiler/wings on the back of a Honda Civic. All that does is ruin your fuel economy... LOL.
 
j99xi: Do you have links to any references, white papers, or other publications that corroborate what you're saying about the stock wheels? You made some blanket statements that imply the stock wheels will be more efficient than any other wheel. I find this hard to believe. Take for example the stock wheels from a 2004 e-class. These look much better (IMO) and I'd be very surprised if they were significantly more or less efficient than the stock wheels from a 2002 e-class.

It's been many years, but I know a bit about aerodynamics and fluid flow, and what you're claiming sounds a bit like marketing taking one small comment by one engineer and running with it to the point of blatant exaggeration. (The classic marketing vs. engineering battle).

Mind you, I'm not saying you are lying or anything. I'm sure you read this somewhere. I just wonder who exactly originally claimed this, and what numbers they have to back it up.

Now, compared to those AMG wheels that are mostly flat with five (IIRC) small holes around the perimeter... then yes, I'd say that the 10-hole wheels are better for brake cooling (still not sold on the fuel economy part though). But there are many wheels out there that might provide the same or better ventilation as the stock 10-holers.
 
I get the aerodynamics.

However, I'm not so sure it's worth the trade-off with brake cooling. I would rather have cool brakes on a twisty mountain road than save 1~2 mpg on the freeway because my wheels were more aero.

On bicycles, the brakes are outside the disc of the wheel. Same for motorcycles. But cars rely on good flow from the wheel-well out through the wheel vents, to cool the brakes.

At high velocities, like autobahn or interstate driving, the high speed flow across the outside of the wheel is going to provide a pretty good suction to draw air from the wheel-well out through the wheel vents. But cruising along at 80+ mph is a situation where the brakes are not going to be very hot, so if you need to hit them hard, they are ready. So the cooling provided at high speed is not really as needed.

When you usually need good ventilation is in a situation like a twisty mountain road, where you're constantly on and off the brakes, up and down hills, etc. But in this situation, your overall speed is much less, so the aerodynamic suction is going to be less, thus the flow of air over the brakes is going to be less. So you'd want bigger vents.

Granted I obiviously didn't go through the design optimization process of these wheels, so I don't know for what speed they were optimized.