Pads Changed Today but Another Question

[bc24]

Ok, so I had my front pads changed today from what turned out to be #4's to #1's in the front and it is perfect now. I cant believe how thick those pads were in the front. I am very very happy with the result. Now, I want to raise the back a little as there is tuck in the back but a perfect meet of the tire and fender in the front. My question is, is it as easy to see what number pads I have in the back as it is in the front? If I jack my car up in the back should I be able to see up into the perch to the see the pad #? Also, what is the thickest that I can go in the back? Thanks a lot for any advice and help!

P.S.- If you have ever considered changing your pads, do it! Though I might be a little crazy, I thought that the second I drove the car it seemed a little stiffer.

[manny]

Yes, you can count the " nibs " in the rear as easy as the front.
The thickest you can get for the rear is # 4 pads.
Remember, according to M-B, your car is supposed to have a slight rake towards the front, i.e. rear about 1/2 " higher than the front, with nobody in the car. ;)

[SpEeDy230]

True you do need a rake about 1/2 inch in the back. Maybe up the back ones to #2's

[bc24]

??? I dont think that I understand. I have tuck in the back but no tuck in the front. What does this have to do with a .5 inch higher in the back? Thanks for the help!

[bc24]

I dont know what I have in the back but I am thinking about putting #4's in. Does anyone have this?

[ShollyC220]

I have an H&R kit, and a system (yes, its heavy) in the trunk. My pads are all stock, but the rear end looks like it sits lower than the front. (just by fender to tire gap) Am I in trouble? It looks the like car sits pretty even, (i.e. neither the front or back iks higher) but I have been reading about the need for 1/2 inch higher in the back? thanks
-sholly

[allirroz]

I have H&R's on mine use the original pads. Rear sat much lower than the front. OE pads were# 1, replaced it with pad 4 with added about 1/2 inch . now I like the stance of my c280 sport . I get a finger gap in the rear and 2 finger up front.

[toamend]

Same deal for me, the H&R's required me to go from a #2 in back to a #4 in back. Now it sits right with the 'rake'. I always hated that squat look and lived with it for a freakin year before I did anything about it.

[Linh]

H&R spring is the only spring known to have the '"squat look". It look really nasty in my opinion.

[C43]

I have H+R's sports and Bilstein sport shocks in the garage. I am so confused about pad size that I am waiting. I want 1 finger gap in the front and 2 finger gap in the back. I'm learning in this forum #1 front+#2 back. Is this the right way to do it?
Please I have done numerous searchs and I was thinking of making a chart. The stealership thinks I am insane. Thanks:confused:

[KWiK]

Originally posted by C43
...I am so confused about pad size that I am waiting. I want 1 finger gap in the front and 2 finger gap in the back...
The only real way to get the look you want is to install a set of pads using your best guess on spring/pad combo & then adjust as needed with a pad change...


Here is my car with Vogtland springs & #4 pads front & rear...

http://forums.mbworld.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=37840&stc=1