As most of you know, Mercedes has declined to own up to the engine wiring harness defect in the 1991-1996 model years, and issue a "goodwill" recall.

I just called MBUSA, and I am not *to say the least* satisfied by their response.

Following, is a list of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-EIGHT (updated 6-19-2006) reported consumer complaints (and a number of FIRES..!) that I found on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website concerning the chronic engine compartment wiring harness failure suffered by 1991 through 1996 Mercedes Benz automobiles.

This list is not--by any means--meant to be complete, as it only lists those reports that I was able to locate. Note that the first complaint on the list is mine:
MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINTS (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html)

If your Mercedes has suffered from the same defect (and it will), please call MBUSA and ask to speak to a supervisor at MBUSA who claims to have NEVER heard of this problem:

1-800-FOR-MERCEDES (1-800-367-6372)

In fact, as you read through the list, notice the arrogance by which the consumer is told this same lie, over and over, by MBUSA.

Click the link below to see hi-resolution images of two typical defective MB wiring harnesses (remarkable pics):
MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT IMAGES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_images.html)

Please file your own complaint with the NHTSA here, and be added to the list:

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


edited on 10-25-05 to include model year 1991 vehicles...
edited on 04-22-06 to include model year 1996 vehicles...


.

<<
who claims to have NEVER heard of this problem
>>

MBUSA has never heard of a problem on Mercedes-Benz cars. They are so perfect. If you have a head gasket problem on M103 and M104 motors, you are th eonly one because they have never head from any other owners.

This bad atitude and poor customer service is really hurting the quality and reputation of the brand.

Many MB models are among the used cars to avoid in the annual Consermers Report car issue.

You are flogging a DEAD horse!

That reply is consistent from MB about that problem!

It has been known that occasionally, even "dead" horses can be "flogged" to life! Keep after them, and then advise proper authorities. Consider small claims court in your area. good luck, Abe G

It has been known that occasionally, even "dead" horses can be "flogged" to life! Keep after them, and then advise proper authorities. Consider small claims court in your area. good luck, Abe G



Absolutely.

This should have been a recall item, and, with perseverance, I believe will be. The local service manager told me that Mercedes did replace these up until two or three years ago, but suddenly stopped, with no explaination.

Today, I printed and mailed all 19 pages, some 60 collected complaints, back to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's "Office of Defect Investigation," as well as a link to the web page I made (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html).

Trust me, I WILL get their attention. And with luck, I will find someone in the NHTSA, or the FTC, with the balls to go after MB.

Numbers are what will give this thing momentum, so if you are having an engine wiring harness problem (or did), you can file your own complaint with the NHTSA here, and be added to the list:

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


.

There is a DIY article here on how to replace the wiring harness. It has step by step instructions and pictures. I can't recall for which engine it was. It seems like a fairly straight-forward thing to do, not any more difficult than changing plug wires.

My daughter's 300TE had some stalling issues. Enrique at Mr. M.B. MOTORS diagnosed the problem as a wiring harness issue. Before ordering a new wiring harness, Enrique took the time to check the wiring and was able to locate the culprit. Some wires were cahnged/re-routed and now the car runs great. We did not need to change the entire harness.

I know we all wish that MB would fix all of our cars' problems. But I have to tell you, I have owned many different brands of cars, it is hard to find a car built as solidly as the W124 or the W126 bodies (I have no experience with newer Benzes). My daughter's 300TE has 190k on the clock and it runs like a champ. Several years ago I sold my '84 300SD with over 300k on the clock, that car is still running strong. The new owners (family friends) still drive it on a daily basis and they love it. BTW, the husband is a German engineer and he loves diesels. I sold my '91 420SEL with almost 250K on the clock. That car is still running great. The new owner took care of the few problems that it had and she loves her "new" car.

By contrast, I now drive a 1999 Seville SLS. Talk about a POS. It has 48k miles and it has been in the family since it was new (it was Dad's car). Since October of last year it has had over $6k worth of tranny work. Fortunately for me, I bought an extended warranty, so all the repair bills have been paid for by GM. I, however, shudder to think what will happen when the extended warranty expires.

If you think that MB is cold and heartless towards its customers then try dealing with GM. The GM "customer care" center is the biggest joke in the world. For example, my highly touted Northstar engine, allegedly the best/greatest/finest engine ever made by GM (at least according to their own literature) consumes one quart of oil every 750 - 1k miles. It has been doing this since new.

When Northstars owners complain about the engine's thirst for oil, GM's reply is: 1. this is normal, 2. manufacturing tolerances (or lack thereof) cause some engines to consume more oil than other engines, 3. this is a "built-in" feature to make sure that there is always a supply of fresh oil in the engine or 4. we NEVER heard of this problem (I actually got that answer once).

Sure, it would be nice if Benz fixed the wiring harness problem, or if they took care of the cracking dashboards on some W123 or W126 cars or if they fixed the peeling clearcoats on some older Benzes. But try finding another car that will consistently give owners such driving pleasure and longevity of use and I am sure that you will find that no other car comes even close to Benz.

So enjoy what you have and thank God that you don't drive a Cadillac Seville. (BTW go to www.cadillacforums.com and see how even the much-touted new STS is full of problems. GM will NEVER get it right).

Enjoy.

There is a DIY article here on how to replace the wiring harness. It has step by step instructions and pictures. I can't recall for which engine it was. It seems like a fairly straight-forward thing to do, not any more difficult than changing plug wires.



I'd be happy enough if MB were to simply hand me a new harness. I could certainly manage the installation. From everything I've read (and as you note), it's a fairly simple swap.

One of the things the MBUSA rep told me that pissed me off, he tried to draw an analogy to the engine control wiring harness and brake pads/tires.

WTF?

Since when are wiring harnesses considered "consumables?"


.

I'd be happy enough if MB were to simply hand me a new harness. I could certainly manage the installation. From everything I've read (and as you note), it's a fairly simple swap.

One of the things the MBUSA rep told me that pissed me off, he tried to draw an analogy to the engine control wiring harness and brake pads/tires.

Since when are wiring harnesses considered "consumables?"

I agree with you that sometimes it is not the product itself that creates the "problem" but, rather, the inane responses from service reps and other company hacks. I am well versed on cars, and sometimes their responses make me feel like they must think I am a doofus from Palookaville. It is when they insult my intelligence that I blow a gasket.

Have you tried negotiating? Maybe they go half and half on the cost of a new harness?

Harnesses became "consumables" when the Germans allowed the "Green Party" to take over industrial decisions. The wiring harness is supposed to be biodegradable. This is because of Germany's countless environmental laws. Some of which make sense, some of which are totally stupid. The wiring harness is one example of the stupid ones. The harnesses began to degrade way before the car's "normal" life.

Another stupid law is the requirement that before you get a fishing license, you have to demonstrate to the German Fish & Game people that you know how to kill a caught fish with a single hammer blow to the head.

Good luck in your quest to make them address the harness issue. On the other hand, thank God you don't drive a POS Cadillac Seville.

Good Luck with your battle, I have tried before here too, hopefully you have more luck and drive than I did after I got my harness. ;)
Chris
http://www.mercedesshop.com/shopforum/showthread.php?t=56427
http://www.mercedesshop.com/shopforum/showthread.php?t=50276

I think it is time for Mercedes to step up to the plate and take responsibility for these harnesses! Consumables??? What else are we going to find out is a consumable? How soon should I expect to replace my airbag and be sure it will still work? Where is the schedule in my manual for changing my wire harness? Had someone said something before I bought the car about changing the harness every 60,000-70,000 miles I might have passed over it. And guess what else... Between my dad and 2 brothers, we own 13 mercedes benz, (enough to start our own mercedes club) guess how many need harness replaced? 1 - mine and all the others are older and all run well and have never had a harness replacement! I wonder what the "consumable" schedule for those cars is! Way to go Mercedes!

I tried to file an on-line complaint using the link from Infoage1 and the website seems to have a flaw. It will ask what type of vehicle and the pull down gives only three choices, Buses..., Motorcycle, or Trailer. Finally, when the pro-forma complaint appears for review, the reason for the complaint, that was previously entered, goes missing. I'll try again tomorrow.

Have you tried negotiating? Maybe they go half and half on the cost of a new harness?


I offered customer service supervisor at MBUSA, as a suggestion: that I had been told that other MB owners had been handed a new harness, and were then responsible for their own installation.

But, well, given that he had NEVER EVER heard of the problem in the first place, my generous suggestion went unheard...

Evidently, being deaf is part of the MBUSA "customer service" rep job description...



I tried to file an on-line complaint using the link from Infoage1 and the website seems to have a flaw. It will ask what type of vehicle and the pull down gives only three choices, Buses..., Motorcycle, or Trailer. Finally, when the pro-forma complaint appears for review, the reason for the complaint, that was previously entered, goes missing. I'll try again tomorrow.
Flanso,
Yes, please try again tomorrow. If you have to, there is a telephone number on that same link, and the NHTSA rep will cheerfully take your complaint verbally.

Also, add my web page to your online complaint. If your complaint is verbal, get an email address to sent it to. The more, and different, NHTSA people that read the scale and trend of the problem, the better the odds of a satisfactory resolution.

http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html

.

Today, I printed and mailed all 19 pages, some 60 collected complaints, back to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's "Office of Defect Investigation," as well as a link to the web page I made (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html).


Numbers are what will give this thing momentum, so if you are having an engine wiring harness problem (or did), you can file your own complaint with the NHTSA here, and be added to the list:

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


.

Here's the letter I snail-mailed to the NHTSA along with the 19 pages of complaints. A similar letter (and link) was emailed to the FTC:


NHTSA
Office of Investigations
NSA-1001400
7Th Street SW
Washington DC 20590


July 11, 2005

Dear NHTSA:

Per our recent telephone conversation:

Mercedes-Benz Engine Wiring Harness Defect

Enclosed, please find a list of reported complaints that I found on your very own National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website concerning the chronic engine compartment wiring harness failure suffered by (at the least) 1992 through 1995 Mercedes Benz automobiles. This list is not, by any means, meant to be complete, as it only lists those reports that I was able to locate. Note that the first complaint on the list is mine.

I am outraged at Mercedes-Benz’ arrogant refusal to own up to, and take responsibility for, this extremely dangerous design and engineering defect. For the life of me (literally), I cannot understand why NHTSA has not investigated this dangerous situation, especially given the large number of complaints. I will not be satisfied with less than Mercedes’ immediate rectification.

http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html

Sincerely,



.

My 1995 E320 (87K miles) has not had a problem YET, but I would sure love it if the dealer just called me in for a recall replacement of the harness. It would be a load off my mind and I guess it would save me $1000.00 or more, if the dealer would fix it for me. I would be very happy if they just gave some kind of discount, like a free harness that I would have to pay to have installed. Thanks again for your efforts to help all of us with this issue.

Have 3 suspect cars with the same potential problem. I think it would be very nice if Mercedes took care of these issues. I know all three have the original wiring and no problems so far, and I check them on a regular basis.

If repeated pressuring from MB owners doesn't make MBUSA take action on these harnesses, perhaps a class-action lawsuit would?

If repeated pressuring from MB owners doesn't make MBUSA take action on these harnesses, perhaps a class-action lawsuit would?

From all of the MB/NHTSA complaints I read, I don't think a decent "Products Liability" law firm would have any trouble proving a claim. Ironically, it would probably take a serious injury to get a "decent" Products Liability law firm interested. Here's a broad description I pulled from the web:

Products Liability:

Products liability refers to a manufacturer or seller being held liable for placing a defective product into the hands of a consumer. Responsibility for a product defect that causes injury lies with all sellers of the product who are in the distribution chain. Potentially liable parties include the manufacturer, a manufacturer of component parts, the wholesaler, and the retail store that sold to the consumer.

The law requires that a product meet the ordinary expectations of the consumer. When a product has an unexpected defect or danger, the product cannot be said to meet those ordinary expectations. In general terms, defective products claims fall into three categories:

Design defects occur when it can be shown that the intentional design of the product makes it unreasonably dangerous;

Manufacturing defects exist when it can be demonstrated that the product does not conform to the designer's or manufacturer's own specifications;

Marketing defects include improper labeling of products, insufficient instructions, or the failure to warn consumers of a product's hidden dangers. A negligent or intentional misrepresentation regarding a product may also give rise to a products liability claim.


.

Interesting article:


"The Legal Duty to Report Safety Defects Belongs to Vehicle and Equipment Manufacturers

The plain and simple fact is that the legal obligation to report possible vehicle-related defects lies with Ford and Firestone, not the victims of defect-related crashes and their attorneys.

Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, a manufacturer is obligated to "notify" NHTSA when it learns of any safety defect in its products. See 49 U.S.C. § 30118. Ford and Firestone knew of problems associated with their products, knew there was a significant number of lawsuits, knew that consumers were suffering tread separations and related rollover crashes, and knew of approximately one thousand consumer complaints.

The companies did not provide NHTSA with this data, which included information as to deaths, injuries and property damage claims, insurance reports, warranty claims and repair records, as well as changes in the design parameters of the vehicle and tire. After evaluating their products in the early 1990s, Firestone replaced the ATX tire with the new Wilderness AT tire in 1995, and Ford redesigned the Explorer suspension system for the 1995 models. The companies, abrogating their statutory duty, knowingly failed to inform NHTSA of the growing problems with this lethal tire and vehicle combination.

In 1999, a year before the Ford/Firestone U.S. recall, Ford conducted foreign "recalls" of the Firestone tires in Venezuela and the Gulf Coast countries, a fact which the companies’ in-house counsel believed was necessary to report to NHTSA, and yet did not. Internal company memoranda uncovered in litigation show that the two companies made a conscious decision to withhold facts concerning the foreign recalls from NHTSA despite the fact that identical tires and vehicles had been and were being sold to millions of American consumers.

A new law, the Transportation, Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (TREAD) Act was enacted by Congress in November 2000, in recognition of the failure of manufacturers to disclose, and NHTSA to discover, the Firestone tire/Ford Explorer defect. The law clarifies the duty of companies to provide information regarding foreign recalls, and requires NHTSA to collect "early warning" information from the manufacturers, including lawsuits, complaints, warranty claims, deaths and injuries, etc. NHTSA is currently engaged in a rulemaking to define how this "early warning" information will be reported to the agency by manufacturers on a regular basis."

http://www.kraftlaw.com/Articles/ConsumerLawyersFirestoneFail.htm


.

Interesting article:


"The Legal Duty to Report Safety Defects Belongs to Vehicle and Equipment Manufacturers

The plain and simple fact is that the legal obligation to report possible vehicle-related defects lies with Ford and Firestone, not the victims of defect-related crashes and their attorneys.

InfoAge:

Since you are in California, let me offer the following suggestion. No law firm is going to take on a wiring harness case unless it is connected to a major injuries case. But you probably already knew/suspected that. The cost of putting on a products liability case against a major company such as M-B is simply prohibitive. No one will do it unless: (1) the client fronts the costs of hiring experts or (b) there are major. serious injuries, that can be directly attributable to the defective wiring harness (so there is a big pot of gold at the end of the litigation rainbow).

I suggest, however, that you look into California's business and Professions Code Sec. 17200 et seq. That is the Unfair Business Practice statute. Unfortunately the law was recently changed (by way of a proposition campaign, Prop 64) so that Sec 17200 is no longer available to private litigants.

Now only the State Attorney General or your local DA office can bring suit under B&P 17200. The good knows is that the standard of proof is different (and easier) than in a normal products liability case. Basically, B&P Sec. 17200 et seq say that ANY business practice is unfair if it gives a company an unfair edge over competitors. You don;t even have to show actual harm to a consumer.

In this case, if it can be proven/shown that M-B gained an unfair advantage over its competitors by using cheaper wiring harnesses, there "may" be a case.

What you should do is try to make an appointment with someone at the local office of the Attorney General's Office (in their Consumer Protection Section). If they agree to meet with you, then bring all your evidence for them to review. Explain to them how this has affected consumers not just in California but all over the US. The AG's Office successfully sued Enron to recover some of the money they overcharged California consumers. So the guys and gals at the AG's office know what they are doing.

I am not saying that they will agree to take on the case or that the case would be successful. It is, however, certainly worth taking a shot. In the good old days (last year) you could got o a private attorney and he or she might take the case. Now you need to go to the AG's Office, but it is still worth a try.

Good luck.

...do we really have a chance of getting anything done when the product affected is already 10 year or older meaning the product in question worked for 10 years just fine? (while many failed much earlier including mine)



The simple answer is yes, "we really have a chance of getting" something done. In answer to my pointed question, the NHTSA told me there is no "statute of limitations" that a manufacturer can hide behind concerning vehicle defects.

For those interested, please call the NHTSA and ask for yourself:

DOT Vehicle Safety Hotline:

For more information dial NHTSA's toll-free hotline at
1-888-DASH-2-DOT (1-888-327-4236) 8:00AM to 10:00PM ET Monday-Friday.
Spanish speaking operators are available on the Hotline.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


.

Being an automotive engineer I'll have to get a little defensive of our colleague who dreamt up the idea. There'a a good chance it's not the engineer's fault, but fault of the manager who wouldn't budget enough resources to thoroughly test the product before putting this "wonderful" idea into production.

I call it "field testing".

made sure to post complaint to nthsb but also per previous thread (who do we really complain to?) sent a letter to Pual Halata!

made sure to post complaint to nthsb but also per previous thread (who do we really complain to?) sent a letter to Paul Halata!



Good idea. Anyone happen to have Paul's email addy?


.

It has been known that occasionally, even "dead" horses can be "flogged" to life!



For those who believe the Mercedes Benz NA line of bullsh!t that time shields them from a defective parts recall, click the "New recall information since" button on the NHTSA below link and note the vehicle age of the most recent defect recall results toward the bottom of the page.

Also note the number of "Potential Number Of Units Affected" in each case (especially the Fords):

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9241475/

This agrees with what the NHTSA told me some time ago, about there being, in no way, a "stautue of limitations" shield for Mercedes to hide behind.

That said, I'm still waiting to hear more from the NHTSA about our ongoing problems with the defective MB wiring harnesses:

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT SUMMARIES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html)


.

Well add me to this crusade.
I've contacted both the NHTSA and MB regarding this issue which indeed turned out to be safety related for myself. My 300e cut out while driving down the road and if it were to have happened on the highway, I might not be here posting this. This all happened last week, but only now has Joseph Leonardi from MB responded. I've also spoken to a regional rep via phone. They are, indeed, shrugging this off as an age related issue and therefore have no repsonsibility to cover any cost. I informed them of the several safety issues it could cause (including my own experience) and that the NHTSA has no statute of limitations on safety hazzards. We'll see where it goes from here. I have a CLK 430 which has been a gem, but am far more proud to drive my 93 300e. I wish MB would stand behind my older vehicle the way I do, and not only concern themselves with their newer stable (though I hear they could care less about them as well). I think once the CLK starts acting up its gone (better than dealing with the new breed of MB reps). I of course don't mind paying the higher repair costs, but not if it is a design flaw that could hurt my family. Best of luck to everyone in this.

Maybe you guys could get your dealer to replace the engine harness and then pay with a check using biodegrading ink that disappears by the time you get home.
When they call you and ask about the ink, you totally deny any knowledge of any such possible ink. :P

ozzy

Oh geez...Ozzy you crazy sob...what a genius idea...

croftynsteph,

I've added your complaint to my list (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html). Perhaps you'd like to email the CEO of MBUSA, Ernst Lieb, and tell him how you really feel :D

ernst.lieb@mbusa.com

Ozzy,

That is, indeed, a brilliant idea; however, I believe we have a good shot at forcing MB to own up to and repair our defective harnesses. Stooping to their low level must remain a last resort.

.

As most of you know, Mercedes has declined to own up to the engine wiring harness defect in the 1992-1995 model years, and issue a "goodwill" recall.

I just called MBUSA, and I am not, to say the least, satisfied by their response.

Following, is a list of reported complaints that I found on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website concerning the chronic engine compartment wiring harness failure suffered by (at the least) 1992 through 1996 Mercedes Benz automobiles. This list is not, by any means, meant to be complete, as it only lists those reports that I was able to locate. Note that the first complaint on the list is mine:

http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html

If your Mercedes has suffered from the same defect (and it will), please call MBUSA and ask to speak to John Hart, a supervisor at MBUSA, who claims to have NEVER heard of this problem:

1-800-FOR-MERCEDES (1-800-367-6372)

File your own complaint with the NHTSA here, and be added to the list:

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/



Does anyone have an old decomposing engine harness they can send me?

My defective harness is still in place, and I would like to forward one to the NHTSA.

I recently printed and mailed to the NHTSA all of the similar complaints I found on their website, and the NHTSA is looking at this problem with greater interest.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/RepositoryFiles.cfm?module=COMPLAINTS&IfsDocId=10130247


Also, for those of you who have suffered this problem, but never took the time to file a complaint, NOW would be a VERY good time to do so... :)

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


.

The problem with the NHSTA complaint forum is they have the model designation all screwed up for Mercedes. They list 300 400 500 series then e c s class all for the same model year and its confusing where to place your car. I posted mine a while back and I know its not included in your write up( 10128437 is the complaint number and its under 94 year model e class passenger car electrical underhood the last one of four complaints) I dont know how to put it on the website here. But anyway with the complaints spread out as far as they are it would be hard for anyone to see a pattern. Oh well best of luck!!

Chris

PS I spoke to John at Mercedes and he knows who you are Tom!! :D

Office of Defects Investigation



Complaints - Search Results
4 Records Displayed.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Report Date : September 13, 2005 at 06:58 PM
SEARCH TYPE : VEHICLE
YEAR : 1994
Make : MERCEDES BENZ
Model : E CLASS
Type : PASSENGER CAR


Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10025241 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: July 1, 2003
VIN : Not Available
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS ON MY 1994 MERCEDES-BENZ E320 IS CRACKED BECAUSE OF THE USE OF POOR WIRING INSULATION CAUSING MY CAR TO DIE IN THE MIDDLE OF DRIVING. TO RESTART IT, I HAVE TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP, PUT THE SHIFTER GATE TO P, TURN THE KEY ALL THE WAY BACK, AND FINALLY RESTART IT. IT IS VERY DANGEROUS BECAUSE I NEVER KNOW WHEN IT WILL OCCUR, I HAVE ALMOST BEEN IN MANY ACCIDENTS BECUASE OF THIS PROBLEM. THE BENZ TECHS TOLD ME THAT THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AND THAT MERCEDES-BENZ REFUSES TO MAKE IT A RECALL. *AK




Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10025560 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: July 7, 2003
VIN : WDBEA32E5RC...
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
ON 5 SEPARATE OCCASIONS OVER THE PAST 4 MONTHS MY CAR HAS SUDDENLY CUT OUT WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AND CITY STREETS, ALL WITHOUT ANY PRIOR WARNING. THESE INCIDENTS RESULTED IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL POWER, RESULTING IS POOR BRAKING AND STEERING. ON A PREVIOUS DEALER VISIT, THE CAR WAS INSPECTED AND SERVICED WITHOUT ANY PROBLEMS. THIS CAR IS NOW AT THE DEALER HAVING THE WIRING HARNESS REPLACED AS A COST OF $1500 WITHOUT ANY GOOD WILL FROM MERCEDES BENZ. THIS IS CLEARLY A MANUFACTURING DEFECT AFFECTING A LARGE NUMBER OF VEHICLES, HOWEVER THE MANUFACTURER STILL APPEARS TO BE IGNORANT TO THE FACT. THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE ON THE INTERNET SUGGESTING THAT THIS IS AN ONGOING PROBLEM.*AK




Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10074886 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: April 7, 2004
VIN : WDBEA34E7RC...
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
1994 MERCEDES BENZ E420- WIRING HARNESS IS DECAYING. THE WIRES ARE BRITTLE AND MELTING TOGETHER. THE INSULATION AROUND THE WIRE IS GONE; AS A RESULT, THE WIRE IS BARE AND UNSAFE. THE VEHICLE SUFFER FROM ALL TYPES OF PROBLEMS; SUCH AS, STALL ON THE HIGHWAY, SURGING IN TRAFFIC JAMS, AND GAUGES INTERMITTENTLY GO HAYWIRE.*AK




Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : Yes Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10128437 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: August 22, 2000
VIN : WDBEA32E8RC...
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
1994 E320 HAD INTERMINTENT RUNNING PROBLEMS. CAR WOULD STALL WITHOUT WARNING, ESPECIALLY DURING A RAIN OR AFTER WASHING THE CAR. REPLACED MANY PARTS(MASS AIR METER, TUNE UP, OVP RELAY, FUEL PUMP RELAY, ETC) TO CHASE THE PROBLEM, NONE OF WHICH SOLVED IT. BEGAN TO LOOK ON MERCEDES FORUMS AND FOUND THIS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM. BEFORE I REPLACED THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS IT BEGAN TO SMOKE HEAVILY FROM UNDER THE HOOD. I HAD AN EXTINGUSIHER WITH ME AND STOPPED IT FROM CATCHING FIRE. MERCEDES COVERED PART OF THE COST UNDER THEIR "GOODWILL" PROGRAM HOWEVER I HAD TO INSTALL IT WHICH TOOK ABOUT 8 HOURS. THE FIRST OCCURANCE HAPPEND AROUND 125K MILES HOWEVER IT WAS MANY MONTHS AND MILES LATER THAT THE PROBLEM WAS FIXED.

Thanks BadBenz94,

As you note, the NHTSA website/search is a mess. I forwarded your complaint, as well as the others I missed, to the engineers at NHTSA. In addition, I included some remakable pix from gerryvz at 500ecstasy.com (thanks Gerry).

hi-res:
http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_images.html

http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/images/wires_3415c.jpg
http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/images/wires_3416c.jpg

looks like we lost a page of posts on this one...I continue to find it amusing that MB denies any knowledge of the problem when I speak to them...considering they did offer a goodwill recall in prior years and auto.consumerguide lists the harness issue as a common problem...

auto.consumerguide (http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2205/act/usedcarreviewreliability/)

The ASR on my '93 S500 comes on first thing in the morning intermitantly when I start the car. If I pump the gas pedal before I turn the key it starts fine. My mechanic that has worked on all of my Mercedes says that he doesn't even want to look at it because he says he KNOWS it's wiring related (either the harness or the throttle actuator) and he says that either one is a pain and very pricey. :eek:

I have filed a report with NHTSA and hope that we can get MBUSA to cough up the dough for a recall, but I'm not optimistic.

Just received a letter from one of Paul Halata's cronies...dismissing my issue b/c my car is 12 years old and has 165k miles and therefore, they have no responsibility. I know for a fact that the wiring problem dated back to a fairly early period in my car's life based on the "repairs" done to it. Some wires were resoldered together and many of the bundles were bound by electrical tape. It is my own fault for purchasing this car, I knew the harness would need to be done at some point but for the price I paid and the condition the car is in, I'm satisfied with the deal. It is the principle of the harness being a safety issue that causes me so much concern. They did tell me to have my car checked over by the dealership so that they can assess the problem, but it is too late for that one (besides my car is not in mint condition and they wouldn't give me a new harness anyway). That's fine. I replaced the harness a few weeks ago and it fixed my car's ailments. I plan on practicing some harness rewiring if I can get a hold of someone's old harness (I threw mine out in disgust). Then maybe I'll work something out where for a few bucks I'll rewire harnesses for people on here and see how that goes (I have a good bit of experience in soldering/rewiring).

You brought up a good point - is there an expiration date for the manufacturer's responsibility to satisfy a recall campaign? What if somebody drives their long neglected, but good running condition, Pinto into a Ford dealer?.... is Ford still resposible for installing the shield to protect the gas tank from rupture, to satisfy a recall that was mandated by NHTSA?

Absolutely if the problems involves a known defect. MB knew after about a year that the wiring harnesses were a problem. They should have replaced them then and there wouldn't be a problem today.

If you think that MB will replace them...think about the infamous 350SD

... is there an expiration date for the manufacturer's responsibility to satisfy a recall campaign?
The short answer is NO.

I have been told several times by the NHTSA that time does not insulate (small pun) Mercedes, or any auto manufacturer, from being forced to issue a recall if the NHTSA mandates it as being necessary.

Witness the recalls of millions of older Ford and Toyota vehicles issued just last month. In Ford's case, there were many fires. In Toyota's, just seven confirmed cases. Certainly much less than problems we are suffering with the MB wiring harness issue.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9241475/


.

The short answer is NO.

I have been told several times by the NHTSA that time does not insulate (small pun) Mercedes, or any auto manufacturer, from being forced to issue a recall if the NHTSA mandates it as being necessary.

Witness the recalls of millions of older Ford and Toyota vehicles issued just last month. In Ford's case, there were many fires. In Toyota's, just seven confirmed cases. Certainly much less than problems we are suffering with the MB wiring harness issue.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9241475/


.

Anything new with this recall effort?

My car is just now having starting and stalling issues, and I can't find a record of the PO replacing the harness.

So far, no news for ya. We shall fight the good fight, until I win the lottery and move onto an Aston Martin.

My car is just now having starting and stalling issues, and I can't find a record of the PO replacing the harness.That shouldn't be a problem. Just peel back the wire bundle armoring and inspect the wire insulation. If it looks 200 years old the engine wiring harness needs to be replaced.

Keep in mind that this problem is generally confined to model years 93-95. I suggest you list your car in your signature for the benefit of others helping you.

Does anyone know who made these defective wire harnesses? Was it MB themselves or was it outsourced to another company who used inferior wire? I just replaced mine on my '95 C280. The old wire harness was in unbelievably bad shape. Visible copper and insulation that would just snap in your hands like a toothpick.

I understand this wiring was outsourced to another company, who also made the same problem wiring for other european makes at the time.

MB should make good on all the wire harnesses and then sue or get reimbursed for the faulty wire harnesses (which most likely or clearly should have not passed minimal specifications). I would assume that every part that goes into an automobile has specific performance criteria that it must pass. Did they just pass on a bogus 'approved' spec sheet to MB? Sounds like a viable law suit to me.

I understand this wiring was outsourced to another company, who also made the same problem wiring for other european makes at the time.
I have seen the Delphi label on a new OEM replacment harness being sold by a German eBayer. My Bablefish translation said something to the effect, "new harness. not from old stock, will not have the problems of the old harnesses."

I have no idea who the original OEM harness maker was, or why MB chooses not to go after them.

Artikelbeschreibung, Gegenstand dieser Auktion:

Original Mercedes-Benz Motorleitungssatz für den 500E Motor, Typ M119.974 LH

passend für alle W124 500E bis Fahrgestellnummer WDB1240361B840526 (siehe Fahrzeugschein)

Zustand:

NEU !!! OVP und aus aktueller Produktion !!

(die Problematik ist allgemein bekannt, dass sich der alte Motorleitungssatz zerbröselt/hart wird und somit die Gefahr besteht Steuergeräte zu beschädigen)

Dieser angebotene Motorleitungssatz ist erst kürzlich produziert worden (siehe auch Produktionsdatum), also noch absolut weich von der Isolierung. Dies ist kein alter Lagerbestand !

http://i13.ebayimg.com/04/i/05/1b/59/77_1_b.JPG



.

so you knowingly purchased a USED car with a faulty wiring system and now want someone else to pay for its repair. :laugh3: :inquisiti

and you say its the "principle.":bowrofl:
:eek2: :bsflag:

how about the principle of buyer beware?

this isn't even buyers remorse. its buyers selected use of "principles" to their gain.

so you knowingly purchased a USED car with a faulty wiring sytem and now want someone else to pay for its repair.

Yeah because its FAULTY AND DANGEROUS, thats why. What part of that do you not understand?

Chris

the part where he knew about it, bought it anyway, and now expects someone else to foot the bill.

if it was dangerous and he knew it, he shouldn't have bought it. period. the fact that he did obviates the danger from his point of view and as far as I'm concerned he has assumed all risks associated with the danger by buying it. its his fault for buying a known "defective" product. if his safety was paramount he wouldn't have bought it.

its like me going to a garage sale and buying some old lead based paint. then trying to sue someone for its Toxic effect.

Fair enough, your point well taken. But for all of those who did not, were not aware, purchased new etc, I definitely feel its Mercedes responsibility to fix a known and dangerous problem. :D
Chris

I actually don't expect them to reimburse me or any of that. I merely inquired about covering part of the cost of repair b/c if they had, I would have let the dealer fix it, rather than do it myself (selfish but at the time it was very cold here and I am w/o a garage). For example, if they had paid the labor then why not let them fix it and I'll cover the harness (which I did anyway). It's also the idea that if I had succeeded in that endeavor, others might also and I could pass on the info. I mentioned I was happy with the deal I got for the harness and the fact it fixed my issues. The principle is more their admission of guilt than it is me getting my money back. For what I've put into the car cost wise, it was a bargain. I only want MB to accept responsibility and take care of others who unknowingly are stuck with the issue.

I don't know who it is we are referring to as "knowingly purchasing a car with a bad harness and expecting someone else to pay for it", but I had never heard of the problem when I purchased mine 4 years ago and I dont ever think I would buy another that had NOT been replaced and the owner would have to show me proof! The fact that current owners of these cars do not pursue MB for replacement is rediculous. It also does not make sense that anyone would say that if you did not purchase the car originally, it should not be covered. Would it make sense for Ford not to cover dangerous vehicles just because you were not the original owner?? Second and third owners spend the same if not more on maintenance that original owners (I've said it before and I'll say it again; my immediate family ownes 13 mercedes benz, all except 1 bought second hand and all cars have nothing but Mercedes parts from local Mercedes Benz dealers in them. If mercedes were a little more reasonable (especially with issues like these) maybe these owners would spend more money at their local dealers instead of going to private mechanics or trying to fix them thenselves.

msethk--I'm the one who knowingly purchased the vehicle...though I've explained my position on pestering MB regarding the harness. The car was cheap enough when I bought it that I didn't mind shelling out for the harness at some point. However, after the car literally dropped dead on the road I figured I would be a pain in MB's butt. I wasn't looking for a coverage of costs, but would've accepted a labor reimbursement (read my posts earlier in the thread for my reasoning). I merely wanted MB to admit there was a problem b/c I'd like others who paid top dollar for their car who unknowingly ended up with the harness issue to get what they deserve, some help from the manufacturer. They continue to deny the problem even after the 10th time I've spoken to them, and despite Consumer Reports listing it as a common issue.

msethk

ever hear of a concept called "due diligence?" its mostly a business and law terminolgy but ti applies to life in general.

i'll quote the second definition from dictionary.com
the care that a prudent person might be expected to exercise in the examination and evaluation of risks affecting a business transaction

theres this wonderful thing called the internet these days. people can go on it and look up all sorts of things before they buy something.

before i bought my 124 i made sure to find out all i could about them. so i knew going in that i would probably have to do a cylinder head rebuild if i bought one and it hadnt been done. should i sue mercedes coz my car blew the gasket and would have overheated if i hadnt been aware of he situation and prepared (carried a 2 gallon bottle of water in the trunk until ihad the head done.)

That's a very good point.... there's not so much as a tsb on this subject!!! Yet the manufacturer sees fit to issue tsb's on issues considerably more minor!

But back to the issue. Normally the answer here would be the infamous class action lawsuit - but I think there's two problems with that - 1) MB has covered a lot of people, and the lawyers are not really going to have a good feel for how large the case is, or maybe even how good the case is, and 2) the 190E court case a few years ago, in which the court ruled the car so old, and the case so frivolous, that the plaintiffs were stuck with several hundred thousand dollars of defendant costs or court costs or something. In any case it's sort of precedent that willl scare the bejesus out of the tort class action attorneys.

.

"THE DEFECT COULD MANIFEST ITSELF AS ILLUMINATION OF THE "SERVICE ENGINE SOON" WARNING LIGHT, CESSATION OF THE ENGINE WITHOUT WARNING DURING OPERATION, REDUCED ENGINE POWER, OR A NO START CONDITION. ODI HAS RECEIVED 29 COMPLAINTS FROM OWNERS OF MY 2003 NISSAN ALTIMA VEHICLES ALLEGING SYMPTOMS SIMILAR TO THOSE DESCRIBED IN RECALL 03V-455."

Sound familiar?

For those that insist it takes a fire or a roll-over to get the NHTSA to effect a vehicle safety recall, the above is "A RECALL QUERY HAS BEEN OPENED TO DETERMINE IF THE SCOPE AND REMEDY OF RECALL 03V-455 ARE ADEQUATE."

While this is in regards to a NHTSA safety recall of bad Nissan crank position sensors, the symptoms could just as well describe those of our bad Mercedes Benz wiring harnesses. And note, that the NHTSA Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) has received nearly five times as many MB wiring harness complaints (138) as those involved in the Nissan recall (29).

NHTSA Action Number : RQ06001
(type in the above number in the below link)
http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/defect/defectsearch.cfm

MB Wiring Harness Failure
http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html

.

My Car began to suffer electircal and operational problems. Over the course of a month, my car was at the mechanic almost every day with odd new problems. My worst fear had come true, as my mechanic had worned me. My car's wire harness had began to fall apart, even simply touching is would cause it to disinigrate which caused many problems for my car. My mechanic told me for the early 90's to 95 model years they have changed many of the wirehanesses on these car's. I contacted mercedes wanting to work out a deal for their defective wire harnesses, and was told no such problem exisited. Customer service was very rude to me, and it ended with mercedes accusing me of creating a false claim to extort the company. I was hurt by the way they treated me, and wowed never to buy a new mercedes again. I have my old wire harness, and you can't even touch some sections of it...it'll simply fall apart. In the end I paid $2000 dollars for a new harness, install...few days worth of diagnoisis time was added to the bill also, and the power surges caused my bulbs and some minor parts to blow, in total after taxes I was in it for $3000 dollars. Mercedes thinks I'm lying and this problem never existed...customer service was rude enough to tell me, its not their fault if I got ripped off...extactly ripped off buying a mercedes.

"few days worth of diagnoisis time was added to the bill also, and the power surges caused my bulbs and some minor parts to blow, in total after taxes I was in it for $3000 dollars".


A few days diagnosis time??? For a bad engine harness??? That's ridiculous. Bulbs blowing bacause of a bad harness??? Never heard of that until now!!! It stinks that MB treated you poorly, but let's get real for a minute. The harness replacement should have cost about $1000. It sounds as though your car had some unrelated issues and/or the shop that did the job has some explaining to do.

1. How about making an expose about the wiring harneses and notifying Mercedes that you would give this to local television stations during weeks with slow news?

2. I wonder how Mercedes can continue to say they are not aware of these deteriorating harnesses when they are selling a disproportionate numer of replacement wiring harnesses to these model year cars owners.

Couldn't a lawyer have the courts demand the sale records on replacement wiring harnesses and point to this obvious fault?

If you choose to make biodegradable insulation for your wiring harness, it will degrade even before it hits the landfill. Whether this is a defect or a plus depends on your view of the big picture. My car had its harness replaced before I bought it, and it didn't cost a grand.

I doubt that you'll generate much interest in such an expose, but by all means, be my guest.

I did absolutely all maintenance on time and no cost was ever spared to get everything just right. I have “perfect books” to prove it, but my car still leaks just about everything from everywhere and of course it also needs the wiring harness. Sure it will last, since I will most likely keep paying to keep it running, but it is just a bunch of s**t that these cars need so much at only 93K. Mine is still kind of cool somehow and it is gorgeous, but it leaks just about everything from just about everywhere.

Looks good in side profile, but leaks from all over the place
http://forums.mbnz.org/gallery/pics/W124_57782.jpg

If you choose to make biodegradable insulation for your wiring harness, it will degrade even before it hits the landfill. Whether this is a defect or a plus depends on your view of the big picture.
You're clearly confusing a safety defect with an environmental issue. Priority number one when building a car is safety. Car manufacturers can't cloak a design defect in the name of environmental friendliness. To my knowledge there were no US regulations in place mandating biodegradable wiring insulation in the early to mid '90's. MB made this engineering decision unilaterally, which ironically is probably doing more harm to landfills had they not.

I doubt that you'll generate much interest in such an expose, but by all means, be my guest.
I doubt that your opinion was influenced at all by the fact that your wiring harness was replaced at no cost to you, huh?

You're clearly confusing a safety defect with an environmental issue. Priority number one when building a car is safety. Car manufacturers can't cloak a design defect in the name of environmental friendliness. To my knowledge there were no US regulations in place mandating biodegradable wiring insulation in the early to mid '90's. MB made this engineering decision unilaterally, which ironically is probably doing more harm to landfills had they not.


I doubt that your opinion was influenced at all by the fact that your wiring harness was replaced at no cost to you, huh?
I have my old wiring harness in my garage. Each bit of movement just makes it fall apart even more. If anyone wants to take action, call me.

There is a DIY article here on how to replace the wiring harness. It has step by step instructions and pictures. I can't recall for which engine it was. It seems like a fairly straight-forward thing to do, not any more difficult than changing plug wires.



Can you please give a link to the DIY article you mentioned. My 600 just hit the shop yesterday. Today they told me I need the harness and about $5,000 to fix it. WOW! I need some alternatives.

I guess you guys haven't heard the "normal wear and tear" excuse that MB is using to keep from having to admit guilt that they screwed up big time.Another thing..what is this story about the dealers were paying to replace the harnesses up until 3 years ago.Not in Dallas.The only owners getting any assistance were original buyers of the cars.No one else.When I approached both dealerships in Dallas about this issue I was told that since my SL320 was 10 years old and because I was the 2nd owner,that there was nothing MB could do.What has either one of these reasons got to do with defective,dangerous wiring harnesses.Unless a lawyer starts a class action lawsuit representing all owners of the 1992-1995 Mercedes cars,nothing will happen.BTW where is Ralph Nader when you need him? I have replaced 5 harnesses so far with defective insulation.The funny thing is that MB was more than willing to take my money for the new harnesses.But when you want customer service,everyone disappears.I recommend that every owner who has harness problems write to NHTS and put in a complaint.I did last month.Maybe after 1000 complaints the government will force a recall.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/defect/defectsearch.cfm

A little update:

As of March 28, 2006, I had found, and snail-mailed, a total of 148 NHTSA wiring harness complaints to the NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigations (ODI), in three separate mailings.

This is far above the the original 62 complaints I first mailed the NHTSA's ODI back in July of last year (which did indeed catch the collective attention of the ODI). Just today, I found and emailed to ODI an additional 15 complaints. So the new total is 163 registered complaints.

Included in today's newly found 15 complaints, was a 1996 "C Class" wiring harness complaint. This is the third 1996 complaint I have found (2 "C" Class, 1 "E" Class) ---so that makes a trend.

Late last year, I found enough 1991 model year complaints to include that year as well. I have sent this new information to ODI, and updated my web site as well:

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT SUMMARIES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html)

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT IMAGES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_images.html)


.

Some of the posts in this thread tell of MBUSA's customer service people saying they never heard of any problem with this or that. I contacted them last year about cracks in the top of my '98 E300's dashboard and yes, I was told the same thing...they never recall hearing of any complaints from any owners pertaining to cracked dashboard covers ever...imagine that, I am the first owner to tell them their plastic dash covers crack sometimes...

I doubt if anyone will have any luck with the NTSB unless the wiring harness causes a fire or an accident (in other words, I hope no one will have any luck).

I don't buy the "normal wear and tear" defense on this. I can take cheapsh** wire from Radio Shack, bury it underground for 20 years, dig it up, wash it off, and it will look and work great. I routinely see wiring on cars 20-30 years old in the junkyards with hoods up that is flexible and looks completely usable.

I routinely see wiring on cars 20-30 years old in the junkyards with hoods up that is flexible and looks completely usable.

Very true!
That was before all the Treehuggers got involved, especially in Europe, since the early 1990's.
Do we have standards in North America, that mandate a certain portion of a vehicle has to be recyclable?

.

What is interesting, is that in talking to one of the NHTSA engineers currently investigating our defective harnesses, he made no mention of "biodegradability" being at all responsible for the wires disintegrating inside our harnesses. He simply attributed it to Mercedes-Benz making one of those poor manufacturer's decisions about where to shave costs. He said it was remarkable/unfortunate that Mercedes chose low-cost (cheap) wire in such a critical location.

My personal opinion is that the "biodegradability-green" story is, if anything, MB company disinformation slipped out as a "We were just trying to do the right thing for the environment" excuse for their blunder.

Strife, please read the below list; there have been a number of suspect fires that have been, and or could be, attributed to the defective MB harnesses:

http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html

Even without the fires, note the recent Nissan recall concerning their Altimas with symptoms nearly identical to the most common complaints of the failing MB harnesses. And further note: the Nissan recall came as a result of only 29 NHTSA complaints:

http://www.mercedesshop.com/shopforum/showpost.php?p=1105134&postcount=90

As to the age question: Yes, it does make a recall harder to effect, but certainly not impossible. Witness the recent recall of millions of early to mid nineties Fords and Toyotas:

http://www.mercedesshop.com/shopforum/showpost.php?p=991452&postcount=48

.

I had a German friend visit earlier this month and mentioned the deteriorating wire harness issue to him and the suspected culpability of German "green laws". He said that this was nonsense as any such initiative would have to be advertised and voted on by the people and this did not occur (he was educated as a lawyer but has never practiced law). In light of this and further thought, I would be willing to bet that it was simply some combination of awarding the contract to the lowest bidder, poor design, weight reduction and German arrogance. One has only to look at the rear window regulators on 126, 124 and 210 vehicles to see these principles in practice. At least with the harness the problem can be corrected by purchasing a new and improved harness---no such luck with the window regulators and numerous other defective MB part groups. Mark

Then you better do some research on the subject.
I know for a FACT ( not suspicion ), of environmental laws that were implemented in Germany in the early 90's, whereas all car manufacturers are required to make their vehicles more recyclable-friendly.
It started with a small percentage of components and escalated every following year.
There are very stiff penalties for not complying.
These laws were also the reason why we ended up with "unpainted" bumpercaps, until the switch to waterbased paint was completed. ;)

Manny wrote: "I know for a FACT ( not suspicion ), of environmental laws that were implemented in Germany in the early 90's, whereas all car manufacturers are required to make their vehicles more recyclable-friendly."

I remember reading about it at the time in Auto Motor und Sport. But you should re-read what I wrote: "In light of this and further thought, I would be willing to bet that it was simply some combination of awarding the contract to the lowest bidder, poor design, weight reduction and German arrogance."

I didn't present my opinion as a researched fact. It IS a fact that Germany and other countries passed laws regarding the labelling of vehicle parts (just look at the back of every 80's and on MB plastic part which clearly identifies the type of plastic used) in order to reliably separate material types and avoid mixed stream wastes. To my knowledge, the German greenies did not legislate the material types that would be acceptable for use as automotive wire insulation (although nothing ever surprises me) and if they did, was this law repealed to permit the sale of the non-green replacement wire harnesses? Also, wouldn't every vehicle sold in Germany be required to use the same defective wire? Similarly, wouldn't a prudent manufacturer who sells vehicles in Germany be forced to use two different wire harnesses, one green and defective for Germany and the other non-green but good for all other countries? Again, stranger things have happened but this doesn't make sense to me. I suppose it is possible that Germany prohibited the plastic of choice for wire insulation and the wire suppliers simply chose a permitted but inferior plastic at the time and have now begun using a permitted and performing plastic. Frankly, whether cost concerns, green laws or aliens caused the problem the fact is that the wiring harnesses are defective, frequentlly create an unsafe condition and cost owners a great deal of money to replace. MB's insistence on blaming their problems on this or that doesn't cure the problem for the consumer---it simply serves to erode their customer base and drive their long-time supporters to other marques. It is also my opinion that it is way past time for MB to stop the denial and excuses in this and many other areas and get back to being the manufacturer (IMO) of the best vehicles in the world. Mark

I have found that filing a legitimate complaint with a State agency (for starters) has been quite effective. I like using the State Atty General's office to get results. Normally, they forward your complaint to the business in question with their letterhead.

I usually end up doing this when I am not getting satisfaction from a business.

hookedon210s, excellent post.

There is an interesting post on the MBCA board whereas the poster claims that MBUSA is now admitting to some degree of defect, for some numbers of harnesses--not that they plan to do anything about it. Also, the poster notes that MBUSA is still being incredibly slippery, shifting and evasive in how it answers customer complaints regarding the wiring harness defect. Anyway, if true, it seems to agree with what we believe: That this isn't an "all things green" argument.

More simply, Mercedes made a serious mistake when they decided to hit the low-bid on these harnesses. That MB refuses to own up to its mistake, is where the problem is.

"Montvale denied everything to me as well ... then acknowledged the defect ... then said they only repair defects where/when known ... then said they only repair known defects based upon volumes (minimum of 5 repairs) ... then (after showing them the NHTSA files) said they only repair known defects on volume repairs, when other criteria was met. In essence, it was suggested that the wiring harnesses were defective, but only when supplied by SOME suppliers (uh - huh)."

http://mbca.cartama.net/showpost.php?p=66323&postcount=56

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT SUMMARIES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html)

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT IMAGES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_images.html)

.

That MB refuses to own up to its mistake, is where the problem is.
I agree. Every manufacturer makes mistakes which can cost huge sums of money to correct. However, not dealing with mistakes timely and appropriately and permitting personal injuries to factor into the equation is when things can get very, very expensive and cost a great deal of the manufacturer's reputation and owner base. This is bad news for MB and us owners since engineering, reliability and exclusivity had historically kept resale values the highest of all makes. Now, the word is out on MB reliability from many sources and resale values have tanked (which also increases MB's lease program costs due to residual values). IMO, MB has done a terrible job since it was required (nee, decided?) to compete on a cost basis with Lexus and others in the early 90's. Until that time, MB built "the best engineered vehicle in the world" and could charge accordingly. Now, through the proliferation of smart cars, Baby Benzes, SUV's and various other vehicles, MB sells vehicles at all price points. This may have looked like a good business plan, but MB and its suppliers have done a terrible job of balancing cost vs. quality/reliability. For example, $380 fuel pumps that last 25-50K when the old Bosch units would go 150-200K, $400 MAF's that last 50-75K, $120 rear window regulators that require replacement every 4-5 years, $2-3K navigation units and head units that fail all the time (I had a total of 5 units fail under warranty in 2 cars over a 2 year period), software "fixes" that an MB shop foreman told me won't "run" out of the box half of the time, improperly sealed $500 transmission shift controllers that fail when liquid from the cup holder or sprayed preservative short it out, $500-2800 ETA's that fail in 8-10 yr old cars, and the list goes on. Until MB acknowledges that it has a serious problem with quality AND devotes significant energy and resources to solve this problem, I am fearful that the ship will eventually be lost. If the Japanese did it and the Koreans are doing it, so can MB. Correcting known defective products would be a good start and IMO be a better place to spend money (on its existing customer base and probable future customer base if it does the right thing) instead of on expensive advertising, disingenuous customer relations and product placement. Don't get me wrong, I have been an MB fan since my Dad bought himself a used 1961 220b when I was 10 yrs. old and I have owned many different MB models over a 30 yr. span. I have enjoyed most of those cars but I am finding it difficult to like the MB's manufactured over the past 10-12 years due to reliability issues. I sure wish MB would figure it out. Mark

I have never expected a high end car to be cheap to operate. If one wants a cheap car to drive well then a MB is probably not a good choice.

Oh yeah the old ones are real trouble free, I have only replaced $1,200 worth of parts since Jan on the SDL. Yeah they last forever sure keep saying that...:rolleyes:

Who ever keeps locking this thread cut it out.

Thanks.Thank you!

I was getting ready to report to you guys a rather disturbing trend I've been noticing in the NHTSA complaints I've been compiling, and the thread was locked--again. Strange.

Anyway...

For those of you that have already replaced your harnesses, and think the Mercedes Engine Wiring Harness Defect no longer concerns you, and so, is too much trouble to file a complaint with the NHTSA (http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/):

There are a fair number of NHTSA complainants reporting (within their ODI complaints) that they are on their third harness (second replacement). Evidently, Mercedes-Benz is (or was) selling new-old-stock replacement harnesses. Talk about arrogance.

I just emailed the NHTSA's ODI a note to this effect, as well as remind them of the number of fires reported within the files...

My online "list" of NHTSA complaints is now up to 180, and I sent ODI a new, printed out, hard-copy batch of complaints last Friday. That brings the total I have sent--so far--to the NHTSA's ODI, in four separate mailings, to 175.

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT SUMMARIES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html)

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT IMAGES (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_images.html)

.

Info...thanks for your efforts.

The images of the wires, snaking throughout the harness, with cracked insulation should give Benz reason to pause and make things right.

In my 1989 300TE, the outside plastic insulation (wherever two or more wires run together) has gotten hard, brittle and cracked at places. The actual wires, however, seem to be OK.

Was the problem due to Benz using the lowest bidder? Or was Benz forced to use biodegradable material in order to meet some German law that requires a certain percentage of each car to be recyclable?

I know that inmany sales brochures, Benz (and Volvo) brag about how green their cars are and what a high percentage of the car can be recycled.

In any event, however, Benz should do the right and honorable thing...shoot the guy who approved the harness bid. :eek:

My dad just came to visit and I had the opportunity to inspect his engine's wiring harnesses. The main engine harness had been replaced some time ago and looks fine but the starter harness is shot especially in the vicinity of the oil filter. MB would of course attribute this to rough filter changes (the oil filter tool will indeed contact the wires) but the insulation has clearly lost its plasticity and crumbles to the touch (much like friable asbestos). I would surmise that this harness is the one that really can and does cause fires since the un-fused positive battery cable which can carry hundreds of amps is a part of it. I recall seeing the aftermath of a 94 or 95 wagon that inexplicably burned to the ground a couple of years ago due to an engine fire--I wonder if this harness was the culprit. Mark

Does anyone know the total number of each model car Mercedes imported to the USA between 1991-1996?

If possible, I'm looking for the model year numbers as opposed to the number of cars actually shipped during the year. But either set of numbers would be of great interest.

Worldwide production numbers would be very helpful too.

.

[QUOTE=whunter]Any other view of the situation is IMO going to be impossible = as silly as trying to prosecute FORD because the wiring on a Model-T failed in 2006.

People need to be aware that vehicles are NOT designed/engineered to last one hundred years and millions of miles.


The wiring harness on the model t is probably still good!!! hahaha

There has been some discussion about how long these harnesses should last. It has been argued that the harnesses have, or that our cars' wiring has, an engineered "service life."

The below NHTSA complaint may be the earliest reference to how short a lifespan these harnesses can have before they fail. Note that the complaint concerns a 1995 129 (320SL), and the owner says his first harness that failed, an engine harness, was replaced in 1998.

The 320SL owner has since had to replace four different harnesses, all for the same reason. Mercedes told him what they told me, "this is normal wear and tear," and offered no assistance.

Also, check my web page for new complaints (183 and counting), and the images page for a new, very good image, sent to me of a disintegrating harness. See for yourself pictures of two different Mercedes-Benz wiring harnesses suffering from, so called, "normal wear and tear."

Remember, this is a problem that MBUSA denies exists...

http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html


NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 129
Year: 1995
Date of Failure: March 16, 2005
Complaint Number: 10150787

Summary:
CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON DASHBOARD, IDLE ROUGH, STALLING OF CAR. I CHECKED THE ENGINE HARNESS CONNECTOR TO THE AIR MASS METER AND GENTLY MOVED THE WIRES. THE OUTSIDE INSULATION BEGAN TO SMOKE, THEN MELTED FROM THE HEAT. I QUICKLY TURNED OFF THE CAR'S ENGINE AND CHECKED THE DAMAGE. THE INSULATION COVERING THE 4 WIRES INSIDE OF THE HARNESS HAD TOTALLY DISINTEGRATED, THUS CAUSING SHORT CIRCUITS IN THE HARNESS. THE HEAT GENERATED ACTUALLY MELTED THE OUTSIDE COVERING OF THE WIRES BOTH AT THE AIR MASS METER CONNECTOR AND UNDERNEATH THE MAIN ENGINE COMPUTER (ECU). I HAD THE CAR TOWED TO THE LOCAL MB DEALER AND THEY SAID THAT THE WHOLE BODY WIRING HARNESS WAS DESTROYED AND HAD TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $1250 PLUS $600 FOR THE HARNESS. MB SAID IT WAS NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. I FEEL THAT THE HARNESSES ON MY 1995 SL320 WERE MADE FROM SUBSTANDARD MATERIALS AND THUS DISINTEGRATED PREMATURELY PUTTING MYSELF AT RISK FROM A POSSIBLE CAR FIRE. I STILL HAVE THE HARNESS IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO INSPECT IT. ANOTHER HARNESS, THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS WAS ALSO FOUND TO BE DEFECTIVE, CAUSING SHORT CIRCUITS, AND WAS REPLACED BY MB UNDER WARRANTY IN 1998. SO FAR I HAVE REPLACED 4 DIFFERENT WIRING HARNESS ON MY CAR, ALL SHOWING THE SAME DECOMPOSITION OF THE WIRING INSULATION. *NM

.

I wonder if $500 a harness is really making up for the negative feelings that many people are now having for the Mercedes nameplate. I don't think Mercedes should pay to have these harnesses fixed on a 10+ year old car but at the same time I don't think they should be making such a profit off of this. At $1200 for labor its a real cash cow for the dealerships.

I guess Mercedes is going to end up playing the same game that many American makers do blaming the customer and making themselves look bad when the news coverage starts to focus on them. Ford is a great example of a company that plays games like this. When you design a car thats dangerous to begin with and then put cheap tires on it your just asking for problems. When enough Mercedes cars burn up and eventually one is newsworthy enough Mercedes is going to have a nasty PR problem on their hands.

I absolutely adore the 07 S class but until Mercedes cleans up their act and starts standing behind their products I would not be able to even consider actually buying one.

When enough Mercedes cars burn up and eventually one is newsworthy enough Mercedes is going to have a nasty PR problem on their hands.
I would say it is only a matter of time before there are deaths attributed to the failing harnesses. Given the larger numbers of cars that are only now showing symptoms, the chances of a defective wiring harness attributed catastrophe can only be increasing.

With an increasingly higher NHTSA/public awareness, all fires, and any accidents caused by stalling (or limp-home events), will have have a better chance of being fully investigated, and thus, directly attributed to this defect.

I believe this is what the NHTSA is struggling with internally. Given the very large number of filed complaints, they will look pretty bad for failing to have taken action.

----------------------------------

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 500
Year: 1992
Complaint Number: 514982
Summary:
ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE. I HAD DRIVEN TO WORK FROM HOME (75 MILES), STOPPED AT THE GATE TO OPEN. AS I RETURNED TOWARD THE CAR FLAMES BEGAN UNDER ENGINE COMPARTMENT. CALLED FIRE DEPT. 911

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: SL
Year: 1994
Complaint Number: 10151360
Summary:
TOTAL ELECTRICAL FAILURE, ENGINE STOPPAGE, DEACTIVATION OF ABS, ASD, SEAT BELTS, ELECTRIC DOOR LOCKS, LIGHTS. WHEN GOING OVER A RAILROAD TRACT, ROAD VIBRATION CAUSED DETERIORATED WIRING INSULATION (INSIDE A BUNDLE OF WIRES) TO FALL OFF CAUSING A MASSIVE ELECTRICAL SHORT CIRCUIT. APPARENTLY SEVERAL MODEL YEARS OF THESE CARS WERE MANUFACTURED WITH WIRE INSULATION THAT 'CRUMBLES' TO A POWDER. THIS CONDITION IS NOT VISIBLE DURING ORDINARY INSPECTION AND REQUIRED ONE TO CUT OPEN THE ENCAPSULATED WIRING HARNESSES. FAILED WIRING HARNESSES FOR THESE CARS ARE COMMON I LEARNED FROM SEARCHING THE MDZ BULLETIN BOARDS. I HAVE 6 FAILED ELECTRONIC THROTTLE ACTUATORS (AT $1800 EACH!!) EXHIBITING THIS TYPE OF FAILURE. ONE EXHIBITED UNCOMMANDED WIDE OPEN THROTTLE. THE OTHERS FAILED BY ENTERING THE 'LIMP HOME' MODE. MERCEDES BENZ NORTH AMERICA IS AWARE OF THIS SERIOUS DEFECT BUT REFUSES TO REPAIR OR WARRANT THIS DEFECTIVE SAFETY SYSTEM. I WAS SHOCKED THAT MY CAR SHUT OFF COMPLETELY AND A SMALL FIRE ERUPTED IN THE MAIN ENGINE WIRING COMPARTMENT HARNESS. *NM

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 190
Year: 1993
Complaint Number: 835649
Summary:
WHILE DRIVING ABOUT 20 MPH, WITHOUT NO PRIOR WARNING, THE VEHICLE DIED OUT. CONSUMER HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO HER HOUSE, AND VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE DUE TO AN ELECTRICAL SHORT. *AK

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 420
Year: 1995
Complaint Number: 10033790
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary: AFTER PARKING THE VEHICLE, THE CONSUMER NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM THE STEERING COLUMN. AS A RESULT OF THE FAILURE, FIRE CAME THROUGH THE FIREWALL. THE LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENT ARRIVED TO EXTINGUISH THE FIRE. *AK THERE WERE NO PRIOR PROBLEMS. THE VEHICLE HAD FILLED WITH BLACK SMOKE WITH THE IGNITION OFF AND THE VEHICLE PARKED. THERE WAS NO WARNING. *SCC *JB

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 320
Year: 1995
Complaint Number: 898986
Summary:
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
WHILE TRAVELING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH SMOKE STARTED COMING OUT FROM UNDERNEATH HOOD OF VEHICLE. DEALERSHIP EXAMINED VEHICLE, AND DETERMINED THERE WAS A POWER SURGE IN ELECTRICAL SYSTEM THAT CAUSED A FIRE TO START. *AK *YH

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 420
Year: 1991
Complaint Number: 706220
Summary:
Crash: NO Fire: YES

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 300SE
Year: 1991
Complaint Number: 10040933
Summary:
UNDER-HOOD FIRE TOTALED CAR. FIRE DEPT. REQUIRED TO EXTINGUISHED FIRE. FIRE STARTED WHILE CAR WAS BEING DRIVEN. CAUSE UNDETERMINED.

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 300SE
Year: 1991
Complaint Number: 10011882
Summary:
CONSUMER NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. THE VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE AND WAS TOTALED. THE FIRE INSPECTOR INDICATED THE FIRE WAS CAUSED BY THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. *JB

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 300
Year: 1991
Complaint Number: 511109
Summary:
ELECTRICAL WIRING OVERHEATED, CAUSING FIRE.

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: 190
Year: 1991
Complaint Number: 958826
Summary:
VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE WHILE STOPPED, IT STALLED THEN BURST INTO FLAMES UNDER HOOD. TT

NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: E CLASS
Year: 1994
Complaint Number: 10128437
Summary:
1994 E320 HAD INTERMINTENT RUNNING PROBLEMS. CAR WOULD STALL WITHOUT WARNING, ESPECIALLY DURING A RAIN OR AFTER WASHING THE CAR. REPLACED MANY PARTS(MASS AIR METER, TUNE UP, OVP RELAY, FUEL PUMP RELAY, ETC) TO CHASE THE PROBLEM, NONE OF WHICH SOLVED IT. BEGAN TO LOOK ON MERCEDES FORUMS AND FOUND THIS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM. BEFORE I REPLACED THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS IT BEGAN TO SMOKE HEAVILY FROM UNDER THE HOOD. I HAD AN EXTINGUSIHER WITH ME AND STOPPED IT FROM CATCHING FIRE. MERCEDES COVERED PART OF THE COST UNDER THEIR "GOODWILL" PROGRAM HOWEVER I HAD TO INSTALL IT WHICH TOOK ABOUT 8 HOURS. THE FIRST OCCURANCE HAPPEND AROUND 125K MILES HOWEVER IT WAS MANY MONTHS AND MILES LATER THAT THE PROBLEM WAS FIXED.


NHTSA Complaint Summary
Make: MERCEDES BENZ
Model: SL
Year: 1994
Complaint Number: 10074940
Summary:
THE WIRING HARNESS TO THE ENGINE CONTROL SYSTEM DEVELOPED SEVERE SHORTS, STALLED THE ENGINE, DISABLED THE ABS, ASR,SRS SYSTEMS. WITH ENGINE STALLED, STEERING AND BRAKING WERE DIFFICULT AND RESULTED IN FRONT END DAMAGE FROM IMPACT TO ROADSIDE BRUSH AND DIRT. WIRING INSULATION INSIDE THE WIRING BUNDLES HAD CRUMBLED TO DUST IN MANY PLACES FAR REMOVED FROM THE SHORT/MINOR FIRE. CAR STILL NOT OPERABLE DUE TO OTHER MAJOR WIRING HARNESS SHORTS DUE TO CRUMBLING INSULATION ON THE WIRES (HIDDEN BY THE BUNDLE JACKET) DEALER RESPONSE "TOUGH IF YOU HAD BOUGHT IT FROM US, AND IT WAS NEW, MAYBE, OTHERWISE GOOD BYE!" *AK

I would think it the other way around - that it's management stonewalling because of the cost. I don't get it - what would lawyers have to do with it?

Its greed pure and simple. If they can stick someone by charging them $500 for some wires and a few plastic connectors they are going to. Its just a function of the "free market system" that us Americans think is the best thing in the world. Its wonderful if your the one getting $500 for $20 worth of materials. It really sucks if your the guy writing the $1600 check for $20 worth of parts and 45 minutes worth of labor. :(

Unfortunatly in this case the greed in Mercedes case ultimately will end up as stupidity. Most of their current advertizing is based on the longevity of their older cars. When most of the 90's vintage cars burn up or get junked by owners sick of pouring money into a worn out car they will have to find some other horn to toot. That unfortunatly will be a sad day for all of us because they will probably at that point no longer have a reason to provide the parts support for the older cars.

In all reality the company Mercedes-Benz that made the wonderful cars we cherish so much went out of business in the mid 1990's. What's left is a greedy multinational corperation that is using the reputation of this dead company to make money.

My 126 has the signatures of the people who assembled it 24 years ago in its doorframe. My 140 is devoid of these signatures. Hmmmm Food for thought :)

I would think it the other way around - that it's management stonewalling because of the cost. I don't get it - what would lawyers have to do with it?

Lawyers are concerned with precedent as in: "...if you do this one thing, it establishes a precedent and then you have to do it all the time."

We are also concerned with the slippery slope: "if you do A, then you are going to have to do B and then C and then D etc. etc. etc."

I am a lawyer. I was in-house counsel for an international oil company. I was also in-house counsel for another major institution. And I have represesented insurance companies. Trust me on this one.

People are quick to blame the bean counters. Bean counters are usually involved in the initial product design/cost allocations.

But when it comes to settling product liability claims, the lawyers have their hands far up the beancounters' butts -- they only move their lips when the lawyers let them.

My 126 has the signatures of the people who assembled it 24 years ago in its doorframe. My 140 is devoid of these signatures. Hmmmm Food for thought :)

Robert, when did they stop doing that? I had a 1967 250SE and a 1984 300SD, it sure would have been nice to seen their signatures. :D

You have a very nice 300SD and the Vovlo you own is a classic. I would not have bought the 2002 V70 for my daughter if I had been able to locate a 240 in decent shape like yours.

OK, I'll stop now. Don't want to cause this thread to be either locked or shipped over to the OD.

Its an 11 year old car. I hate to say it but the latest car with this problem is 11 years old. At this point, they are just old cars the world has moved on.
So you're saying my 95 E320, bought for $28K four years ago, and I have since only put on 20K miles, is ready for the scrap heap?... this also implies that I'm a fool for having paid so much money for such a car back then instead of (for example) a new Sebring convertible.

So you're saying my 95 E320, bought for $28K four years ago, and I have since only put on 20K miles, is ready for the scrap heap?... this also implies that I'm a fool for having paid so much money for such a car back then instead of (for example) a new Sebring convertible.

Your 124 will probably hold out longer than my '96 210 due to its more solid construction, but I'm not giving up on mine just yet. I only drove one 124 (300D 2.5 turbo) which drove rather well, but not as nicely as the 210 (IMO, of couse; they're different).

My '96 had a new engine harness installed before I got it.

I bought my 1994 c280 a few years back and it is my daily driver. I paid a premium for it and I could have been cheap and bought a lesser quality brand new car for less money. I could have bought an s-class but I dont want a big mercedes to drive in city/rush hour traffic. my "smaller benz" is the perfect fit. I bought a mercedes that as a 6 year old car should have been higher quality than a new car and shouldn't have a problem with a harness.
The point has been made these harness are 10 years old, but the problem is that all of these cars should have had the harnesses changed when the problem started and it wouldn't be an issue today. Mercedes can deny all they want there are not problems with these harnesses, but someone just this week noted they have a receipt from a car only 4 years old and the dealer recommended a change.

Lawyers are concerned with precedent as in: "...if you do this one thing, it establishes a precedent and then you have to do it all the time."

We are also concerned with the slippery slope: "if you do A, then you are going to have to do B and then C and then D etc. etc. etc."

I am a lawyer. I was in-house counsel for an international oil company. I was also in-house counsel for another major institution. And I have represesented insurance companies. Trust me on this one.

People are quick to blame the bean counters. Bean counters are usually involved in the initial product design/cost allocations.

But when it comes to settling product liability claims, the lawyers have their hands far up the beancounters' butts -- they only move their lips when the lawyers let them.

But there's plenty of precedents for recalls and campaigns for defective auto designs, including by MB. Perhaps the thinking is that this isn't going to kill anyone - which is itself a gamble - and therefore no need to fix the problem. I've had to buy two harnesses - one 104 and one 119. I called them on the 104 and their response was essentially that the government had not forced a recall so therefore they were not responsible. This struck me as an odd thought from such a once proud company.

I wonder if $500 a harness is really making up for the negative feelings that many people are now having for the Mercedes nameplate.
It certainly wasn't in MBUSA's best interest not to have been a bit more flexible (and honest), when I called their Customer Service department.

As a direct result of my conversations with MBUSA Customer Service Supervisor, John Hart, and his (non)handling of the MB Wiring Defect (http://homepages.roadrunner.com/infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html), my girlfriend bought a Lexus RX440. She already has a 2005 Mercedes E320, and was very interested in buying a new Mercedes "R" Class SUV as a second car.

Given my experiences, and my advice, she bought the Lexus.

She just took the RX440 in to Lexus for her 20,000 mile service (which was free to her), and had nothing but GREAT things to say about the way she was treated. Mind you, she has her E320 serviced where she bought it, at Fletcher Jones, and she is very picky about things like that. She thinks Lexus customer service is superior to Mercedes.

btw, the Lexus has been rock-solid dependable, which is paramount, given the 30,000+ miles she drives each year. No regrets--she flat loves the Lexus--and her Mercedes is collecting dust. She's thinking of trading it in on a Porsche...:)

So you're saying my 95 E320, bought for $28K four years ago, and I have since only put on 20K miles, is ready for the scrap heap?... this also implies that I'm a fool for having paid so much money for such a car back then instead of (for example) a new Sebring convertible.


No I am saying its an 11 year old car. If the head gasket blew tomarrow MB would laugh at you if you wanted them to fix it.

Besides I think most of the W126's in those reports caught on fire because of leaves between the fire walls. W126's always had top quality wiring.

Robert, when did they stop doing that? I had a 1967 250SE and a 1984 300SD, it sure would have been nice to seen their signatures. :D

You have a very nice 300SD and the Vovlo you own is a classic. I would not have bought the 2002 V70 for my daughter if I had been able to locate a 240 in decent shape like yours.

OK, I'll stop now. Don't want to cause this thread to be either locked or shipped over to the OD.

Heh heh

Thanks for the compliments. I love the 126 and the 240. While not as comfortable as my 140 they do have other qualities that are quite nice to have.

Im not sure when MB stopped doing signatures. But it really speaks volumes to how they feel about their cars. The current model AMG engines are signed as they are hand built but I think thats it.

I really want the old Mercedes Benz back. But unfortunatly they are long gone.

A comment about your legal comments. I agree with what you mentioned 100%. While not an Attorney I work in an industry that services the legal industry and see this all day long.

Its really just a shame that Mercedes does not admit their mistake and say ok heres the parts at cost and punish their dealers for overcharging for installation. While it would be a slight admission of guilt it would make things easier for the owners.

So you're saying my 95 E320, bought for $28K four years ago, and I have since only put on 20K miles, is ready for the scrap heap?... this also implies that I'm a fool for having paid so much money for such a car back then instead of (for example) a new Sebring convertible.

Sebrings are worse..... The thing is that the whole auto industry not just MB is creating "disposable" cars..... When these cars hit about 10-15 years old they become so expensive to service that its impossible to drive them..... My 24 year old 300SD is the CHEAPEST car I have ever owned..... I pay virtually nothing to keep it going year after year...... My 240 wagon is the same.....

It certainly wasn't in MBUSA's best interest not to have been a bit more flexible (and honest), when I called their Customer Service department.

As a direct result of my conversations with MBUSA Customer Service Supervisor, John Hart, and his (non)handling of the MB Wiring Defect (http://users.adelphia.net/~infoage1/complaints_nhtsa_mercedes_wiring_harness_failures_1991_1996.html), my girlfriend bought a Lexus RX440. She already has a 2005 Mercedes E320, and was very interested in buying a new Mercedes "R" Class SUV as a second car.

Given my experiences, and my advice, she bought the Lexus.

She just took the RX440 in to Lexus for her 20,000 mile service (which was free to her), and had nothing but GREAT things to say about the way she was treated. Mind you, she has her E320 serviced where she bought it, at Fletcher Jones, and she is very picky about things like that. She thinks Lexus customer service is superior to Mercedes.

btw, the Lexus has been rock-solid dependable, which is paramount, given the 30,000+ miles she drives each year. No regrets--she flat loves the Lexus--and her Mercedes is collecting dust. She's thinking of trading it in on a Porsche...:)

Yep... Thats happening more and more to the Germans..... Their "attitude" about not making mistakes is killing them..... A friend of mine who is a Doctor bought a brand new 330 converitble with every possible option known to mankind on it and spent a lot on it..... He picked it up at BMW's performance center in SC and it started to rain and his wipers would not work.... He had to sit out the storm and drive the car back to the performance center for a repair only to be told that it was not a flaw with the car it was something that it was designed to do.... If they had just admitted they screwed up he would have been ok..... He owned the BMW for only a year before trading it in an a LS430.... He loves the LS430 and it has been flawless and he says even though he loves the european cars he wont be back.....

I don't care for his Lexus at all with its mismatched instrument cluster and cheap feeling suspension.... But what he is looking for is a comfy car that starts whenever he puts the key in..... I am more interested in the engineering and don't mind when my car does not work.... I understand cars are machines.... Most consumers today don't and look at simple problems as big issues.....

Sebrings are worse..... The thing is that the whole auto industry not just MB is creating "disposable" cars..... When these cars hit about 10-15 years old they become so expensive to service that its impossible to drive them

I actually still have a 96 Sebring convertible w/that cheap 4 cyl. that I bought as my second car years ago (spoken about in other posts). It has 113k hard miles on it (50k which are mine and took less than 2 years to put on) but it hasn't been driven regularly in 3-4 years. But, it still starts up and runs just fine, and repairs from my Indie are very very inexpensive. Right now the A/C needs a recharge but I'm in no rush as I drive the MB's now. The battery is hidden behind the wheelwell but takes all of 30 mins total to replace. It's sitting in the driveway hoping for some sprucing up...uncovered.

It isn't exactly an expensive car inside, but the 4 is big enough to move her quite well. She rides nicely and doesn't squeak or rattle or leak. And the car wasn't exactly well cared for either, the top is original as well. I've had nothing but good luck with 3 Chryslers. A really low mileage Lebaron that needed a tranny solenoid cleaned under 3 month warranty, then no problems before being totalled. A higher mileage Sebring that needed nothing when I drove it regularly other than an A/C leak fix. And a 300m that needed a tranny sensor replaced for 100 bucks and change.

The CLK is fine for now...the 300e is still a really nice car but needs a good bit of cosmetic work now (some bubbling around the windshield and A pillar. Perhaps what I appreciate most about it is the ability to easily adjust and tweak most things on it. I just adjusted the two front doors yesterday, the rears are still shutting like new. The harness cost was a joke, and I'm not sure where everyone is pulling $500 from. Several months ago I was quoted around $900 from Phil...I believe it was 900ish.

While I appreciate the 300 and could careless about keeping the CLK, I'm leary of newer MB's. I'm thinking about a 99-00 e55 for next year and dropping the CLK...but I don't know. One thing I'll never do is get a Jap car...

And I can't help but think that someone at Benz wants to do the right thing...if it weren't for the lawyers. Darn those lawyers...

It's basic cost-efficiency (negligence 101) analysis that EVERY corporate manufacturer conducts when faced with a supposed "defective" product on the market, so I wouldn't single out MBUSA.

If the cost of taking a precaution is less than the probability and gravity of harm (for not taking precaution) the manufacturer has a duty to cure the defect.

While I'm not defending MB here, they've obviously run the numbers and have concluded that replacing the "defective" (I don't want to be conclusory) wiring harnesses would cost more than any potential future litigation costs.

There are other factors to consider that have been mentioned in this thread such as hit to their goodwill, which almost certainly has been factored into the equation also.

The fly in the legal ointment for MB is the NHTSA, of course, which can impose a duty to recall their cars regardless of any legal analysis.

The harness cost was a joke, and I'm not sure where everyone is pulling $500 from. Several months ago I was quoted around $900 from Phil...I believe it was 900ish.

The harness cost is a joke. A rude, tasteless, joke.

Someone with a C280 emailed me last week asking me about the $500 harnesses he keeps reading about, and if I could tell him where he could find one at that price...:rolleyes:. He said the dealer quoted him $1150 for a new harness. I gave him a couple leads, and the best he he could do from my suggestions was $998.

What percentage of Mercedes' quoted price of $1150 would anyone guess is MB's cost from Delphi?

Maybe, what, $50? $100? Certainly no more than $150.

No two ways about it; Mercedes-Benz is making an obscene profit from a problem they created. A manufacturer's defect, no less.

In my opinion, highway robbery--in the crudest sense.

Apropos to this discussion (which has now gone beyond the wiring harness issue) is the following text. It is taken, verbatim, from pages 45 and 46 of the original sales brochure for my 1989 300TE. The comments, obviously, apply to all Benz model lines:

The fact that Mercedes-Benz owners are the most stubbornly loyal of all car owners in America today arises from something more than their satisfaction with the car itself. Mercedes-Benz owners are also very satisfied with their total ownership experience.

...

In brief: when you own a Mercedes-Benz you own a car engineered, built and supported like no other car in the world...A car and a car ownership experience designed to excel in every measurable way, and some purely emotional ways.

Thus, it is the philosophy of Mercedes-Benz to build automobiles and conduct business not merely to sell cars but to earn the long-term loyalty of every owner.

(Emphasis added)

On page 45 of the brochure, prominently displayed alongside the text, is a photograph of a Benz grille, proudly displaying the 250,000, 500,000 and 1,000,000 km driving badges.

That is, in short, why we buy Benzes. And that is (rightfully or wrongfully) what Benz has led us to expect from their cars.

It would appear to me that a proud company like Benz, that actively trades on its reputation for quality design, engineering and build, product longevity and customer satisfaction ought to do better by its stubbornly loyal customers. Owning a Benz, at least for those of us who hang around here and the other Benz-related websites, becomes an almost cult-like experience (I am not referring here to the guy who leases a Benz for three years because the rates are good, then turns it in for another brand that is currently offering a better deal). I think only Saab or Volvo owners may be as fanatical as we are.

Benz knows that there is a vast reservoir of goodwill among Benz owners. Look at the Classic Benz Museum they built in California. You can even buy a "birth certificate" for your Benz (for $100.00). Benz knows that we are fanatical and they know that we are going to keep coming back to their cars. Maybe they take us a little bit too much for granted and perhaps one day the reservoir will run dry -- they shouldn’t piss away all that goodwill so frivolously.

Benz by now knows that the wiring harness for certain model year were either poorly designed or manufactured (or both). They are in a better position to go after the part vendor for reimbursement.

Instead of stonewalling the issue (and yes I know these ARE old cars, but Benz has us convinced that these are old cars that WILL last a long, long time) Benz should try to meet owners at least part of the way. If Benz just offered to pay for part of the wiring harness (part and installation) most Benz owners would be exceedingly happy (and grateful).

Maybe Benz figures that we are so “stubbornly loyal” that like, a battered spouse or a cuckolded husband, we are going to keep coming back for more regardless of how we are treated. Maybe they are right or maybe they are wrong – but is it worth the gamble?

Personally, I have always been treated very well by my local dealer and by the Benz organization. I have no complaints and all the Benzes I have owned (and stillown) have met and exceeded my ownership expectations. I know, however, that others have not been as fortunate as I have.

For their sake and for the sake of the car company that I am so stubbornly loyal to, I ask any Benz executive who may be reading this thread to reconsider their position and do the right thing. No company will ever fail by doing the right thing.

Yes...that was tongue in cheek...and I know there were many other factors...however back on topic...

It really is extremely evident to me that MB is making a killing on these harnesses. I managed to rewire an entire harness with extremely high quality/high temp wiring from a nearby marine store...for around $25.

Now, connectors and such will add cost to this...but considering they are mass produced...the cost of overall production is no doubt very very low compared to its retail price.

I'd be content if MB at least offered the harness for a reasonable cost of around $150-200. Make a small profit if you must, but please stop gouging people dealing with a defective product. I agree however, that businesses no longer are concerned with customer satisfaction. Gone are the days when losing a few thousand customers spelled your doom. The marketplace is so large now that these businesses believe they can continue with their poor customer service and save money b/c there will always be a new batch of consumers hoping to jump on their bandwagon. It ranges from cellular providers all the way up through the auto industry. If MB wants to continue on the road of cheaper and cheaper materials and spotty customer service, they'll just become another Ford etc. They'll still sell plenty of cars, their reputation will just be tarnished. But as long as someone is buying the product and generating a profit...who cares?

Just read this article on CNN.com

http://www.cnn.com/2006/AUTOS/06/14/pricey_lemon/index.html

Seems like they have a multimillion dollar car that has some serious engine related problems. There are only 6 of these cars in existance in the world. The car's primary purpose for existance is a high end low production car for PR purposes.

Is Mercedes just going out of their way trying to commit brand suicide? I really love all of my cars and have managed to pick some rather trouble free models. When I read stuff like this I really start to question if cars with the 3 pointed star will remain in my driveway in the next few years. :(

I have some sympathy for them on this one. The car is not U.S. street legal, but for it to go 10 blocks before breaking down would indicate that they were driving it illegally on U.S. streets. Hard to know what the "contract" says but the contract is with Germany, not MBUSA. So why sue MBUSA? What's Germany supposed to do - fly techs over here to take care of a car that was never meant for sale in the U.S. Almost sounds like a frivolous lawsuit - or at least in the wrong court.

Only part of the story. Sounds like both sides have dug their heals in.

Agreed... Both sides dug their heels in BUT this story is on CNN.com. How much damage to Mercedes reputation are they willing to endure for a few million dollars? Im sure the car could be repaired a lot cheaper.

Yeah only the bad stuff makes the news.:rolleyes:

Their was a guy on MBworld with a new E55, the engine blew up. MB flew one over from Germany at great expense and got the car up and running extremly quickly. Needless to say the guy who built that engine for AMG had a bad day.:D