604 C63

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...ada-fix-lights

Umm.....about friggin time?!?!?!

EC C63

Interesting point - "NHTSA said it had reports of more than 400 complaints..."

Perhaps those who had the headbolt experience, whether repair was covered under warranty or not, should make formal contact with NHTSA. Particularly those who experienced a confirmed failure. It appears as though MB knows something is going on with the headbolts, hence the issue of the "L" version TSB, dated April 2011. Maybe just a nudge from NHTSA is all that's necessary to effect an absolute recall.

whoover

Recalls are only about safety, so any NHTSA communication has to be about how your head bolt failure caused, or almost caused, an accident or unsafe situation. I suspect most (all?) head bolt problems manifested as thrown codes, and not the "engine suddenly died while I was cruising in the fast lane" situation that could get NHTSA's attention.

Sadly, a slightly dim tail light is much more likely to spark a recall than coolant in the oil.

tfthach13

+1

Kinda late for me...already had both tail light harnesses replaced under warranty.

jvanbrecht

Catastrophic engine failure is a safety issue, even if it manifests in a check engine light before failing... How many people are currently driving around with the CEL on... I would hazard a guess..... A crap ton of cars NHTSA has to take that into account as well.

cloverfield

^That is oftentimes how it works. Crowd-sourced feedback/concern, especially from those who have experienced the issue, can sometimes illuminate with a surprisingly effective voice.

saziz

https://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w...-problems.html

604 C63

Yes, Saziz. We know. That's the whole point of the thread title. I'm telling of the taillight recall, and saying it would be great if the head bolts were next. The bolts were not just a randomly selected part.

bhamg

Was it "philipango" (sp) who pushed it along here? Whoever it was, good work!

Clark Kent

I took my 2010 in to the dealership just late last week because of a warning on the display to check the tail lights. I took with me a printed copy of the link above regarding the recall. I also searched for and re-read the thread that showed pictures of the melted tail light wiring harness just to be sure to mention that to the SA.

Regarding the recall, here is the gist of what the SA said: "The recall has not been announce yet. Did you receive a notice in the mail?" - giving me the impression that I was going to get some pushback if I asked for NEW tail lights/harness etc.

Turned out, only the bulbs were burnt out (replaced under warranty). No evidence of overheated wiring.

Upon picking up my car he stated that only cars with evidence of overheated wiring would be eligible for the recall replacement. I don't agree with that statement but I had no need to argue with him about it at that time.

604 C63

Well, the upside of this is that you now know that your SA is either a) incompetent b) full of **** c) both. I suspect the correct answer is c. I always pick C on multiple choice

If what he says is correct, it would be a Service Bulletin. Service Bulletins say (amongst other possible things): This is a known issue for us. If you see this, fix it and we will cover it.

A recall is just that: They are recalling all the cars to come back, as there is an issue that must be fixed ie you could have an electrical fire in the trunk or could be driving without tail and brake lights and not know it, and get rear ended and die a horrible, disfiguring death

When my taillight went I was told that it would be two weeks I think before they could get me in.
I said "wow. Ok, I guess you know your insurance coverage better than I do".
SA: Excuse me?
Me: Ive let you know that I have a malfunctioning safety device in my car, covered under warranty, and the possibility of an electrical fire back where my battery and fuel tank are, so I imagine theres some liability for you there if I get rear ended. But Im cool with it if you are. I'll try and drive safe.

SA put me on hold for about two minutes, and pretty much got me in there immediately, and it was indeed covered under warranty.

If your SA doesnt know the difference between service bulletins and recalls, and fights back on either, get a new SA or a new dealership.

Clark Kent

I pick "C" as well. I just let him speak uninterrupted to see what kind of bs he would spout. And spout he did. Without a MB recall letter in hand I didn't have a trump card to force immediate action even though I totally agree on your definition of recall vs. service bulletin. I purposely spelled out in detail what this guy said in my previous post as a means to prepare others for what they might face should they take their cars to the dealership for this issue.

I will be inspecting both harnesses myself this evening just to see things with my own eyes because this guy's spiel has lessened my trust in that place.

jvanbrecht

You must have a ****ty dealer. I have had both of my tall lights replaced. Long before the recall while under warranty. The dealer did not have the parts. The immediately took my car in and gave me a rental. I did not have to say a thing.

Philipangoo

OMG I am so glad to see this come to light. I sold my C63 about 8 months ago but I had already paid for the dealer to fix my tail lights. I am glad to see its finally a full fledged recall. The more people who made reports the more light that this issue saw.