So again, why not just buy a spare ECU? It will cost money, but will likely pay for itself in the first visit.

 

This subject comes up once a month.. Ecu is vin coded from the dealer.. They no you have 2? The only safe way to mod/tune is not to do it.. They will find out if they have to..

 

And? They'll know you have two ECUs. BFD. You can keep a spare ECU. It won't be tampered with and that's that.

 

nice attitude take it elsewhere.. fact is you are not suppose to remove the ecu that is a void most likely...

 

Hmm, what a can of worms! :-) I know of at least one SLK55 owner who was "8'd" cause he asked to have the seeping valve covers covered under warranty and they noticed his tune - so it does and can happen - this is first hand, not "friend of a friend" BS. I also know of three SLK55 that got new engines due to complete failures, all at really low miles and not tune related.

So -
-
1] I don't know of any timestamp that show's that the ECU has been tampered with or removed. I do know that it stores every time it's been flashed. I also believe that the same hacks that a tuner uses to access the ECU would allow a knowledgeable person to remove these.

2] MB can already flash the ECU via the ODBII port using SDS. I don't think there's a way for a tuner to do this without physically modifying the ECU.

3] What are the chances that MB notices a mod'ded ECU? If the SDS diag tree says check the ECU, SDS is going to note a difference between what FDOK says is SCN coded to the car and what's really on it. I doubt that if you reflashed to stock they would go and physically inspect the ECU, unless the root of the diag tree said to replace the ECU.

4] For the N/A M113 in the SLK55, the replacement price is right over $40k US. I can only imagine if you kill it that badly they will be looking for a reason to not cover it.. Of the SLK's that had the engine replaced, two of the failed engines where crated and shipped back to Germany for teardown.

For the record, none of the three I'm personally aware of that died had been modded - so they die regardless! :P

 

To mod or not to mod. Either way be expecting that blank look like on how they portray the doctor coming out of the OR and the "He didn't make it" look on your service managers face...

 

Bingo.

IMHO, people who mod during the factory warranty period just have to realize that they're taking a risk for the parts modded, and any affected systems.

So, if you tune the ECU, you risk having no remaining factory warranty coverage for the engine and drivetrain. It really is that simple. If you have an engine and/or drivetrain issue that arises post-tuning, you should expect that it'll be you scratching the check for the repair - not MBUSA. You might be pleasantly surprised, of course, if your SA or dealership goes to bat for you and works a miracle... but you shouldn't go in expecting it'll be on their tab.

Oh, and for the inevitable "just flash back to stock" or "swap ECUs" ideas - bear in mind, that's fraud. Someone smarter than me would have to spell out the potential consequences, if you were to be caught following that course... but I'd guess it wouldn't end well. YMMV.

 

Thanks for putting it in english.. Manufacturers are in the game to make money not pay claims do to modifications. They hire professional inspectors to not pay "big" claims

 

Thanks for changing your sig photo. Google Jimmy Fallon as Charlie Sheen.....

 

That was funny.

 

It was right on, hilarious...

 

I obviously don't get the way a few of you think...at least C32AMG-DTM gets it and verbalized what I'm writing below.

The C63 is a $65-$70,000 vehicle. MBZ's warranty protects all of us from failures on a stock car.

I'm a little shocked that some of you are suggesting attempting to trick, lie to and deceive Mercedes Benz after having the ECU flashed. Suggesting 2nd ECUs, re-flashes back to stock, etc is immature grade-school crap. This is what Civic Type R owners do, not MB owners with $70k cars.

There's a longtime understanding in the tuner crowd, at least among those with a conscience...when you mod, the car is no longer under warranty. Been like this forever. ECU flash or anything else, man up and accept that you must pay to play. If your engine blows with a tune, that's your fault. The burden of proof would be on YOU to prove the tune didn't cause the failure, why should MBZ have to prove otherwise when their policy is to NOT warrant any modified cars? MB doesn't warranty altered vehicles, nor should they have to. They have no control over what any tune does to the fuel mixture, operating temps, etc...why should they warrant an engine that fails w/a tune?

Do you understand how unethical, fraudulent and childish it is to plan to deceive MBZ in the event of an engine failure after a ECU flash? Yep, it would be an expensive repair. Someone has to pay for it--if Mercedes pays for enough of these via warranty repair, we all get screwed via higher vehicle prices down the line. You're sticking it to the company that made this awesome car for us to enjoy.

If a blown engine repair is too much for you to afford, then you can't afford to mod IMO. Some C63 owners can hardly afford the car in the first place, so modding should be out of the question if they are that concerned with repair bills.

Sorry but the idea of sticking it to MBZ for your modification just bothers me. Doesn't matter whether engines have blown from ECU flashes or not...if one DOES, are you prepared to pay for it? I'm not trying to lecture but rather make some of you think about the ethics of what you're suggesting.

Flame suit on.

 

Hard.. But on point insurance fraud is insurance fraud.

 

What happens to our car prices when dealers charge for services that aren't needed, lie to naive mercedes consumers or suggest services that have already been done 1 week prior(brakes)? let's step into reality....ok.

I found out my SA left the dealer this week. WTF WILL I DO WITH MY TUNE, HEADERS, NOS, COILOVERS, WHEELS, SYSTEM, CF ADD-ONS, WHEELS, WEISTEC SUPERCHARGE ON THE WAY?!?!?!

 

Thats business brother.. 2 wrongs don't make a right.. Ignorance is no excuse

 

Stepping into reality IMO is being an adult and acknowledging that 2 wrongs don't make a right. There are many good MBZ dealers out there.

Robin Hood delusion aside, stealing from the rich (MB) to give to yourself is still stealing and fraud, no matter how you attempt to justify it.

 

one wise man once said, "you fight fire with fire" and another wise man said if "you play with fire your going to get burned" guess what the third wise man said?

 

...and Mercedes isn't above fraud themselves? How many people, with unmodded cars, haven been denied coverage for problems Mercedes knew was their defect, but the command was given somewhere in the chain to attempt collecting for those repairs? How about all the defective parts Mercedes uses? Is that fraud or ethics? Please.

I'm always fascinated by this line of thinking that if one has reached a social class, then it's Mercedes time, or in the other direction, one has social class when they have a Mercedes. I guess this is why Germans make fun of Americans and in fact, some German colleagues did just that about the Mercedes topic yesterday.

 

Don't play with fire?

 

Getting to deep for me.. Guys enjoy the rest of this thread but remeber mod you car and you could end up holding the bag!

 

And that is smart advice.

 

Since you were quoting me, I'll engage your questions. I'm of the mind that I'm only responsible for my own moral compass and behavior; others' behavior and choices are beyond my control. Therefore, while I certainly understand what you're getting at, my view is that your questions above are irrelevant to maintaining a clear conscience on this end. You may differ, of course, as these issues are perception-driven and inherently subjective in nature.

If a local bank had a particularly nasty record of predatory lending, would it be morally acceptable to rob that bank for yourself, with their unsavory business practices as justification? Your questions above would seem to suggest yes, although I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. Just food for thought.

 

As always, we have an example being brought forth of comparing one industry to another, and examples that are NOTHING alike, but someone who doesn't want to bring their moral compass into a thread about scenarios in their purest sense, that are not calling for anyone else's moral compass, but they bring in their moral compass anyhow.

If you want to bring up predatory lending, we can go there. The banks knew they had a fallback and took it, in the form of the taxpayer's bailout fund. They all worked together to get to that point. A huge benefactor was Deutsche Bank, who here, claimed in very specific wording, that they will not take rescue funds [from German taxpayers] while they took it from American taxpayers. So in effect, they stole from us twice (actually more). Deutsche Bank is also one of the big benefactors from foreclosures and predatory lending practices. Or we could bring Madoff into it.

That is food for thought. Think things through before you try to compare a pure scenario with one scenario that will ultimately end up killing millions of people worldwide. You're comparing car, an optional luxury item, with something that has and is killing people and is light years beyond in ethical questions and seriousness. Your bringing of a serious ethical topic forth on an auto forum, then dumbing this worldwide problem into gearhead terms, only shows your own lack of understanding, but where your moral compass may lie. You're the person that tells people not to shop at walmart, while shopping there yourself.

 

The civic type r and "some people cant afford their c63's in the first place" comments were pretty lame, accuracy of your point aside. Way lame.

 

Wow - must've touched a nerve; my (sincere) apologies. I reread my analogy, looking for the flawed logic. I'm sorry, but I don't see it. You are taking the simple analogy and spinning it into something it's not. Paraphrasing:

Customer tunes vehicle's engine and it blows up. Customer defrauds MBUSA into replacing the engine. Customer rationalizes it as "MBUSA defrauds customers who have legitimate claims, so I'm just leveling the playing field a bit."

My position: regardless of how ethically MBUSA handles customer issues, it is morally wrong to submit a fraudulent warranty claim. Period; no rationalization makes it okay. If one feels that MBUSA has an unacceptable track record of defrauding their customer base with denied warranty coverage on repairs that should've been covered - one should consider taking his business elsewhere, where customers are treated appropriately (Audi/BMW/et. al.).

Customer does their banking at ABC Bank in town. Huge story unfolds over ABC's unsavory business practices. Customer decides it's okay to rob ABC bank for their own personal gain, since ABC treats some of their customers poorly.

My position: regardless of how ethically ABC handles customer issues, it is morally wrong to rob a bank. Period; no rationalization makes it okay. If one feels that ABC unethically preys on their customers, one should consider taking his banking business elsewhere, where customers are treated appropriately (XYZ Bank, et. al.).

As for your diatribe on banking - how does predatory lending wind up "killing millions of people worldwide." Huh? Hurt their credit score... okay, I see that. Make it difficult for them to obtain loans in the future... yes. Kill them? I can't connect those dots, unless you're being melodramatic. I've yet to see charges brought against BAC for mass murder... one would expect that to be frontpage news. Given the human-rights concerns and people who are literally being killed in geopolitical hotspots throughout the world, I'd suggest it's poor form to make light of killing.

Final thought - I love shopping at Walmart (although I prefer Target), and have no problem suggesting friends and relatives do likewise.