Traded my 2007 cab for a 2008. Got a car with 20K fewer miles and an engine not in the effected range. Cost me $10K but I have a car with factory warranty remaining. Compared to waiting for the car to blow up and then paying $7K for a repair, I'm kinda ok.

I really like my clk cab and got one very similar to it. Same color, similar interior. Added a wood and leather steering wheel and some heated seats.

Would not have traded if I had any confidence that the car would last or MB would make good on their defective part.

Good luck to all with an engine in the effected range. I just couldn't stand the suspense, lol.

 

Pretty surprised that there isn't much discussion on this. I saw there was support group on facebook and people still seemed to be getting screwed constantly. The other thread leads one to believe MB is now taking care of this. Current owners would beg to differ.
I am in the market and have talked to a few dealers(one MB) and no one knows anything about the problem(what a crock). Anyone have any news?

 

My dealer wasn;t aware either. I have a 2009 CLK 550, so it apears mine was built after the correction. Over the years I've received many notices of a class action that I was included in, I wonder if this will be the case for those affected here.

 

Thats crazy, luckily I'm just outside of that range with my 2003 CLK and 2011 E. But then I had the coolant leak to trans issue that resoled in replacing the trans, torque converter and radiator in the CLK couple years ago so I got hit anyway. The cost of that repair was around $7000 as well and it was a MB documented issue with a STAR bulletin issued regarding the defective radiators and possibility of the leak and resulting damage. But MB never decided to do the recall of the radiators. They definitely should have, they owe it to their customers to stand behind their products, expansive products. But they did not. The cost to replace the defective radiators would be far far less. They lost far more in marketing/image/lost of customers. I had extended warranty that covered the cost minus $100 deductible but I'm aware of quite a few people that had to eat the cost of the repair that should have never got to that point

 

It concerns me that dealers say they are not aware. Most dealerships have done this repair on more than one vehicle. There is also a technical service bulletin out there that was sent to all dealerships notifying them of the problem and its extent.

Very dissapointed in MB over this. Kia or Hyundai would likely back their cars better than this.

Even if the class action suit goes forward and there is a settlement or verdict, it will take a long time. Letters informing you that you may be party to such a class action typically go out only after an agreed settlement is reached.

Has left a bad taste in my mouth about Mercedes Benz which has always been my idea of a standard for quality and engineering. Not so much now.

 

Completely agree with you

 

Anyone have and updates on this issue? I have a 2006 CLK350 I bought new, and now has 45K miles. No extended warranty. Are dealers making good on this defect yet? This situation is very disturbing.

 

... and has there been an outcome of the class-action suit(s)? Thanks for any further info.

 

All I know is you don't want this to happen to you. I was in CPO warranty at the time (right at the end). Since having this major work done I have been towed back in to the dealer twice becuase of hoses (both trans and coolant) falling off the engine. It seems to me the mechanic reused the c clamps used on the hoses instead of new ones.
If you plan on keeping the car past 80k I would see f you could get something in writing from the dealership, although I doubt they'll do that.

 

I read on this board or another, that one of the class action suits was denied. That is thrown out on a motion by the defense related to the MB stated warranty. I'm sorry, I can't cite that post. Also, I don't know if that was the New Jersey suit or one in California. At one time there were two being discussed on the chat boards.

I made my decision to get a vehicle outside of the effected range. I have been pleased with its performance so far. It does seem to have a nagging issue with the SRS light. The dealer tells me he will fix it free if it continues as it is a known issue for my model clk. I am taking it in for "A service" shortly and will see if he makes good on that offer.

Good luck to all of you with the effected engines. It grated on me until I traded out of the range.

By the way, I just bought a Hyundai SUV I love. It has a 100,000 mile power train warranty. How about that MB?

 

I drove the same year and sold the car with 53k miles. although I never had an issue, it was always in the back of my mind. Really enjoyed the car.

I was able to negotiate and put in writing the repair if needed with my dealership.

It could have been due to the fact I had purchased 4 MB's from them.

The class action case was dismissed.

 

This is an absolute outrage. I spent a fortune on this car, for what it is. Mercedes-Benz needs to own this flaw. Many people are affected -- us, the E-class and SLK-class owners, etc. This refusal to recall these cars could -- and should -- be a public relations disaster for them. I have many friends in big media. I think this is worthy of an expose on "60 Minutes" or in the NYT.

 

It got a lot publicity in many mediums across the world. The dead horse has been beaten.

A court of upper law ruled, and not one appeal was made.

As Metallic says "Sad But True"

 

Thread on here. MB treated me GREAT.

https://mbworld.org/forums/e-class-w...m272-m273.html

 

Yea, first one was thrown out. There is another one that has been started.

 

The original class action suit was thrown out because it was crap filed by idiot lawyers. They had a lot of the facts wrong and presented it from a warranty standpoint. Since MBZ already has an existing warranty which they honor, there is really very little a court will do to extend that. Now, if MBZ had issued a recall of vehicles under warranty only, then there would be a case. However, MBZ never issues recalls unless forced to do so by governing authorities (and I don't believe this has ever happened). Instead of recalls, they issue "TSBs" that are sort of like warranties, and give dealers the approval to repair these issues when the car is under warranty and the owner brings them in, but they don;t call them back in. For example, the Valeo radiator failure worked this way. if you had a Valeo radiator and had your car in for service while it was under warranty, it was very likely that the dealer would go ahead an replace it. The MBZ TSB allowed the dealer to proactively do that.

MBZ does occasionally approve goodwill repairs outside of warranty. They do this on a case by case basis. It usually requires a very good dealer to work with the customer and MBUSA to get the repairs approved. There is no cut and dried policy - it's up to the MBZ customer service case manager to make the decision. Part of the decision is based on the dealership's recommendations as well as the situation. For example, they often seem to help when the vehicle warranty has only expired on one of the limits - mileage or months. For example, they covered the repair on my CLK550 when my warranty had expired over a year before, but the mileage was under 40K. The problem is going to come when these some 468,993 V6 and 88,611 V8's start having problems at the 80K mile mark, the 120K mile mark or even the 200K mile mark. Every engine with a timing chain is eventually going to have these gears or the chain fail, but it shouldn't happen at these low miles.

 

I am just stunned by this. My previous car was a 1998 Jaguar XK8 ... had almost the same issue: the cheap plastic tensioners tended to crack and fall apart north of 60,000 miles, sending the timing chain flooey. Ford never recalled that one either, but in basically an admission of guilt, used a different plastic source in MY 1999 forward. I had to trade once I found out because I was never comfortable driving the car long distances. Can't believe I picked another car with this fatal flaw. Thank you guys for the responses. I will not let this rest!

 

Togi55: I understand your outrage. I can't offer any assistance, but I can offer some comfort in the facts. The fact is, your timing gear will eventually fail. Yeah, comforting, right? The fact is, all timing gears will eventually fail. Even if your engine wasn't in the range of affected ones, it would fail. Why? All mechanical parts eventually fail.

The problem with the affected engines is that the timing gears are made of materials that fail "too soon". The definition of "too soon" is a bit indeterminate. For some, that may be at 30K miles. For others, it may be at 130K miles or even more. Either way, that's probably earlier than the expected life of the timing gear which really should be about 300K miles or even more.

So, while we hear of plenty of cars here that when looked up by VIN have engines that fall within the range (which includes over 550,000 engines) how many hear have actually experience the problem? I have, and I know of one other in this thread, and maybe a few others on a this forum and BENZWORLD, but it's not like a rampant issue. In fact, when my dealer repaired mine, they said this was only the 2nd V8 they had repaired and they had seen less than a dozen V6's. Of course the affected cars are model years 2005-2008, so they are just now getting into the higher mileage ranges. Then again, there are plenty of affected engines with over 100K miles and no problems.

Just consider the odds. Statistically speaking, your timing gear will probably fail prematurely. However, there are a lot of possible outcomes between "now" and "failure day". It's possible that yours might not fail until 150K miles or more are on the clock. Maybe you'll not own it then. Maybe it will get stolen or totaled in an wreck before it fails. Or, it might fail tomorrow, and MBUSA might "goodwill" the repair since it's fairly low miles, even though it's out of warranty.

 

Thanks, Rodney. I'll start with the Evonne Ghoul at Mercedes-Benz of Beverly Hills, who sold it to me.

 

I was bored today, so I put my thoughts on this in a thread over on the W203 forum at BW:

http://www.benzworld.org/forums/w203...ml#post5432899

 

hi guys i have the same problem- have taken car in several times for noise checks and engine light warning - now have been told it is a breakage of the inferior part - but i think dealership is claiming wear and tear at 78000klm ( or 49000miles which should be nothing for this car). the car has been fully maintained and serviced at this dealership

 

Ohh man. Start nice, but your probably gonna have to get real nasty. Your, what, 9k mi over the warranty, thats nothing. Have you had any cam sensors report errors before the warranty ran out? Thats usually a tell tail sign. You could say that it was going before the warranty ran out. In any case print out the lawsuit, go in and start making threats. "I'll never buy another Merc again!", "I'm calling a lawyer", etc. Only after you go the nice route, especially if you've had all your maint done there.. let them know that, it helps. If it comes down to it though, your gonna have to get mean if you don't want to pay $10k for repairs. Good luck.

 

This is also going to depend on where you live. I see you using "kilometers". The warranty rules and the arm of MBZ that handles out of warranty claims are different in other countries. You might want to update your profile to not your location.

 

thanks all think it is going to be a major battle
at the last check before warranty expired it is documented that i reported a noise on starting engine apparently this is also a sign- service claim it was unleaded petrol 91 causing this ( car always filled with 95 or 98)
apart from that absolutely love the car but will not buy another merc

 

The class action suit excluded the 08 CLK550's. Anyone know if the 08's have the same issue?