USA 2014 E250 after diesel TSB issues
At the time of the TSB being performed, I had the MB dealer change the oil and filter. Let's hope they really did instil spec 229.51 or 229.52. Hope this is the end of Fritz on the fitz.




Those cars are subject to AEM. (Approved Emissions Modifications) and having warranty, you don't need forum help. Did you collect the check?
https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/daim...vil-settlement
I deleted DPF on 1 of my Bletecs and now am converting it back.
The delete was forced over 3 years ago by MB USA not being able to supply new DPF. Now new DPF can be bought aftermarket for less than $1000.
The sedan with DPF delete delivers lower mpg, than the one with DPF working although the small difference can be due to different driving style (freeways v/s more city driving)
DPF delete still passes NV smog test, what is sniffer on the rolls.
Last edited by kajtek1; Jun 23, 2022 at 12:47 PM.
Those cars are subject to AEM. (Approved Emissions Modifications) and having warranty, you don't need forum help. Did you collect the check?
https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/daim...vil-settlement
I deleted DPF on 1 of my Bletecs and now am converting it back.
The delete was forced over 3 years ago by MB USA not being able to supply new DPF. Now new DPF can be bought aftermarket for less than $1000.
The sedan with DPF delete delivers lower mpg, than the one with DPF working although the small difference can be due to different driving style (freeways v/s more city driving)
DPF delete still passes NV smog test, what is sniffer on the rolls.




My 2014 had almost all exhaust replaced under AEM and Nox sensor as well.
So reading your post I understand that the new parts developed defects or poor installation?
Trending Topics
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
I worked as a new car dealer tech for 42 years. Mercedes first, then Chrysler, lastly Nissan. I had to go to where the repair dollars were. Back in the 80's Mercedes just didn't have enough repair opportunities. On to Chrysler, It had to have been the winter of 88-89 or 89-90, I traveled to a tech class regarding Chrysler's A604 auto trans.
The A604 had a terrible problem with bump stop. At a red light it felt like the car behind you, bumped into you. This class addressed that problem. The clearance in the low/reverse clutch became excessive after low milage. The TCM couldn't control release and apply smoothly with too loose clutch packs. No TSB or anything in print ever revealed the fix. We were instructed to stack the L/R clutch way tighter than specs. The gave the TCM very good control of the clutch volume indexes and it ran smoothly. Chrysler kept this top secret to avoid a recall.
The trans was so bad one very cold day our dealership sent a rental truck to Chicago and brought back 27 new ones. The fluid coolers got so cold they wouldn't flow and the trans melted down. Chrysler came out with a thermal bypass valve to fix that issue.
Nissan pulled a lot of super secret stuff to make their crap actually work right.
So, My 0651 isn't happy after the emissions TSB. Is it the sensors? I doubt that but they are reporting signals outside the scope of realm, so the ECU flags them and the dealer just keeps replacing them. So why the issue? It seems so obvious to me, the air/fuel ratio is unacceptable to the new ECU parameters. I believe widening those sensor parameters would keep the Mil off, while allowing the new A/F ratios from the TSB reprogramming to scrub the NOX acceptably.
Of course, running the emissions system outside of printed specs is emissions tampering. But that's debatable, if the emissions are within the spec isn't all good? So a traveling, secret agent tech may have a PCM flash to fix this issue, not in print anywhere and NOT shared with dealer techs.
If I could get my hands on a star diagnostic data link, I'd look into widening the parameters myself. Just look at how easy it is to tune VW's with Ross-Tech software.
When the warranty runs out, good bye emissions system. Let it Flo.





