LovinMercedes

As many of you know, I had the problem with my pistons misfiring with my brand new 2005 SL600 that was produced on December 1, 2004.

They diagnosed the problem as needing a new fuel pump. With this new fuel pump came a new control module and fuel filter.

I insisted on seeing my original and new parts and noted the part numbers. I then called a "friend" overseas that is very familiar with Mercedes Benz if you get my drift.

This is what I found out. My new fuel pump is the third generation of pumps for the SL600. Along with this new fuel pump, it needed the new control module and the new fuel filter.

What I was amazed to find out is that the fuel pump that originally came with my car was the original pump that was released when the new SL's came out in 2001.

I also found out that this original pump was replaced with a new pump that was released some time in the middle of 2002. Furthermore, this second new pump was again superceded by yet another pump released shortly after the middle of 2004.

Thus, the pump that I had in my car was the original fuel pump that the car came out with in 2001 despite the fact that they had two upgraded pumps released prior to the production of my car.

In othe words, my brand new 2005 SL600 had a pump that was over 2 1/2 years old and there had already been two more upgraded pumps released prior to it's production.

My question is the following:

How many of you that bought brand new 2005 SL600's or possibly any other SL realized when you bought your car that it could contain a fuel pump or any other part that is over 2 1/2 years old that is known to possibly have problems to which they have upgraded that pump on two separate dates prior to your car being built but decided not to give you that upgraded pump?

Do you find this acceptable?

WIldcat465

How do we know which one that we have?

LovinMercedes

I would guess you are going to have the same as my old one unless you have had a problem and had it changed.

It is located underneath the car at the rear. You can't see it. You need a mechanic to take it out and check the part number imprinted on it.

If the part number ends in 13 94 it is the original first generation pump from 2001. The second generation pump part number ends in 58 94. The third generation and latest pump released early 4th quarter last year ends in 87 94.

blueSL

The new verson of the pump may have been introduced for reasons other than "the old one doesn't work". Mercedes are on a big cost reduction push at the moment, which includes sourcing more parts from outside Germany where unit labour costs are the highest in the world. It may be the new pump is cheaper to buy, install, maintain but existing older style pumps in the supply chain (including forward purchase contracts) are still being used.

Are you certain that the fault in your car was because of the design of the pump or was it just a faulty example?

It would be good to think the newer part must be better but then newer versions of Windows always work better than older versions, don't they?

Whatever the true explanation, it's been a bad start to your SL ownership, not least the time it's taken to get the replacement part.

LovinMercedes

I saw the written document from Mercedes Benz that talks about my problem being caused by a lack of fuel getting to the front of the engine. The new fuel pump delivers more fuel to the engine which is why you also need an updated control module and a updated filter.

I wouldn't say it is better. It is just designed to fix a problem many are having with the engine. I know of 2 others that have had the problem not to mention what happened with Oprah who drove an SL600 for one day and when the car went dead in the middle of a turn, she dropped it off at the dealer and returned it. She still talks about it on her show.

She said she loved the car but didn't trust it enough to drive it.

tiggerfink

It is common practice to put in parts older than the build date of the car. But it is not acceptable to not put in the latest build series of that part that was changed because of a design change.

To me that is very wrong of Mercedes putting in a part that they know will fail. I wonder if it is under the lemon law.

blueSL

Just what Mercedes need, Oprah complaining about one one of their cars on air. They are in a mess and that sadly is the measure of Mercedes these days - the reality of owning one of their cars does not measure up to either the hype or the expectation. Is there anyone out there whose ownership experience has exceeded their expectations?

LovinMercedes

I understand exactly what you are saying even though I know that my existing problems with my car will get resolved. It is just the aggrivation associated with it.

The bottom line is really what are the other car manufactures doing? I truly believe Mercedes is screwing up its brand and if it doesn't fix it, they are really going to have significant problems. That is the future however and that will take some time in the event they don't screw on their heads.

The problem is today when you look at the SL600. I am not sure, for the money, what car is better.

While I could never say this SL600 experience has exceeded or even met my expectations, if I had the chance to do it all over again, you would probably see the same SL600 sitting in my driveway.

SL55406

You spent what .. 150k or more on your car and you want the latest pump!!

NO SOUP FOR YOU!!!!!

PA55AMG

Lovin, I am sorry to here about your dilemma. Hopefully this hasn't completely soured your ownership experience. Your car will be fixed soon and then you can get back to enjoying one of the finest cars on the planet! I know my Mercedes experience is only a month old, but I couldn't be happier. My car even damn near stranded me when the brake switch went bad and it would not come out of park. I think my "dealership experience" helped me get through it mentally unscathed. I guess I have come to the conclusion that the complexity of these cars means your going to have hiccups. Don't give up--keep Lovin' it!!



P.S. I see from your other post that someone feels that your dealer is terrible. Maybe this is part of the problem. Having a good dealer is critical.

jasab

Well said!

SL55406

They are not screwing up the brand .. they have SCREWED up the brand.

I am having doubts as to where I want to spend $150k .. 2006 SL55 ?? maybe .. or not.

PA55AMG

Come on guys, your so negative! If you really want to get to know your dealer, try buying an Aston or a Bentley. Try going to an M3 board and learn about spun rod bearings, or a Porsche board and hear about constant rear main seal leaks, these are world class cars by anyone's standards and they have far more serious problems. Do you think you can buy a G5 or a Citation10 and not have problems? These SL's are fantastic automobiles, with incredible engineering and complexity, and they are bound to have some issues, but for now there is nothing even close with more reliability. Don't sweat the small stuff---ENJOY YOUR CARS!!

RJC

COME BACK ONE YEAR!!!!!

RJC

Thank Mr. Schrempp for most of the lack in quality, back in the late 90's he started insisting on cheaper parts from all of MB's suppliers which continues today... GUESS WHAT??? he got what he paid for.... but we didn't!

MBZFAN55

At this point in time, maybe we should all be pleased that the Chrysler "Mopar" parts logo hasn't yet appeared on our Mercedes vehicles.

Many times I have seen identical parts all boxed with different part numbers, and not surprisingly different prices. The factories are more cost conscious than ever, and will do whatever they have to do to reduce costs, even if that means "last years part". The only difference this time is that an interested car owner caught them !

tiggerfink

I can understand if these cars were made in mass production 6 months in advanced then I can see older defective parts on these cars. But these cars are made pretty much to order, so the factory should have the latest parts. Mercedes knew that there was a problem with the fuel pump, so they designed and made a new one. But for some unknown reason, the factory installed the old fuel pump that was known to have problems.

For example, I would be out of business if I installed a financial system for a company with the oldest software, patches, and hardware with know problems.

JackStraw

COGS on software and hardware are very different. If you were sitting on an inventory of thousands of fuel pumps, you would install them unless you were pretty damn sure that the cost to repair/replace the defective ones was significantly higher than the cost of the write down on the inventory.

That being said, Lovin's argument about the old fuel pump not being able to distribute fuel to all of the cylinders sounds fishy to me. This should have been worked out in the testing of the V12 engine and never should have been a production problem.

tiggerfink

I disagree with you. I remember Dell replaced all the hard drives in my PCs through out the US and Canada when they discovered the hard drives was defective. At that time the drives ran about $500 a piece. My rep called me one day, and said he would like to work out a schedule to replace the drives. That is service.

I see lovinSL600 point. If the pump was known to be defective, why did the factory install the old pump with known problems?

By the way, the hardware systems I installed run about 90K for just a server.

blueSL

I agree with Jack, the fact there's a new part out doesn't mean you stop using the existing stock/forward contract to buy of the existing one.

The cars may be built to order but they are also mass-produced; when I visited the plant, they were making 155 a day, 750 a week, call it 35000 a year, $3bn+ at retail. With 50% of them coming to the US, this car alone makes a significant contribution to the US Trade Deficit.

tiggerfink

You are correct that a new part out does not mean you top using the existing part in stock, but if the new part fixes a known problem in the old part then the new part should be use.

So what I am hearing if the defective part does not cause a death then it is ok to use the defective part.

blueSL

It's not that black and white. If the part failed in every situation, it would have been picked up in testing. What they may have found is that over a large population of cars, manufacturing tolerances cause some pumps to under-perform and LovinSL600's is one and as Jack says, it's a judgment call as to whether you dump the existing pumps or accept a failure rate in the field. I'm quite sure these decisions are made all the time and it's only those which net down to a safety risk result in recalls. What's the worse case of this under-performing pump: rough running, reduced output power, unhappy customer, warranty cost.

It's an isolated failure which we haven't seen elsewhere but in the total scheme of things, fixable, that's what warranties are for. We don't know, and will never know the reason for the part change and the use of existing inventory. What's less excusable is that the testing of the car at the plant and the dealer did not pick up the uneven running.

LovinMercedes

Lovin's argument is not fishy nor is it Lovin's. At 52 I have learned command of the English language and I can read a document, especially when it has a Mercedes Benz logo on the top of the piece of paper.

Think what you want Jack but I read the f%#ken document and that is what it says.

The document further went on to say that this only happens in instances where the allowed tolerances of the pump are slightly off, what the octane level of the fuel is and yes, believe it or not, the ambient temperature.

If you have the right mix of these items, the result is the amount of fuel being delivered to the front of the engine is not enough.

To test what this document said, before we started the car's engine, we turned on the ignition which is all that is needed start the fuel to the engine. When you did it once, the pistons misfired but when you did it at least two times, you never had the problem because there was enough fuel there by the time you started the engine.

The bottom line is very obvious. They knew they had a problem. They say the new pump was designed to deliver more fuel to the engine and because of the increased load, you need a new control unit with increased power to fuel pump.

They are making a calculated bet the the amount of fuel pumps they have to fix are less than the cost of junking what they had on hand which was obviously a very significant amount if they are still putting them in since 2001.

You either believe that your car manufacturer is wrong for allowing you to take this risk or you don't. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is that I spend approximately $172,000 on my car and for that amount of money they should have eaten the old pump when the car was assembled and installed the new one.

blueSL

Does sound as if a certain proportion of cars are falling outside the operating envelope of the original pump and yours is one. As aggrieved as you may feel, and I would be too, Mercedes contractual obligation to you is to supply a car which works and fix it under warranty if required.

There's no obligation to supply parts of a particular type but at least the car is new. When I worked for IBM, there was no assurance that the computer you bought was even new, just refurbished to an equivalent condition which consisted of cleaning it, vacuuming out the dust inside, repainting the covers and putting it on soak test. And this was for computers which cost millions in today's money.

Do you know if this pump is unique to the SL600 or is it used elsewhere? Do you know if the part no begins 230 - if it does, it's unique to the SL, if not, it may well be used in other cars. I would have thought it likely that it's in an internal "catalog" of parts available from the MB parts bin rather than a model specific item.

JackStraw

I should have attributed the defective fuel pump argument to MB and not you, LovinSL600. My use of the word "fishy" was not meant to be an indictment of your reading skills, but rather to convey my disbelief that Mercedes would design and install a fuel pump that was inadequate to deliver fuel to all of the cylinders of an engine that was in their flagship vehicles, including the Maybach.

Octane? I suspect you put nothing less than 91 octane in your tank. Ambient temperature? Feel free to correct me, but I don't imagine the Bay Area sees a lot of the temperature extremes experienced in many other climates. Mercedes tests these vehicles in extreme temperatures before production in order to see if unexpected weather-related problems might arise. "The allowed tolerances of the pump are slightly off"? Sounds to me like this describes a pump that is out of spec, and possibly defective.