|
Originally Posted by aynorfarms
(Post 5389419)
Folks,
I have been posting on the MB facebook page. Perhaps it would get their attention if more comments hit there?? If we start costing them money in sales they may want to hurry up and shut us up with a repair. |
Originally Posted by BBBSS
(Post 5389694)
I REALLY like this idea. I made on their well as well as in their advertisement of the new E63 AMG the other day. I'm sure I ruffled some feathers with my posts. Especially in the E63 advertisement. Noted the NHTSA investigation number and linked the jalopnik story on the class action suit along with some choice words on my feelings about how Mercedes has handled this. :D
If we start costing them money in sales they may want to hurry up and shut us up with a repair. NHTSA will have to make them fix the cars. Even then, they will probably try to substitute some 10 cent part for a band-aid and proclaim that it's fixed. I really hope this is fixed before someone is hurt or killed from the leaking fuel. It's a real possibility and is very scary knowing that the leaking fuel tank is right under your childs car seat. Fuel and fuel vapor fires spread so quickly that you would not have time to get your child out of the car. |
Oh boy this ol thread is near 40000 hits. It brings a tear to my eye that MBUSA can be so stupid than to deny gas tank leaking claims from AMG owners. :crazy: There is no fix and nothing in the wings.
Bring on Facebook and spread the news.
Originally Posted by BBBSS
(Post 5389694)
I REALLY like this idea. I made on their well as well as in their advertisement of the new E63 AMG the other day. I'm sure I ruffled some feathers with my posts. Especially in the E63 advertisement. Noted the NHTSA investigation number and linked the jalopnik story on the class action suit along with some choice words on my feelings about how Mercedes has handled this. :D
If we start costing them money in sales they may want to hurry up and shut us up with a repair. |
Originally Posted by dunnman99
(Post 5389494)
I found this while looking for a replacement fuel filter.
Nasty job. Requires draining fuel tank, removing rear seat, and extracting fuel filter/fuel pressure regulator combination. Are you aware that there is a voluntary recall campaign on this item? It is possible this can be replaced for free by your Benz dealer. Reference: Campaign No. 2008020001, March 2008 http://answers.edmunds.com/question-...lem-52818.aspx The 2008 recall campaign had nothing to do with the e350 / e500 cars. It was a very directed recall for the E55 and the 2006 CLS55 only. Only around 8000 vehicles were covered by that recall. As much as I sympathize with the non-E55 members with fuel leaks, you guys are really at an enormous disadvantage. The total number of ODI#s filed are a small fraction compared to the 250,000+ vehicles produced... In contrast, the E55 platform has 50+ ODI filings on a population of ~10,000 vehicles. -G |
Originally Posted by GregMB
(Post 5389837)
The 2008 recall campaign had nothing to do with the e350 / e500 cars. It was a very directed recall for the E55 and the 2006 CLS55 only. Only around 8000 vehicles were covered by that recall.
As much as I sympathize with the non-E55 members with fuel leaks, you guys are really at an enormous disadvantage. The total number of ODI#s filed are a small fraction compared to the 250,000+ vehicles produced... In contrast, the E55 platform has 50+ ODI filings on a population of ~10,000 vehicles. -G |
Originally Posted by BlownV8
(Post 5389721)
They are going to fight this tooth and nail. The costs of this recall could set the company back for a few years in terms of profitability and bad press. If they had intentions of fixing the issue, they would have already stepped forward.
NHTSA will have to make them fix the cars. Even then, they will probably try to substitute some 10 cent part for a band-aid and proclaim that it's fixed. Ever see fight club... If not then read the quote below... Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one. Business woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents? Narrator: You wouldn't believe. Business woman on plane: Which car company do you work for? Narrator: A major one. I would think X in this case is more than a recall. |
Actually a false assumption. If you read the campaign the level sensor assembly is only to be replaced if its shows signs of failure or leaking. If memory serves....most cars had the assembly replaced.
Mine was leaking at 4years old and 50k. It has never stopped leaking for more than a year each time its been repaired since. Ethanol may play a role. IMHO But Iam not a chemical engineer.
Originally Posted by SPVFD47
(Post 5390095)
I'd like to add that it seems the majority of E55 owners, if not all, have had problems after the campaign. I have yet to find or hear of anyone that has had the problem prior to the campaign. I'm hoping to see if there is anyone out there that hasn't had the campaign performed and see if they're have problems. Greg did you find out if the campaign was performed to Euro Spec E55's ? It appears the Euro cars are still using the old P/N's. I could be wrong on that thou.
|
I can't say that everyone or the majority of campaigns performed had the assembly replaced or not. I know there were 3 fixes, replace an elbow, replace the assembly, and I forget the third. I know thru the NTHSA that the info they have says the assembly was replaced on mine. Also, my fuel gauge reads less than what is actually in there which leads me to believe it was installed incorrectly to begin with.
I thought about getting a new seal and trying it out and see what happens. In my case I only have a leak on the drivers side. Not the passenger side. I've read about the ethanol theory too, but if that was the case I'd have the leak on both sides not just one if the seal was not compatible with ethanol. But then again who knows, the seal on the passenger side could be the original seal and resistant to the ethanol. I just hope what every happens with MB and the NTHSA happens soon. I'm sick of waiting. |
But you said above that the majority if not all had the leak after the recall. I think that part is in error as I was there to give the play by play as this happened over the past 4 years.
I feel a good portion or majority had the level sender assm replaced at the time of the warranty due to the fact they showed signs of failure or even leaking. Mine was leaking at the time the 2008 recall and the level sender had to be replaced. What generally happens after the sensor is replaced.....tank stays sealed for a time period. 6months, 1yr, 2yr. But the leak almost always comes back. And when it comes back its a pain in the arse to get it sealed again. This theory has proven itself time and time again with members on this forum. The leak comes back. Could the tanks be warping from heat or breaking down? Making it difficult to attain a seal from the seal and clamp around the sender? Why is it happening worse on E55s? I have actually given some thought to scrap the whole intank setup and run a true fuel system with return line and fuel pressure regulator on the engine. This would eliminate much of the added pressure in our fuel tank. A couple of members have done this over the years for performance and fuel volume increases.
Originally Posted by SPVFD47
(Post 5391340)
I can't say that everyone or the majority of campaigns performed had the assembly replaced or not. I know there were 3 fixes, replace an elbow, replace the assembly, and I forget the third. I know thru the NTHSA that the info they have says the assembly was replaced on mine. Also, my fuel gauge reads less than what is actually in there which leads me to believe it was installed incorrectly to begin with.
I thought about getting a new seal and trying it out and see what happens. In my case I only have a leak on the drivers side. Not the passenger side. I've read about the ethanol theory too, but if that was the case I'd have the leak on both sides not just one if the seal was not compatible with ethanol. But then again who knows, the seal on the passenger side could be the original seal and resistant to the ethanol. I just hope what every happens with MB and the NTHSA happens soon. I'm sick of waiting. |
Originally Posted by 03RSTT
(Post 5391444)
I have actually given some thought to scrap the whole intank setup and run a true fuel system with return line and fuel pressure regulator on the engine. This would eliminate much of the added pressure in our fuel tank. A couple of members have done this over the years for performance and fuel volume increases. FWIW, my 2006 was "not eligible" for the recall per the VIN. I also have the larger (stock SLR) injectors on my car, so clearly there are differences year to year and VIN to VIN. |
I don't want to argue... and we're on the same team here. It's all of the E55 owners against MB with the hopeful backing of the NTHSA. I can't say for sure when my E55 started to leak, it was leaking when I bought and the previous owner stated he never noticed anything. I bought it a Mercedes Benz Service Center because the Brake - Visit Workshop light was on and a coworker's friend (who is a MB Tech) wanted to see the vehicle and said he'd bet any amount of money the SBC Pump went bad. I told him about the leak and he said he'd never heard about it and he'd test the tank to check. They fixed the SBC Pump and tested the tank and said it was ok... That's how my whole ordeal started back in May 2011. I immediately researched the issue and found a few threads about it, but only to US vehicles... I jumped aboard here and filled a NTHSA complaint. After a month, I received an email and phone call regarding the photos I had mentioned in my filing and sent them to the NTHSA. Immediately was contacted again, and have been since a few times. They've even asked I would mind if they looked at my E55 and if I could provide more photos which I have, I've even time stamped so they the leak can tracked over time progression.
The NTHSA was able to give me the VMI info for my vehicle. They said the campaign was performed in 2008. During that time the whole assembly was changed. O3RSTT, did your E55 leak before or after the campaign ? |
Originally Posted by cij911
(Post 5391463)
FWIW, my 2006 was "not eligible" for the recall per the VIN. I also have the larger (stock SLR) injectors on my car, so clearly there are differences year to year and VIN to VIN. |
No prob on my end. I just wanted to clarify that the leaks did not start after the recall. I want to keep a few details and timeline very clear for the group.
My car started leaking or was leaking at the very time the recall was issued in 08. And I live in AZ and the car was mostly driven a short distance to work. 2 miles or so. The exact stipulation outlined in the recall. So if it were to happen to anyone....it would be me. Lucky me. Which also gives credit to the reason why my leak comes back faster every time. Where it may take another member 2 or 3 years for the leak to come back....mine is back every 8 months. Lucky me.
Originally Posted by SPVFD47
(Post 5391479)
I don't want to argue... and we're on the same team here. It's all of the E55 owners against MB with the hopeful backing of the NTHSA. I can't say for sure when my E55 started to leak, it was leaking when I bought and the previous owner stated he never noticed anything. I bought it a Mercedes Benz Service Center because the Brake - Visit Workshop light was on and a coworker's friend (who is a MB Tech) wanted to see the vehicle and said he'd bet any amount of money the SBC Pump went bad. I told him about the leak and he said he'd never heard about it and he'd test the tank to check. They fixed the SBC Pump and tested the tank and said it was ok... That's how my whole ordeal started back in May 2011. I immediately researched the issue and found a few threads about it, but only to US vehicles... I jumped aboard here and filled a NTHSA complaint. After a month, I received an email and phone call regarding the photos I had mentioned in my filing and sent them to the NTHSA. Immediately was contacted again, and have been since a few times. They've even asked I would mind if they looked at my E55 and if I could provide more photos which I have, I've even time stamped so they the leak can tracked over time progression.
The NTHSA was able to give me the VMI info for my vehicle. They said the campaign was performed in 2008. During that time the whole assembly was changed. O3RSTT, did your E55 leak before or after the campaign ? |
We can thank our EPA for that one.
2004 mandate eliminated the fuel return line. Many fuel system problems have surfaced after that 2004 mandate. The primary reason the US did not get the 2004 RS6. Audi said FU to the mandate and produced 2003 RS6s up to December of 03 and sold them all as 03s during 04. My RS6 has no problem with too much pressure developing in the gas tank. Its a crappy design to leave the fuel pressure regulator in the gas tank. The end result is a rats nest of fuel lines inside the tank and the chance of too much pressure to develop inside the tank.
Originally Posted by cij911
(Post 5391463)
I too have thought this would be a better and safer option and don't understand why it was not done in the first place? I wonder how hard it would be to seal the top of the tank and then add a new feed line, external pump, and return line ? Technically it should not be that hard and could still incorporate the factory gas level.
FWIW, my 2006 was "not eligible" for the recall per the VIN. I also have the larger (stock SLR) injectors on my car, so clearly there are differences year to year and VIN to VIN. |
Originally Posted by 03RSTT
(Post 5391554)
We can thank our EPA for that one.
2004 mandate eliminated the fuel return line. Many fuel system problems have surfaced after that 2004 mandate. Its a crappy design to leave the fuel pressure regulator in the gas tank. The end result is a rats nest of fuel lines inside the tank and the chance of too much pressure to develop inside the tank. Is this really all there is to the issue.... internal tank pressure from an unvented tank? How hard would it be to run a tank vent of some sort, or would the absence of tank pressure cause the car to throw codes? Obviously we could fix this pretty easily ourselves if it were that simple. :y -G |
I believe it is part of the problem.
Yes, it will throw a gas cap code. Can that code be bypassed? IDK There is a rats nest of lines inside the E55 tank. There are no such lines and no fuel leaks in older W210 E55s. 2plus2equals? Can anyone find the threads where a couple of owners here took out this crap and installed fuel pressure regulator on the engine with a full return line setup? How did they get around star and SES lights??? It was part of a high hp fuel delivery project that a few members have done.
Originally Posted by GregMB
(Post 5391583)
Is this really all there is to the issue.... internal tank pressure from an unvented tank?
How hard would it be to run a tank vent of some sort, or would the absence of tank pressure cause the car to throw codes? Obviously we could fix this pretty easily ourselves if it were that simple. :y -G |
Interesting.
I guess the test would be to pull the inspection covers off, and fill my tank to the top the same way I did before and park the car.... except this time I could disconnect the fuel cap so that the tank is fully vented and has no internal pressure. Obviously, with a cracked fitting there is still a chance that fuel would leak and puddle but without any pressure to drive it outward the leak should be a lot slower and less dramatic??? Maybe. -G |
Do your magic with the parts catalog and see whats different between the W210 and 211 gas tanks.
I dont think the 210 has the problem. I think the 210 still had the fuel return line and thus did not have the rats nest of lines inside the tank. I dont think the 210 has the problem. My theory GregMB-as with your specific problem. Once a seal point has failed due to ?pressure in the tank? its too late to vent the tank and reduce pressure. The leak point has already failed and I doubt it will seal even if you vent. It is worth a try however |
2 Attachment(s)
Just an FYI if it helps....
Never exactly found out the cause, but it appears that my tank blew up like a balloon so badly that the drive shaft actually ground a hold through the tank. was investigated by MBZ and they replaced my whole tank... that tank was previously leaking from somewhere high on the tank, but since it stopped with the new tank, i never pursued. I was actually hoping for an insurance car-b-que after my dealer sent me home for the 3rd time with a leaking tank... told them when my house burned down, id be coming after them.. that's when they called corporate. Attachment 245272 Attachment 245273 |
I have a 2007 E550 4matic sport and have been smelling a strong gas odor on the driver side and finally decided to google this and am now here. Dumbfounded and amazed that this is not a unique problem as well as wondering if this is dangerous. I see the link to report this to NTSA and wondering if this is still ongoing or been closed out due to lack of reporters. Any advice on moving forward greatly appreciated.
|
It's still OPEN. Maybe someday they will pull the trigger and force MB to do a recall.
|
Originally Posted by AMG903L
(Post 5483378)
It's still OPEN. Maybe someday they will pull the trigger and force MB to do a recall.
Every magazne publication has published all sorts of recall investigations and notices. Ive sent letters to every one of those publications. They are not interested. You know why? My theory is MB commits so much money to those advertisers, they wont touch the story. |
Unfortunately you may be right, but the pressure theory is a very good one because the last time this happened to me the fuel light was flashing and it said to check gas cap and it was after a few runs back to back so I'm wondering if the pressure rose during those runs and there was no evap
|
Fuel sending unit leak
Originally Posted by 03RSTT
(Post 4209878)
...just waiting to go off.
If you have a 03-06 E55 that was involved in the fuel level sender recall back in 2008 you still may have a problem. The recall did not seem to fix the problem and several E55 owners are now reporting that the replacement part is starting to leak. Ours broke this last weekend and literally gas was pouring out from under my car. This is a fire and bomb hazard and had I not noticed this and drove the car on the hwy....I would not be writing this post. I have reported the condition to the NHTSA and filed a claim. http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/index.cfm I have called MB USA and started a notice and case file. I have 4 other E55 owners with the same problem. One has said MB USA denied any assistance in fixing his car because "we completed the recall in 2008 and that was it." How stupid of MB USA. Just over 2years and 12,000 miles. The assembly is cracked and fuel is pouring out just sitting there. http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/a...s/fuelleak.jpg Good Luck! |
Originally Posted by Hulk
(Post 5483581)
Unfortunately you may be right, but the pressure theory is a very good one because the last time this happened to me the fuel light was flashing and it said to check gas cap and it was after a few runs back to back so I'm wondering if the pressure rose during those runs and there was no evap
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:44 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands