I recently noticed paint bubbles where the roof meets the windshield.

When I noticed paint bubbles at other places, the bubbles also showed brown crack lines.

This time however, the bubbles are very smooth and healthy shiny white. I am not sure whether they were there since long time ago, or they occurred recently.

There are also two tiny bubbles under the rubber, but they do not show any brown crack lines (the black stuff you see on the picture is rubber).

Do you think rust is growing under these bubbles? Or can this be just result of poor paint work done by a body shop to which the previous owner went?

The car is 1992 300D arctic white.

Attached Thumbnails

       

__________________
1992 300D 2.5 turbo diesel. 319 k miles.
124.128 chassis, 602.962 engine, 722.418 tranny.

That is Rust,,, I guarantee it.

__________________
95 SL500 Smoke Silver, Parchment 64K
07 E350 4matic Station Wagon White 34K
02 E320 4Matic Silver/grey 80K
05 F150 Silver 44K

I agree, there is rust under those....get it attenedto ASAP in the propper manner or its going to get FAR FAR worse.

__________________
Proud owner of ....
1971 280SE W108
1979 300SD W116
1983 300D W123
1975 Ironhead Sportster chopper
1987 GMC 3/4 ton 4X4 Diesel
1989 Honda Civic (Heavily modified)
---------------------
Section 609 MVAC Certified
---------------------
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche

You've got rust.

Lou K

You have moisture trapped under these bubbles. The moisture is trying to break through, and when it does you will see the same cracks and brown spots that you saw before. Needs to be fixed properly, by somone that knows what he is doing.

Phil

__________________
'95 E300 Diesel, 264,000 Miles. [Sold it]

Thank for your replies.

I saw MB service CD. I think I can remove the plastic trim myself, and treat the rust with RustBullet. However, if the rust extends to hard to reach edges or to the place where windshield is attached, I will not be able to treat the rust myself.

The windshield was replaced in June 2004, that is about 10 months ago. The glass technician did not report any rust.

Is it possible that the glass tech made scratch by mistake to cause rust?

__________________
1992 300D 2.5 turbo diesel. 319 k miles.
124.128 chassis, 602.962 engine, 722.418 tranny.

We see this on a regular basis. Slammer glass installers dig through the paint and primer and slam a windshield in and the rust starts in short order. I would take it back to the installer and show them the problem. The insurance company, if there was one involved, may even help.

__________________
95 SL500 Smoke Silver, Parchment 64K
07 E350 4matic Station Wagon White 34K
02 E320 4Matic Silver/grey 80K
05 F150 Silver 44K

Is this usual with auto glass companies? The glass technician saw rust, which spread to the visible outside area in 10 months, but just put the glass?

The glass company agrees that the bubble probably comes from under the trim near the windshield.

Hoverer, they say they did not do anything wrong. This is what they are saying:
The technician noticed pre-existing ‘surface’ rust. So the tech is not responsible for the paint bubble.
I asked why the technician did not notify me about the rust. They said it was because I was not there. The car was at an MB dealer, and the technician notified the rust to the dealer ‘verbally’. However, the dealer did not say anything about the rust to me. On the glass company’s invoice or warranty document, there is nothing written about the pre-existing rust around the windshield.

Anyway, the local glass shop’s boss is on vacation. When he comes back, he will have his insurance company’s adjuster see my car and determine what he can do for me.


=======================
Below is detail.

Amica: my auto insurance company. The windshield replacement was covered by the insurance.

J: the glass company that replaced my car’s windshield in June 2004.

Teleglass: the company that deals with billing issue between Amica and J.

J at W: local branch of J at city W.

F: my car was located at this MB dealer when the windshield was replaced. J at W is this MB dealer’s choice for glass work. They recommend J at W to their customers, technicians at J at W come often to this dealer to replace or repair auto glass for this dealer’s customers, the technicians at J at W know the name of service advisors at this MB dealer.


M: the person at Amica who responded to my question about the paint bubble.

R: the person at Teleglass with whom I talked.

D: the technician at J at W who replaced my windshield in June 2004.

W: the person at J at W with whom I talked on April 22. 2005.




M’s reply e-mail is below.
----------
I spoke with the glass carrier; they are going to send someone out from J**** to view the damage you are saying were caused by the windshield replacement. J***** guarantees their work.


If it was not caused by the glass replacement, then it would be considered regular “wear and tear” and would not be covered by your insurance.
----------




I talked with R over the phone in the morning, April 22. 2005.
-----------
Although R did not see my car, he said he was sure that the bubble had nothing to do with the glass work. He emphasized that old cars have rust, especially near trims.

I: There is no stone chip or scratch near the bubbles, so the bubbles seem to be coming from under the trim right above the windshield.
R: The bubbles are then due to “micro” stone chip that is not visible with bare eyes.

R: When did you notice the bubbles.
I: About two weeks ago.
R: It is impossible that the bubbles are due to glass work. If the tech scratched paint, the rust should have spread to the visible outside area in several days. It cannot be noticed after 10 months.

I: I respect your professional opinion, but I want to have a technician see my car.
R: That is fine.
-----------



I talked with W at the local glass shop in the afternoon, April 22. 2005
-----------
W seemed to agree that the bubble was due to rust under the trim, but he did not remove the trim.

W: The rust is not due to faulty work of D. When D worked on your car, he noticed a lot of pre-existing rust under the trim. He primed the metal for proper glass adhesion, but he did not treat rust on painted area. That should be done by body shop. I sent fax to our insurance. So an adjuster will see the car, and by boss will determine what to do. He is currently on vacation.

I: Oh, there was pre-existing rust. Why didn’t D notify me about it?

W: Because you were not there. Your car was at F, MB dealer.

I: You had my phone number.

W: He told about the rust to Al (the name of the service advisor at F).

I: Al did not say anything about rust to me. Did D say about rust verbally?

W: Yes.

I: Here, it reads that the warranty will not be valid if rust/corrosion is present at time of initial replacement. Because rust is so important, shouldn’t it be documented?

W: D said about rust verbally, because it was “surface” rust. “Surface” rust does not void warranty. I am sorry that you did not hear about the pre-existing rust at that time. Our technician do the job carefully. We do not scratch paint during work, and we prime the metal for proper adhesion. That is why F chose us. If the bubble were due to D’s improper work, then you would not see this bubble now. 10 months is too short. It takes much longer time for the rust to creep this distance.

I: R at Teleglass said the opposite. It takes much less than 10 months for the rust to spread.

W: I have been working for 18 years on auto glass.

I: Rust on painted area can spread to the area where there is adhesive, and make the adhesion of glass weak and affect safety.

W: Eventually, yes.
-----------


I talked to R over the phone in the afternoon, April 22. 2005
-----------
I: The glass tech saw pre-existing rust and told it to the dealer, but I did not hear anything about rust, and nothing about rust is documented on the invoice. In such case, is there anything Teleglass can do for customer?

R: What do you want me to do?

I: I am asking.

R: According to what you said, there was pre-existing rust. The bubble is not due to the tech’s fault. Your car is 13 years old. Old cars have rust.

I: In this case, I was not notified about rust.

R: Does it leak?

I: No.

R: If the pre-existing rust is so severe that it will cause rust, the technician stops the work and contacts you. In your case, there was pre-existing rust, but it was not so severe, so the tech just put the glass, and you do not have leak. Old cars have rust. Nothing wrong.

I: If it does not leak, then it is perfect job? That’s very bad glass company.

R: We are repeating the same talk. What do you want me to do?

I: I see what you are saying. Thanks.
-----------


I talked to M over the phone in the afternoon, April 22. 2005
-----------
I: Is it usual that a glass technician puts the glass even there is rust around, and record nothing about the rust on the invoice or warranty documents?

M: I do not know. Anyway, if there was pre-existing rust, there is nothing I can do.
-----------



I talked to a local body shop on April 23, 2005.
He said the bubble is rust, and the rust is certainly coming from somewhere under the trim. He said he could not give estimate before removing both trim and glass.

__________________
1992 300D 2.5 turbo diesel. 319 k miles.
124.128 chassis, 602.962 engine, 722.418 tranny.

A person from JN Phillips visited, and opened the trim. There is rust area under the bubble right to the adhesive.

The tech said it could not be due to scratch caused by JN Phillips technician 10 months ago.
I did not see any sharp scratch there, so I agreed.
The tech said he was sorry that the MB dealer had not told me about the rust. He said JN Phillips would remove and re-install windshield free if I choose to repair the rust at a body shop at my cost.

Anyway, I think glass shop should take more care about the rust adjacent to the adhesive, and notify the customer about the rust.
Even though the rust is pre-existing, not cause by the technician, the tech should take care of that.

__________________
1992 300D 2.5 turbo diesel. 319 k miles.
124.128 chassis, 602.962 engine, 722.418 tranny.