beautiful 1987 300td, trap oxidizer? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

yellowbenz · #1 08-26-2006, 12:05 AM

This is my dream car. Absolutely perfect in appearance. Curious about the trap oxidizer. Wasn't this a recall item?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1987-Station-Wagon-LOW-MILES-IMMACULATE-DIESEL_W0QQitemZ150026647366QQihZ005QQcategoryZ6330QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem#ebayphotohosting

Kevin

1979 240D manual
1984 190D manual

#2 08-26-2006, 12:10 AM

"The car is absolutely stock including the original trap oxidizer which is warranted for life"

If they made this mistake, what else did they miss?

Jeremy5848 · #3 08-26-2006, 12:44 AM

Kevin, don't buy it sight unseen. If you can afford to go to Minneapolis to pick it up (or pay to have it delivered), you can afford to go to Minneapolis to check it out.

yellowbenz · #4 08-26-2006, 12:54 AM

Good point. I think the trap oxidizer problem/recall was more complicated than I originally thought. It sounds like there was more than one solution to the problem as far as I can tell from the archives. I believe he did have the recall performed after my review but will post the question to the seller. It sounds like he is a member so I think it is likely that he took care of the problem. I need to show this to my wife. She's not warming up to my idea of replacing the suburban/prius combo with a Dodge Sprinter van.

Kevin
1979 240D manual
1984 190D manual

Rich300TDMBZ · #5 08-26-2006, 02:27 AM

There are a couple of things in the description that do not make sense:
1.Quote "Within the first 30 days I owned the car I was noticing white smoke in the exhaust and took it to my local MB dealer who diagnosed it as needing a new head. Working with the dealer in Lexington where I bought the car, I had a new head put on in June, 1996 at my local dealer. The stamped number on the new head is "20". The car has run perfectly ever since". The #14 head lasted only 40K miles? I did not know of a #14 head that lasted for such a short milage - Mercedes should replace it free! Maybe they did. And since the head was replaced at the dealer, why was the trap oxidizer not removed?
2. He is "a member of the MercedesShop.com for many years" - what's is he doing there? He did not know about the trap oxidizer recall?
For those interested, it is best to go and check out the car, and not depend on the photos.

callenderevent · #6 08-26-2006, 02:30 PM

I can appreciate your concerns about the original oxidizer and the head on my car. To elaborate a little more on the circumstances I will provide a little more detail.

When my local dealer diagnosed the head problem they said it appeared the car had been overheated. I didn't find out for sure, but I think the original owner overheated the car and then traded it in. The dealer in Tennessee where it was traded "slapped" it back together and sold it to the dealer in Kentucky. This is what I was able to determine in talking to the dealer in Kentucky where I bought it.

The repair was about $4,000 and I ended up splitting it with the dealer I bought it from in Kentucky.

As for the trap oxidizer, I was told my my dealer there was no need to replace the original trap until it affected the performance of the car and that the replacement had a limited warranty. I can't answer why else they didn't suggest replacing it or why the dealer in Kentucky didn't replace it before I bought. As I said, my dealer has suggested leaving it stock until it needs replacement. I have the documentation and letter authorizing the warranty replacement coverage.

I felt compelled to put some of the info in my listing so as to disclose an occurence of this nature. If anyone in the forum has a recommendation regarding the trap oxidizer I would like to know so if it is a concern I can have it corrected.

Jmana · #7 08-26-2006, 02:53 PM

I always thought the trap supposedly contributed to head failures? Why would a mechanic recommend to leave it, especially when replacing a bad head? Would seem like the perfect time to get rid of it. Nice car though, love the color combo. I can see this car doing $15k on ebay.

#8 08-26-2006, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by callenderevent

If anyone in the forum has a recommendation regarding the trap oxidizer I would like to know so if it is a concern I can have it corrected.

It's a free recall. The trap will be replaced with a pipe and you will get a complete new exhaust system. If the turbo is damaged, they will also replace it free.

There is no reason what-so-ever to leave it on. It's a FREE recall. The engine will run better, you will get better MPG, and you get a FREE exhaust system in the process.

diametricalbenz · #9 08-26-2006, 03:18 PM

On a side note a friend just purchased a 1985 300D which had the trap still in place. Apparently WITH the recall campaign put into action the trap was suprisingly replaced with a new one. It may not apply to the 603's but perhaps their protocols have changed?

#10 08-26-2006, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diametricalbenz

On a side note a friend just purchased a 1985 300D which had the trap still in place. Apparently WITH the recall campaign put into action the trap was suprisingly replaced with a new one. It may not apply to the 603's but perhaps their protocols have changed?

On 84 and 85's, the Trap Oxidizer is replaced with an Oxidation Catalyst in the same place. I believe you can tell which it has by the part number stamped on it. It's basicly the same thing, just better built with different materials.

86-87 are replaced with a tube and the exhaust treatment is moved to after the turbo.

Hit Man X · #11 08-26-2006, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diametricalbenz

On a side note a friend just purchased a 1985 300D which had the trap still in place. Apparently WITH the recall campaign put into action the trap was suprisingly replaced with a new one. It may not apply to the 603's but perhaps their protocols have changed?

If they'd have just installed a new Trap on yours, I'd hit up a parts yard and pull an entire motor to score the emission-less stuff.