MB Wiring Harness Failure
 

As most of you know, Mercedes has declined to own up to the engine wiring harness defect in the 1991-1996 model years, and issue a "goodwill" recall.

I just called MBUSA, and I am not *to say the least* satisfied by their response.

Following, is a list of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-EIGHT (updated 6-19-2006) reported consumer complaints (and a number of FIRES..!) that I found on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website concerning the chronic engine compartment wiring harness failure suffered by 1991 through 1996 Mercedes Benz automobiles.

This list is not--by any means--meant to be complete, as it only lists those reports that I was able to locate. Note that the first complaint on the list is mine:
http://sites.google.com/site/infoage1/mercedes-benz-1991-1996-engine-wiring-harness-defect

If your Mercedes has suffered from the same defect (and it will), please call MBUSA and ask to speak to a supervisor at MBUSA who claims to have NEVER heard of this problem:

1-800-FOR-MERCEDES (1-800-367-6372)

In fact, as you read through the list, notice the arrogance by which the consumer is told this same lie, over and over, by MBUSA.

Click the link below to see hi-resolution images of two typical defective MB wiring harnesses (remarkable pics):
http://sites.google.com/site/infoage1/mercedes-benz-1991-1996-engine-wiring-harness-defect/images



Please file your own complaint with the NHTSA here, and be added to the list:

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


edited on 10-25-05 to include model year 1991 vehicles...
edited on 04-22-06 to include model year 1996 vehicles...


.

<<
who claims to have NEVER heard of this problem
>>

MBUSA has never heard of a problem on Mercedes-Benz cars. They are so perfect. If you have a head gasket problem on M103 and M104 motors, you are th eonly one because they have never head from any other owners.

This bad atitude and poor customer service is really hurting the quality and reputation of the brand.

Many MB models are among the used cars to avoid in the annual Consermers Report car issue.

You are flogging a DEAD horse!

That reply is consistent from MB about that problem!

m/b dead horses and wire harness defects
 

It has been known that occasionally, even "dead" horses can be "flogged" to life! Keep after them, and then advise proper authorities. Consider small claims court in your area. good luck, Abe G

Absolutely.

This should have been a recall item, and, with perseverance, I believe will be. The local service manager told me that Mercedes did replace these up until two or three years ago, but suddenly stopped, with no explaination.

Today, I printed and mailed all 19 pages, some 60 collected complaints, back to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's "Office of Defect Investigation," as well as a link to the web page I made.

Trust me, I WILL get their attention. And with luck, I will find someone in the NHTSA, or the FTC, with the balls to go after MB.

Numbers are what will give this thing momentum, so if you are having an engine wiring harness problem (or did), you can file your own complaint with the NHTSA here, and be added to the list:

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


.

There is a DIY article here on how to replace the wiring harness. It has step by step instructions and pictures. I can't recall for which engine it was. It seems like a fairly straight-forward thing to do, not any more difficult than changing plug wires.

My daughter's 300TE had some stalling issues. Enrique at Mr. M.B. MOTORS diagnosed the problem as a wiring harness issue. Before ordering a new wiring harness, Enrique took the time to check the wiring and was able to locate the culprit. Some wires were cahnged/re-routed and now the car runs great. We did not need to change the entire harness.

I know we all wish that MB would fix all of our cars' problems. But I have to tell you, I have owned many different brands of cars, it is hard to find a car built as solidly as the W124 or the W126 bodies (I have no experience with newer Benzes). My daughter's 300TE has 190k on the clock and it runs like a champ. Several years ago I sold my '84 300SD with over 300k on the clock, that car is still running strong. The new owners (family friends) still drive it on a daily basis and they love it. BTW, the husband is a German engineer and he loves diesels. I sold my '91 420SEL with almost 250K on the clock. That car is still running great. The new owner took care of the few problems that it had and she loves her "new" car.

By contrast, I now drive a 1999 Seville SLS. Talk about a POS. It has 48k miles and it has been in the family since it was new (it was Dad's car). Since October of last year it has had over $6k worth of tranny work. Fortunately for me, I bought an extended warranty, so all the repair bills have been paid for by GM. I, however, shudder to think what will happen when the extended warranty expires.

If you think that MB is cold and heartless towards its customers then try dealing with GM. The GM "customer care" center is the biggest joke in the world. For example, my highly touted Northstar engine, allegedly the best/greatest/finest engine ever made by GM (at least according to their own literature) consumes one quart of oil every 750 - 1k miles. It has been doing this since new.

When Northstars owners complain about the engine's thirst for oil, GM's reply is: 1. this is normal, 2. manufacturing tolerances (or lack thereof) cause some engines to consume more oil than other engines, 3. this is a "built-in" feature to make sure that there is always a supply of fresh oil in the engine or 4. we NEVER heard of this problem (I actually got that answer once).

Sure, it would be nice if Benz fixed the wiring harness problem, or if they took care of the cracking dashboards on some W123 or W126 cars or if they fixed the peeling clearcoats on some older Benzes. But try finding another car that will consistently give owners such driving pleasure and longevity of use and I am sure that you will find that no other car comes even close to Benz.

So enjoy what you have and thank God that you don't drive a Cadillac Seville. (BTW go to www.cadillacforums.com and see how even the much-touted new STS is full of problems. GM will NEVER get it right).

Enjoy.

I'd be happy enough if MB were to simply hand me a new harness. I could certainly manage the installation. From everything I've read (and as you note), it's a fairly simple swap.

One of the things the MBUSA rep told me that pissed me off, he tried to draw an analogy to the engine control wiring harness and brake pads/tires.

WTF?

Since when are wiring harnesses considered "consumables?"


.

I agree with you that sometimes it is not the product itself that creates the "problem" but, rather, the inane responses from service reps and other company hacks. I am well versed on cars, and sometimes their responses make me feel like they must think I am a doofus from Palookaville. It is when they insult my intelligence that I blow a gasket.

Have you tried negotiating? Maybe they go half and half on the cost of a new harness?

Harnesses became "consumables" when the Germans allowed the "Green Party" to take over industrial decisions. The wiring harness is supposed to be biodegradable. This is because of Germany's countless environmental laws. Some of which make sense, some of which are totally stupid. The wiring harness is one example of the stupid ones. The harnesses began to degrade way before the car's "normal" life.

Another stupid law is the requirement that before you get a fishing license, you have to demonstrate to the German Fish & Game people that you know how to kill a caught fish with a single hammer blow to the head.

Good luck in your quest to make them address the harness issue. On the other hand, thank God you don't drive a POS Cadillac Seville.

Good Luck with your battle, I have tried before here too, hopefully you have more luck and drive than I did after I got my harness. ;)
Chris
http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/tech-help/56427-attn-w124-owners.html
http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/tech-help/50276-94-e320-stalling-problems.html

I think it is time for Mercedes to step up to the plate and take responsibility for these harnesses! Consumables??? What else are we going to find out is a consumable? How soon should I expect to replace my airbag and be sure it will still work? Where is the schedule in my manual for changing my wire harness? Had someone said something before I bought the car about changing the harness every 60,000-70,000 miles I might have passed over it. And guess what else... Between my dad and 2 brothers, we own 13 mercedes benz, (enough to start our own mercedes club) guess how many need harness replaced? 1 - mine and all the others are older and all run well and have never had a harness replacement! I wonder what the "consumable" schedule for those cars is! Way to go Mercedes!

Glitch Filing Complaint to NHTSA
 

I tried to file an on-line complaint using the link from Infoage1 and the website seems to have a flaw. It will ask what type of vehicle and the pull down gives only three choices, Buses..., Motorcycle, or Trailer. Finally, when the pro-forma complaint appears for review, the reason for the complaint, that was previously entered, goes missing. I'll try again tomorrow.

I offered customer service supervisor at MBUSA, as a suggestion: that I had been told that other MB owners had been handed a new harness, and were then responsible for their own installation.

But, well, given that he had NEVER EVER heard of the problem in the first place, my generous suggestion went unheard...

Evidently, being deaf is part of the MBUSA "customer service" rep job description...


Flanso,
Yes, please try again tomorrow. If you have to, there is a telephone number on that same link, and the NHTSA rep will cheerfully take your complaint verbally.

Also, add my web page to your online complaint. If your complaint is verbal, get an email address to sent it to. The more, and different, NHTSA people that read the scale and trend of the problem, the better the odds of a satisfactory resolution.

http://sites.google.com/site/infoage1/mercedes-benz-1991-1996-engine-wiring-harness-defect
.

Here's the letter I snail-mailed to the NHTSA along with the 19 pages of complaints. A similar letter (and link) was emailed to the FTC:


NHTSA
Office of Investigations
NSA-1001400
7Th Street SW
Washington DC 20590


July 11, 2005

Dear NHTSA:

Per our recent telephone conversation:

Mercedes-Benz Engine Wiring Harness Defect

Enclosed, please find a list of reported complaints that I found on your very own National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website concerning the chronic engine compartment wiring harness failure suffered by (at the least) 1992 through 1995 Mercedes Benz automobiles. This list is not, by any means, meant to be complete, as it only lists those reports that I was able to locate. Note that the first complaint on the list is mine.

I am outraged at Mercedes-Benz’ arrogant refusal to own up to, and take responsibility for, this extremely dangerous design and engineering defect. For the life of me (literally), I cannot understand why NHTSA has not investigated this dangerous situation, especially given the large number of complaints. I will not be satisfied with less than Mercedes’ immediate rectification.

http://sites.google.com/site/infoage1/mercedes-benz-1991-1996-engine-wiring-harness-defect

Sincerely,



.

Thank you infoage1
 

My 1995 E320 (87K miles) has not had a problem YET, but I would sure love it if the dealer just called me in for a recall replacement of the harness. It would be a load off my mind and I guess it would save me $1000.00 or more, if the dealer would fix it for me. I would be very happy if they just gave some kind of discount, like a free harness that I would have to pay to have installed. Thanks again for your efforts to help all of us with this issue.

Have 3 suspect cars with the same potential problem. I think it would be very nice if Mercedes took care of these issues. I know all three have the original wiring and no problems so far, and I check them on a regular basis.

If repeated pressuring from MB owners doesn't make MBUSA take action on these harnesses, perhaps a class-action lawsuit would?

From all of the MB/NHTSA complaints I read, I don't think a decent "Products Liability" law firm would have any trouble proving a claim. Ironically, it would probably take a serious injury to get a "decent" Products Liability law firm interested. Here's a broad description I pulled from the web:

Products Liability:

Products liability refers to a manufacturer or seller being held liable for placing a defective product into the hands of a consumer. Responsibility for a product defect that causes injury lies with all sellers of the product who are in the distribution chain. Potentially liable parties include the manufacturer, a manufacturer of component parts, the wholesaler, and the retail store that sold to the consumer.

The law requires that a product meet the ordinary expectations of the consumer. When a product has an unexpected defect or danger, the product cannot be said to meet those ordinary expectations. In general terms, defective products claims fall into three categories:

Design defects occur when it can be shown that the intentional design of the product makes it unreasonably dangerous;

Manufacturing defects exist when it can be demonstrated that the product does not conform to the designer's or manufacturer's own specifications;

Marketing defects include improper labeling of products, insufficient instructions, or the failure to warn consumers of a product's hidden dangers. A negligent or intentional misrepresentation regarding a product may also give rise to a products liability claim.


.

Interesting article:


"The Legal Duty to Report Safety Defects Belongs to Vehicle and Equipment Manufacturers

The plain and simple fact is that the legal obligation to report possible vehicle-related defects lies with Ford and Firestone, not the victims of defect-related crashes and their attorneys.

Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, a manufacturer is obligated to "notify" NHTSA when it learns of any safety defect in its products. See 49 U.S.C. § 30118. Ford and Firestone knew of problems associated with their products, knew there was a significant number of lawsuits, knew that consumers were suffering tread separations and related rollover crashes, and knew of approximately one thousand consumer complaints.

The companies did not provide NHTSA with this data, which included information as to deaths, injuries and property damage claims, insurance reports, warranty claims and repair records, as well as changes in the design parameters of the vehicle and tire. After evaluating their products in the early 1990s, Firestone replaced the ATX tire with the new Wilderness AT tire in 1995, and Ford redesigned the Explorer suspension system for the 1995 models. The companies, abrogating their statutory duty, knowingly failed to inform NHTSA of the growing problems with this lethal tire and vehicle combination.

In 1999, a year before the Ford/Firestone U.S. recall, Ford conducted foreign "recalls" of the Firestone tires in Venezuela and the Gulf Coast countries, a fact which the companies’ in-house counsel believed was necessary to report to NHTSA, and yet did not. Internal company memoranda uncovered in litigation show that the two companies made a conscious decision to withhold facts concerning the foreign recalls from NHTSA despite the fact that identical tires and vehicles had been and were being sold to millions of American consumers.

A new law, the Transportation, Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (TREAD) Act was enacted by Congress in November 2000, in recognition of the failure of manufacturers to disclose, and NHTSA to discover, the Firestone tire/Ford Explorer defect. The law clarifies the duty of companies to provide information regarding foreign recalls, and requires NHTSA to collect "early warning" information from the manufacturers, including lawsuits, complaints, warranty claims, deaths and injuries, etc. NHTSA is currently engaged in a rulemaking to define how this "early warning" information will be reported to the agency by manufacturers on a regular basis."

http://www.kraftlaw.com/Articles/ConsumerLawyersFirestoneFail.htm


.

InfoAge:

Since you are in California, let me offer the following suggestion. No law firm is going to take on a wiring harness case unless it is connected to a major injuries case. But you probably already knew/suspected that. The cost of putting on a products liability case against a major company such as M-B is simply prohibitive. No one will do it unless: (1) the client fronts the costs of hiring experts or (b) there are major. serious injuries, that can be directly attributable to the defective wiring harness (so there is a big pot of gold at the end of the litigation rainbow).

I suggest, however, that you look into California's business and Professions Code Sec. 17200 et seq. That is the Unfair Business Practice statute. Unfortunately the law was recently changed (by way of a proposition campaign, Prop 64) so that Sec 17200 is no longer available to private litigants.

Now only the State Attorney General or your local DA office can bring suit under B&P 17200. The good knows is that the standard of proof is different (and easier) than in a normal products liability case. Basically, B&P Sec. 17200 et seq say that ANY business practice is unfair if it gives a company an unfair edge over competitors. You don;t even have to show actual harm to a consumer.

In this case, if it can be proven/shown that M-B gained an unfair advantage over its competitors by using cheaper wiring harnesses, there "may" be a case.

What you should do is try to make an appointment with someone at the local office of the Attorney General's Office (in their Consumer Protection Section). If they agree to meet with you, then bring all your evidence for them to review. Explain to them how this has affected consumers not just in California but all over the US. The AG's Office successfully sued Enron to recover some of the money they overcharged California consumers. So the guys and gals at the AG's office know what they are doing.

I am not saying that they will agree to take on the case or that the case would be successful. It is, however, certainly worth taking a shot. In the good old days (last year) you could got o a private attorney and he or she might take the case. Now you need to go to the AG's Office, but it is still worth a try.

Good luck.

The simple answer is yes, "we really have a chance of getting" something done. In answer to my pointed question, the NHTSA told me there is no "statute of limitations" that a manufacturer can hide behind concerning vehicle defects.

For those interested, please call the NHTSA and ask for yourself:

DOT Vehicle Safety Hotline:

For more information dial NHTSA's toll-free hotline at
1-888-DASH-2-DOT (1-888-327-4236) 8:00AM to 10:00PM ET Monday-Friday.
Spanish speaking operators are available on the Hotline.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


.

Being an automotive engineer I'll have to get a little defensive of our colleague who dreamt up the idea. There'a a good chance it's not the engineer's fault, but fault of the manager who wouldn't budget enough resources to thoroughly test the product before putting this "wonderful" idea into production.

I call it "field testing".

made sure to post complaint to nthsb but also per previous thread (who do we really complain to?) sent a letter to Pual Halata!

Good idea. Anyone happen to have Paul's email addy?


.

For those who believe the Mercedes Benz NA line of bull***** that time shields them from a defective parts recall, click the "New recall information since" button on the NHTSA below link and note the vehicle age of the most recent defect recall results toward the bottom of the page.

Also note the number of "Potential Number Of Units Affected" in each case (especially the Fords):

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9241475/

This agrees with what the NHTSA told me some time ago, about there being, in no way, a "stautue of limitations" shield for Mercedes to hide behind.

That said, I'm still waiting to hear more from the NHTSA about our ongoing problems with the defective MB wiring harnesses:

MERCEDES-BENZ 1991-1996 ENGINE WIRING HARNESS DEFECT NHTSA COMPLAINT SUMMARIES


.

Well add me to this crusade.
I've contacted both the NHTSA and MB regarding this issue which indeed turned out to be safety related for myself. My 300e cut out while driving down the road and if it were to have happened on the highway, I might not be here posting this. This all happened last week, but only now has Joseph Leonardi from MB responded. I've also spoken to a regional rep via phone. They are, indeed, shrugging this off as an age related issue and therefore have no repsonsibility to cover any cost. I informed them of the several safety issues it could cause (including my own experience) and that the NHTSA has no statute of limitations on safety hazzards. We'll see where it goes from here. I have a CLK 430 which has been a gem, but am far more proud to drive my 93 300e. I wish MB would stand behind my older vehicle the way I do, and not only concern themselves with their newer stable (though I hear they could care less about them as well). I think once the CLK starts acting up its gone (better than dealing with the new breed of MB reps). I of course don't mind paying the higher repair costs, but not if it is a design flaw that could hurt my family. Best of luck to everyone in this.

Maybe you guys could get your dealer to replace the engine harness and then pay with a check using biodegrading ink that disappears by the time you get home.
When they call you and ask about the ink, you totally deny any knowledge of any such possible ink. :P

ozzy

Oh geez...Ozzy you crazy sob...what a genius idea...

croftynsteph,

I've added your complaint to my list. Perhaps you'd like to email the CEO of MBUSA, Ernst Lieb, and tell him how you really feel :D

ernst.lieb@mbusa.com

Ozzy,

That is, indeed, a brilliant idea; however, I believe we have a good shot at forcing MB to own up to and repair our defective harnesses. Stooping to their low level must remain a last resort.

.

Does anyone have an old decomposing engine harness they can send me?

My defective harness is still in place, and I would like to forward one to the NHTSA.

I recently printed and mailed to the NHTSA all of the similar complaints I found on their website, and the NHTSA is looking at this problem with greater interest.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/RepositoryFiles.cfm?module=COMPLAINTS&IfsDocId=10130247


Also, for those of you who have suffered this problem, but never took the time to file a complaint, NOW would be a VERY good time to do so... :)

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/


.

The problem with the NHSTA complaint forum is they have the model designation all screwed up for Mercedes. They list 300 400 500 series then e c s class all for the same model year and its confusing where to place your car. I posted mine a while back and I know its not included in your write up( 10128437 is the complaint number and its under 94 year model e class passenger car electrical underhood the last one of four complaints) I dont know how to put it on the website here. But anyway with the complaints spread out as far as they are it would be hard for anyone to see a pattern. Oh well best of luck!!

Chris

PS I spoke to John at Mercedes and he knows who you are Tom!! :D

Office of Defects Investigation



Complaints - Search Results
4 Records Displayed.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Report Date : September 13, 2005 at 06:58 PM
SEARCH TYPE : VEHICLE
YEAR : 1994
Make : MERCEDES BENZ
Model : E CLASS
Type : PASSENGER CAR


Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10025241 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: July 1, 2003
VIN : Not Available
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS ON MY 1994 MERCEDES-BENZ E320 IS CRACKED BECAUSE OF THE USE OF POOR WIRING INSULATION CAUSING MY CAR TO DIE IN THE MIDDLE OF DRIVING. TO RESTART IT, I HAVE TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP, PUT THE SHIFTER GATE TO P, TURN THE KEY ALL THE WAY BACK, AND FINALLY RESTART IT. IT IS VERY DANGEROUS BECAUSE I NEVER KNOW WHEN IT WILL OCCUR, I HAVE ALMOST BEEN IN MANY ACCIDENTS BECUASE OF THIS PROBLEM. THE BENZ TECHS TOLD ME THAT THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AND THAT MERCEDES-BENZ REFUSES TO MAKE IT A RECALL. *AK




Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10025560 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: July 7, 2003
VIN : WDBEA32E5RC...
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
ON 5 SEPARATE OCCASIONS OVER THE PAST 4 MONTHS MY CAR HAS SUDDENLY CUT OUT WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AND CITY STREETS, ALL WITHOUT ANY PRIOR WARNING. THESE INCIDENTS RESULTED IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL POWER, RESULTING IS POOR BRAKING AND STEERING. ON A PREVIOUS DEALER VISIT, THE CAR WAS INSPECTED AND SERVICED WITHOUT ANY PROBLEMS. THIS CAR IS NOW AT THE DEALER HAVING THE WIRING HARNESS REPLACED AS A COST OF $1500 WITHOUT ANY GOOD WILL FROM MERCEDES BENZ. THIS IS CLEARLY A MANUFACTURING DEFECT AFFECTING A LARGE NUMBER OF VEHICLES, HOWEVER THE MANUFACTURER STILL APPEARS TO BE IGNORANT TO THE FACT. THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE ON THE INTERNET SUGGESTING THAT THIS IS AN ONGOING PROBLEM.*AK




Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10074886 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: April 7, 2004
VIN : WDBEA34E7RC...
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
1994 MERCEDES BENZ E420- WIRING HARNESS IS DECAYING. THE WIRES ARE BRITTLE AND MELTING TOGETHER. THE INSULATION AROUND THE WIRE IS GONE; AS A RESULT, THE WIRE IS BARE AND UNSAFE. THE VEHICLE SUFFER FROM ALL TYPES OF PROBLEMS; SUCH AS, STALL ON THE HIGHWAY, SURGING IN TRAFFIC JAMS, AND GAUGES INTERMITTENTLY GO HAYWIRE.*AK




Make : MERCEDES BENZ Model : E CLASS Year : 1994
Manufacturer : MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC.
Crash : No Fire : Yes Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10128437 Number of Deaths: 0
Date of Failure: August 22, 2000
VIN : WDBEA32E8RC...
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING:FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
1994 E320 HAD INTERMINTENT RUNNING PROBLEMS. CAR WOULD STALL WITHOUT WARNING, ESPECIALLY DURING A RAIN OR AFTER WASHING THE CAR. REPLACED MANY PARTS(MASS AIR METER, TUNE UP, OVP RELAY, FUEL PUMP RELAY, ETC) TO CHASE THE PROBLEM, NONE OF WHICH SOLVED IT. BEGAN TO LOOK ON MERCEDES FORUMS AND FOUND THIS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM. BEFORE I REPLACED THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS IT BEGAN TO SMOKE HEAVILY FROM UNDER THE HOOD. I HAD AN EXTINGUSIHER WITH ME AND STOPPED IT FROM CATCHING FIRE. MERCEDES COVERED PART OF THE COST UNDER THEIR "GOODWILL" PROGRAM HOWEVER I HAD TO INSTALL IT WHICH TOOK ABOUT 8 HOURS. THE FIRST OCCURANCE HAPPEND AROUND 125K MILES HOWEVER IT WAS MANY MONTHS AND MILES LATER THAT THE PROBLEM WAS FIXED.

Thanks BadBenz94,

As you note, the NHTSA website/search is a mess. I forwarded your complaint, as well as the others I missed, to the engineers at NHTSA. In addition, I included some remakable pix from gerryvz at 500ecstasy.com (thanks Gerry).

hi-res:
http://sites.google.com/site/infoage1/mercedes-benz-1991-1996-engine-wiring-harness-defect

oh no...
 

looks like we lost a page of posts on this one...I continue to find it amusing that MB denies any knowledge of the problem when I speak to them...considering they did offer a goodwill recall in prior years and auto.consumerguide lists the harness issue as a common problem...

auto.consumerguide

The ASR on my '93 S500 comes on first thing in the morning intermitantly when I start the car. If I pump the gas pedal before I turn the key it starts fine. My mechanic that has worked on all of my Mercedes says that he doesn't even want to look at it because he says he KNOWS it's wiring related (either the harness or the throttle actuator) and he says that either one is a pain and very pricey. :eek:

I have filed a report with NHTSA and hope that we can get MBUSA to cough up the dough for a recall, but I'm not optimistic.

Just received a letter from one of Paul Halata's cronies...dismissing my issue b/c my car is 12 years old and has 165k miles and therefore, they have no responsibility. I know for a fact that the wiring problem dated back to a fairly early period in my car's life based on the "repairs" done to it. Some wires were resoldered together and many of the bundles were bound by electrical tape. It is my own fault for purchasing this car, I knew the harness would need to be done at some point but for the price I paid and the condition the car is in, I'm satisfied with the deal. It is the principle of the harness being a safety issue that causes me so much concern. They did tell me to have my car checked over by the dealership so that they can assess the problem, but it is too late for that one (besides my car is not in mint condition and they wouldn't give me a new harness anyway). That's fine. I replaced the harness a few weeks ago and it fixed my car's ailments. I plan on practicing some harness rewiring if I can get a hold of someone's old harness (I threw mine out in disgust). Then maybe I'll work something out where for a few bucks I'll rewire harnesses for people on here and see how that goes (I have a good bit of experience in soldering/rewiring).

You brought up a good point - is there an expiration date for the manufacturer's responsibility to satisfy a recall campaign? What if somebody drives their long neglected, but good running condition, Pinto into a Ford dealer?.... is Ford still resposible for installing the shield to protect the gas tank from rupture, to satisfy a recall that was mandated by NHTSA?

Absolutely if the problems involves a known defect. MB knew after about a year that the wiring harnesses were a problem. They should have replaced them then and there wouldn't be a problem today.

If you think that MB will replace them...think about the infamous 350SD

The short answer is NO.

I have been told several times by the NHTSA that time does not insulate (small pun) Mercedes, or any auto manufacturer, from being forced to issue a recall if the NHTSA mandates it as being necessary.

Witness the recalls of millions of older Ford and Toyota vehicles issued just last month. In Ford's case, there were many fires. In Toyota's, just seven confirmed cases. Certainly much less than problems we are suffering with the MB wiring harness issue.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9241475/


.

Anything new with this recall effort?

My car is just now having starting and stalling issues, and I can't find a record of the PO replacing the harness.

So far, no news for ya. We shall fight the good fight, until I win the lottery and move onto an Aston Martin.

That shouldn't be a problem. Just peel back the wire bundle armoring and inspect the wire insulation. If it looks 200 years old the engine wiring harness needs to be replaced.

Keep in mind that this problem is generally confined to model years 93-95. I suggest you list your car in your signature for the benefit of others helping you.

Does anyone know who made these defective wire harnesses? Was it MB themselves or was it outsourced to another company who used inferior wire? I just replaced mine on my '95 C280. The old wire harness was in unbelievably bad shape. Visible copper and insulation that would just snap in your hands like a toothpick.

I understand this wiring was outsourced to another company, who also made the same problem wiring for other european makes at the time.

MB should make good on all the wire harnesses and then sue or get reimbursed for the faulty wire harnesses (which most likely or clearly should have not passed minimal specifications). I would assume that every part that goes into an automobile has specific performance criteria that it must pass. Did they just pass on a bogus 'approved' spec sheet to MB? Sounds like a viable law suit to me.

I have seen the Delphi label on a new OEM replacment harness being sold by a German eBayer. My Bablefish translation said something to the effect, "new harness. not from old stock, will not have the problems of the old harnesses."

I have no idea who the original OEM harness maker was, or why MB chooses not to go after them.

Artikelbeschreibung, Gegenstand dieser Auktion:

Original Mercedes-Benz Motorleitungssatz für den 500E Motor, Typ M119.974 LH

passend für alle W124 500E bis Fahrgestellnummer WDB1240361B840526 (siehe Fahrzeugschein)

Zustand:

NEU !!! OVP und aus aktueller Produktion !!

(die Problematik ist allgemein bekannt, dass sich der alte Motorleitungssatz zerbröselt/hart wird und somit die Gefahr besteht Steuergeräte zu beschädigen)

Dieser angebotene Motorleitungssatz ist erst kürzlich produziert worden (siehe auch Produktionsdatum), also noch absolut weich von der Isolierung. Dies ist kein alter Lagerbestand !

http://i13.ebayimg.com/04/i/05/1b/59/77_1_b.JPG



.

so you knowingly purchased a USED car with a faulty wiring system and now want someone else to pay for its repair. :laugh3: :inquisiti

and you say its the "principle.":bowrofl:
:eek2: :bsflag:

how about the principle of buyer beware?

this isn't even buyers remorse. its buyers selected use of "principles" to their gain.

Yeah because its FAULTY AND DANGEROUS, thats why. What part of that do you not understand?

Chris

the part where he knew about it, bought it anyway, and now expects someone else to foot the bill.

if it was dangerous and he knew it, he shouldn't have bought it. period. the fact that he did obviates the danger from his point of view and as far as I'm concerned he has assumed all risks associated with the danger by buying it. its his fault for buying a known "defective" product. if his safety was paramount he wouldn't have bought it.

its like me going to a garage sale and buying some old lead based paint. then trying to sue someone for its Toxic effect.

Fair enough, your point well taken. But for all of those who did not, were not aware, purchased new etc, I definitely feel its Mercedes responsibility to fix a known and dangerous problem. :D
Chris

I actually don't expect them to reimburse me or any of that. I merely inquired about covering part of the cost of repair b/c if they had, I would have let the dealer fix it, rather than do it myself (selfish but at the time it was very cold here and I am w/o a garage). For example, if they had paid the labor then why not let them fix it and I'll cover the harness (which I did anyway). It's also the idea that if I had succeeded in that endeavor, others might also and I could pass on the info. I mentioned I was happy with the deal I got for the harness and the fact it fixed my issues. The principle is more their admission of guilt than it is me getting my money back. For what I've put into the car cost wise, it was a bargain. I only want MB to accept responsibility and take care of others who unknowingly are stuck with the issue.