Thank you for all of your posts. They have all been insightful. I am now convinced that there is some form of design, how should I put this delicately, oversight from Mercedes. It is my opinion at this time, that due to reputation and monetary concern Mercedes may have been less than forthcoming with information on this engine. Given my extensive mechanical/engineering background I am forced to believe that the post by Jim Smith is most accurate. There is no reason that a part, such as a connecting rod should suffer failure in so many instances, given that no other component parts have failed. There does seem to be a dearth of evidence that shows that this is the case with this engine. I would still like to know if anyone out there has any knowledge of improved rods for my 350. If there are modified or improved rods then the problem can be remedied. The only question left then is, how much will they cost and who will pay for them. Having worked before in the role of a contract negotiator I believe that Mercedes and the owners of affected cars can settle our grievances equitably. I have a part-time job working in a law office as a research analyst, and have many favors to call in if things get ugly. First since Mercedes dealers appear to be tight lipped about these parts I really do need all of your help in ascertaining if these improved rods are indeed factual and not a myth. Second I would request that all those who have had problems with their 350 engines contact me either on this list or through my email with all of their details. It is my intention that I/we receive some compensation from Mercedes in this matter. I believe that it would be to all our collective interest, Mercedes included, to see a solution to this dilemma that would bring about a robust and long lived 350 engine. Any assistance that can be rendered will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

__________________
T.W.
1987 300D 170,000 Mi.
1990 350SDL 105,000 Mi.
1979 450SL 147,000 Mi.
1976 U 1300 Unimog 4400 H
1963 Piper Cherokee 160 1800 H