[KBelov]

Dear Mercedes owners:

Isn't it time for us to raise our complaints to government officials once again about the deteriorating wiring harness in our cars? We now learn that NTSB is waiting for 911 call from a driver seconds before a crash that kills several people to take an action. None of us wants to be that driver! We already know that defective wiring harness in our MB engine and electronic accelerator (ETA) can lead to problems with engine RPM and fires. I personally know a lady whose car was burned due to a faulty engine wiring harness. I think this is the best time to contact the NTSB again, possible in a coordinated action. Seeking your opinion about this matter.

 

[deanyel]

They are now 15+ year old cars, with a 15+ year history of no one being hurt by the problem. NHTSA is interested only in safety issues, not long term maintenance problems.

 

[Zeitgeist]

Yeah, I think that ship has sailed, long ago

 

[bigwiki]

Wiring harness and head gasket really annoy me. These parts are so simple. I can't believe Mercedes made the mistakes. This is worst than the Toyota gas paddle problem. The Toyota problem only impacts several out of a million but the Mercedes problems exists in EVERY w124 from 92 to 95.

 

[gyrate]

Wiring harness and head gasket really annoy me. These parts are so simple. I can't believe Mercedes made the mistakes. This is worst than the Toyota gas paddle problem. The Toyota problem only impacts several out of a million but the Mercedes problems exists in EVERY w124 from 92 to 95.

Sometimes i come across a post that makes me shake my head and want to cry. This is one of these.

If you do some research, you will learn that the toyotas (incl lexus) of the same era were plagued with head gasket failures and oil sludge. V8s excluded


Also, what is a gas paddle? My feet must not be big enough to use one of those

 

[KBelov]

If you do some research, you will learn that the toyotas (incl lexus) of the same era were plagued with head gasket failures and oil sludge. V8s excluded

Everyone can make a mistake. It is a matter how Mercedes handled those particular mistakes. My 1992 W124 wagon has had its head gasket changed twice, but I do not complain. I just appreciate marvelous engineering of M103 engine. The problem became obvious years later. Replacing the engine is not an option.

Engine wiring harness on the other hand is an obvious blunder and a safety issue. Mercedes should have replaced the wiring harness by a quick recall and be done with that. This is just one of the chain events that hurt Mercedes reputation, turned many customers away from Mercedes-Benz cars and eventually forced once a great company into a deadly spiral of deteriorating quality in order to cut costs to be able to compete with cheaper Asian makes. This is of cause my personal opinion.

 

[neanderthal]

Wiring harness and head gasket really annoy me. These parts are so simple. I can't believe Mercedes made the mistakes. This is worst than the Toyota gas paddle problem. The Toyota problem only impacts several out of a million but the Mercedes problems exists in EVERY w124 from 92 to 95.

Headgasket?
Not in four cylinder or 8 cylinder models. Short length of engine makes for more even heat distribution in comparison to the 6 cylinder engine. Ergo, no head gasket problem.

 

[Ron500E]

Engine wiring harness on the other hand is an obvious blunder and a safety issue. Mercedes should have replaced the wiring harness by a quick recall and be done with that. This is just one of the chain events that hurt Mercedes reputation, turned many customers away from Mercedes-Benz cars and eventually forced once a great company into a deadly spiral of deteriorating quality in order to cut costs to be able to compete with cheaper Asian makes. This is of cause my personal opinion.

I have agree, up to a point.
I believe MB was mandated by certain laws, ushered through by people who, interestingly, refer to themselves by traditional Christmas colors - usually green or red, that required the wiring to be biodegradable to "help the environment."
How can that be bad, what can possibly go wrong.

In theory it was a good idea, just as in theory a Space Shuttle made of a lightweight material, such as hay for example, would use less fuel to achieve orbit. Or in theory a Hummingbird can't fly.

The funny point is that with the replacement of all the harnesses not to mention the pollution generated by the manufacturing of the new harnesses and the poor running of the cars before the problem was correctly diagnosed I would bet that pollution was increased 10 fold over what would have happened if they just let well enough alone.
But in certain circles there's no glory in maintaining the status quo, no matter how good that status quo may be.
That is a lesson that many companies and countries need to learn IMHO. If it aint broken, don't fix it. Or sometimes "the fix" causes more problems than the original problem.
The Great God of Unintended Consequences, and his maker of laws - Murphy, wield their mighty swords often when it comes to change.

As far as turning people away... truer words were never spoken. The quality of some of the post 124 cars were at many times dismal. The bean counters from Jeep held sway, not the engineers. You kind of expect certain problems from a $5000 Yugo, not from a $50,000 Mercedes.

That is why the 124 is the last of the best and the 500E is the best of the last.
Those days are gone forever I fear.
Just my 500E cents.

Ron

 

[gyrate]

Everyone can make a mistake. It is a matter how Mercedes handled those particular mistakes. My 1992 W124 wagon has had its head gasket changed twice, but I do not complain. I just appreciate marvelous engineering of M103 engine. The problem became obvious years later. Replacing the engine is not an option.

Engine wiring harness on the other hand is an obvious blunder and a safety issue. Mercedes should have replaced the wiring harness by a quick recall and be done with that. This is just one of the chain events that hurt Mercedes reputation, turned many customers away from Mercedes-Benz cars and eventually forced once a great company into a deadly spiral of deteriorating quality in order to cut costs to be able to compete with cheaper Asian makes. This is of cause my personal opinion.

Safety issue because you have data that actually backs that up? by all means then, present it. Until then, you are just barking up the maintenance tree.. And it's a big tree, exhausted on every forum, dealership service floor and independant shop waiting room.

 

[Blago]

haha Ya, that ship has sailed long ago. Harness and headgasket problems started occurring on these cars years after the initial purchase, and in most cases it was after many miles. In fact there are still high mileage cars out there running on the original harness 15 years later. By that time Benz was well into other models with the W210/W211. And as said, none of these are a safety issues.

As for the cost cutting, that really killed the reputation. Just compare the interior of a 96 S-class to a 95 S-class and you'll see it first hand. Cheaper buttons, crappier materials used etc. It's easier for a small company to get bigger and control quality, like Lexus (Toyota) did in the early 90's, then for a big company like Mercedes to scale down and cut costs like they did in the mid 90's.

 

[Sergio]

I think it is time for us to get over the headgasket and wiring harness issues. These cars are between 15 and 18 years old. While MB should have corrected the problem then, they are not going to dig into the history of these older cars and remedy their defficiencies. Don't forget that Toyota also swept their problems under the rug and the only reason they recalled all these millions of vehicles is because they HAD to (secretary of transportation forced the issue).
If you are unhappy with your 2 decade old W124 because of HG and wiring issues, then get a different car. Otherwise accept the good (most) with the bad (little) and enjoy the ride and next time you get into a serious accident and the W124 saves your life, you will feel less angry at HG and wiring issues....

 

[Jayare]

I think it is time for us to get over the headgasket and wiring harness issues. These cars are between 15 and 18 years old. While MB should have corrected the problem then, they are not going to dig into the history of these older cars and remedy their defficiencies. Don't forget that Toyota also swept their problems under the rug and the only reason they recalled all these millions of vehicles is because they HAD to (secretary of transportation forced the issue).
If you are unhappy with your 2 decade old W124 because of HG and wiring issues, then get a different car. Otherwise accept the good (most) with the bad (little) and enjoy the ride and next time you get into a serious accident and the W124 saves your life, you will feel less angry at HG and wiring issues....

Very well stated Sergio.........

Jayare

 

[deanyel]

Not all 92 to 95s have a bad harness - there were lots of CIS cars in 92-93 that were not afflicted. It was only the LH and HFM engines in that era. In my view the bad wiring harness cars w/o ASR were simply the finest cars that MB ever made, and by no small margin. The whole episode was stupid but a one time wiring harness replacement is an insignificant issue in the bigger picture.

 

[KBelov]

If you are unhappy with your 2 decade old W124 because of HG and wiring issues, then get a different car. Otherwise accept the good (most) with the bad (little) and enjoy the ride and next time you get into a serious accident and the W124 saves your life, you will feel less angry at HG and wiring issues....

This thread is couple months old, but still. If you read my posts carefully, I accept the head gasket issue. Engineering mistakes do happen. I do mine as well. I recently changed the head gasket and my only complain is the lack of an appropriate garage, but it is my problem not MB's. Otherwise the job is fun.

As for the wiring harness, following your logic, GM does not have to recall 11 year old cars due to possible brake line corrosion. At the end, brake failure is not much worse than the engine fire. Owners should just shut up and drive!

 

[deanyel]

As for the wiring harness, following your logic, GM does not have to recall 11 year old cars due to possible brake line corrosion. At the end, brake failure is not much worse than the engine fire. Owners should just shut up and drive!

You have a logic path all your own there. I'd say there's a lot of difference between brake line failure and an engine fire, and indeed wiring harness engine fires are extremely rare.

 

[sammywater]

I have owned a slew of Mercedes and none of them have ever experienced a head gasket issue. My W201 2.6 has 240,000 miles and runs like a swiss watch on its first head gasket. My coupe is all original too and runs perfectly. I think as long as I maintain their cooling systems they proper way, I am not going to have any problem. Maintenance is the key. As for the wiring harness 93-95, if I owned one of those I'd replace the wiring harness and call it good.

 

[imon_2nd]

NHTSA only counts dead and injured, not money or time.

As many have said already, the wiring harness and head gasket defects are notable but have never killed or injured anybody as far as the people in this forum know.

Soon after I bought my M-B in 2005, I wrote to the NHTSA about the harness issue, thinking it was related to safety. They added my "complaint" to their M-B electrical issues list, which they "monitor." There must be thousands of entries on that list by now. However, until some bodies pile up, nothing will be done.

I figure that both the harness and gasket replacements are simply part of the cost of ownership of these cars. They are worth repairing and driving.

Cheers,

Dave

 

[KBelov]

You have a logic path all your own there. I'd say there's a lot of difference between brake line failure and an engine fire, and indeed wiring harness engine fires are extremely rare.

GM brake failures are extremely rare! Only 3 cases reported with 6.2 millions cars potentially affected. Let's do the math : 3/(6.2*10^6) ~= 0.5*10^-6 = 0.00005 % - NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. Even with 37 cars found to have problems, the number is roughly 0.0005 %.
I will let you to do the exact math for MB. Even a single fire reported will send these numbers orders of magnitude higher. There are several though. And how many cars from 94-95 will reveal bad harness? Do we even need to do the math here or just take the production numbers for those years.

Now, what is more rare?

We will note your preference to die from an accident started by a fire on board, rather than brake failure. Did you have a chance to look at Tata Motors recent products? They burst into flames on occasion, but you share the common view with Tata - the cases are very rare and nothing to worry about.

MB should make a safety recall on wiring harness. Mercedes should charge the cost of this recall on the government that forced the company to go "green" with untested product. I bet MB fought that decision. It is ultimately a taxpayer's fault who voted for their government officials who created "green buzz" to gain political capital and voters did not bother to study the facts. By the way, I buy dishwasher detergent with maximum phosphate content. I will have to use it anyway after "green" products that work no better than clean water. Somebody already mention it, pollution created by bad wiring harness far exceeded any potential damage from wiring degrading on the land field. If say a big manufacturer finds out that O2 sensors are defective. Is it a recall? Or we just let the cars pollute for 10 more years?

 

[deanyel]

But it's time to get over it. MB convinced the US government that wiring harness failures were not a safety risk, and it would appear that they were correct.

 

[KBelov]

But it's time to get over it. MB convinced the US government that wiring harness failures were not a safety risk, and it would appear that they were correct.

Would you please point to investigation by the government? I did not find any official investigation ever conducted.

But here is an example of what I found. It is only for E320 1994 Model year.

ODI ID Number : 10217590:
THE WIRING HARNESS IS DEFECTIVE. ALL THE INSULATION AROUND EACH WIRE HAS DISINTEGRATED. THE CAR DIED AS I PULLED INTO HEAVY TRAFFIC.

ODI ID Number : 10202468:
WIRING PROBLEM. WHILE DRIVING AND IT WAS RAINING AT THE SAME TIME, MY LIGHTS WENT OFF AND THE WIPERS STOPPED WORKING, LEADING TO A CRASH ON HIGHWAY I-44. *JB

Source: Office of Defects Investigation (ODI)

Out of 10 reports for that model year, one involves an accident. Another - potential danger. Let's take just one - the accident. That is 10% of reported cases. 10% is roughly the same as 3/37 GM vehicles with problems. I have troubles finding the total production numbers for all 1994 E320 variations, so correct me if I am too far off. I assume 100,000 units were built. 50,000 sold in US. Let's do the math 1/50000 = 0.2 *10^-4 = 0.002 %. That means the Mercedes accident rate caused by a faulty wiring harness about 40 times higher than GM's rate due to faulty brakes. Same math applies for reported cases. 10/50000. I feel sorry for GM. Toyota's recall backfired? Do Toyota's numbers. I bet they are close to GM.

That all reminds me Firestone tires, that were OK for 100 years until the company was bought by Japanese for hefty price. "Suddenly" the tires started to pop up on Ford Explorer vehicles. And a massive recall was initiated. Nothing personal, just business.

Assumption that all Mercedes owners know about the wiring harness problem and can address it is WRONG. Most MB owners never visit these discussion boards and are uninformed about the potential danger. Mercedes can at least supply a fire extinguisher with a warning sign to be attached to the sun visor

Is it fair to ask that people who advocate to "get over it" will say the same to the family of the first people to die due to this problem? I consider these cars to be one of the best ever made and assume that people will keep them for a very long time. So, let's just wait for the first death to be reported. And pray that a Mercedes running out of control with flames under the hood will not hit our loved ones. Or, the proud owner will have time to unbuckle the child from the back seat when the fire starts. The probability of a tragedy is very low, isn't it?