← New search

2001 Mercedes Benz C Class

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Limited comparison data

There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all C Class years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

Limited mileage data: 10 of 14 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Electrical System. Review the 4 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 3 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Equipment. Review the 2 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

0 crash reports0 fire reports0 injury reports

Power Train complaints

2 reports
Clear category filter
11,400 miles · Apr 20, 2009
Power Train

APRIL NOV 2004, I PURCHASED A 2001 C240 MERCEDES FROM PRINCETON MERCEDES IN NEW JERSEY. ONE MONTH AFTER DRIVING THE CAR SLOWED DOWN AS IF IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATED. I HAD TO TAKE IT BACK IN FOR REPAIR. THEY TOLD THEY COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM. HOWEVER 4/19/08 I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM OF DECELERATION WHILE DRIVING I WAS T…

Read full complaint

APRIL NOV 2004, I PURCHASED A 2001 C240 MERCEDES FROM PRINCETON MERCEDES IN NEW JERSEY. ONE MONTH AFTER DRIVING THE CAR SLOWED DOWN AS IF IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATED. I HAD TO TAKE IT BACK IN FOR REPAIR. THEY TOLD THEY COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM. HOWEVER 4/19/08 I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM OF DECELERATION WHILE DRIVING I WAS TOLD THIS TIME THAT IT WAS TRANSMISSION CONTROL UNIT. I HAVE BEEN RESEARCHING AND I BELIEVED THAT THIS WAS THE PROBLEM 4 YEARS AGO; HOWEVER THEY DID NOT WAS TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. I WANT TO KNOW WAS THERE A RECALL FOR THIS SPECIFIC TRANSMISSION CONTROL UNIT ON THESE TYPES OF CARS. I HAVE BEEN IN SEVERAL CHAT ROOMS AND THERE ARE VARIOUS COMPLAINTS REGARDING THIS TYPE OF PROBLEM. THE CAR WILL STOP IN TRAFFIC OR ON THE FREEWAY WITHOUT NOTICE. AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER TO A GAS STATION: HOWEVER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THERE WAS MAJOR TRAFFIC BUMPER TO BUMPER. I WANT THIS PROBLEM RESEARCHED. I BELIEVED THAT MERCEDES KNEW ABOUT A FLAW WITH THIS TRANSMISSION CONTROL UNIT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10266184

10,168 miles · May 11, 2004
Air BagsEquipmentPower Train

VARIOUS PROBLEMS WITH 2001 MERCEDES C240. *MR THE KEYLESS ENTRY REMOTE FAILED INTERMITTENTLY. THE WINDSHIELD WASHER AIMED TOO HIGH. THE FM RADIO RECEPTION WAS POOR. THE CLUTCH WAS RUBBING. THE SRS LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE DASH.

NHTSA ODI #10073800

Official recalls

0

No recalls in this snapshot.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

2

DP05007 · Transmission Malfunction

Opened Nov 7, 2005 · Closed Mar 27, 2006

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission; Power Train:automatic Transmission:control Module (tcm/pcm/tecm)

THE PETITIONER ALLEGES THAT COFFEE FROM A CUP, PLACED IN THE CUP HOLDER, SPILLED ONTO THE GEAR SHIFTER AND SHUT DOWN THE VEHICLE?S ENTIRE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. THE CONCERN RAISED BY THE PETITIONER WAS INVESTIGATED (SQ01-010) AND WAS CLOSED AFTER ODI CONCLUDED THAT THE FACTS DID NOT DEMONSTRATE A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT.ODI HAS SUBSEQUENTLY RECEIVED NINE MORE COMPLAINTS ALLEGING FLUID CONTAMINATION OF THE TRANSMISSION SHIFTER SINCE THE INVESTIGATION WAS CLOSED, NONE OF WHICH REPORT CRASHES OR INJURIES.THESE NINE COMPLAINANTS MAINLY EXPRESSED DISSATISFACTION WITH THE DESIGN OF THE CUP HOLDER AND THE COST OF REPLACING THE CONTAMINATED ELECTRONIC SELECTOR MODULE.SIMILARLY, IN PETITIONER?S CASE SHE WAS ABLE TO OPERATE THE VEHICLE TO A PLACE WHERE IT COULD BE SAFETY STOPPED AFTER THE LIQUID SPILLAGE.THE PETITIONER HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING AND THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Power Train:automatic Transmission:control Module (tcm/pcm/tecm)

THE PETITIONER ALLEGES THAT COFFEE FROM A CUP, PLACED IN THE CUP HOLDER, SPILLED ONTO THE GEAR SHIFTER AND SHUT DOWN THE VEHICLE?S ENTIRE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. THE CONCERN RAISED BY THE PETITIONER WAS INVESTIGATED (SQ01-010) AND WAS CLOSED AFTER ODI CONCLUDED THAT THE FACTS DID NOT DEMONSTRATE A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT.ODI HAS SUBSEQUENTLY RECEIVED NINE MORE COMPLAINTS ALLEGING FLUID CONTAMINATION OF THE TRANSMISSION SHIFTER SINCE THE INVESTIGATION WAS CLOSED, NONE OF WHICH REPORT CRASHES OR INJURIES.THESE NINE COMPLAINANTS MAINLY EXPRESSED DISSATISFACTION WITH THE DESIGN OF THE CUP HOLDER AND THE COST OF REPLACING THE CONTAMINATED ELECTRONIC SELECTOR MODULE.SIMILARLY, IN PETITIONER?S CASE SHE WAS ABLE TO OPERATE THE VEHICLE TO A PLACE WHERE IT COULD BE SAFETY STOPPED AFTER THE LIQUID SPILLAGE.THE PETITIONER HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING AND THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.

Power Train:automatic Transmission

THE PETITIONER ALLEGES THAT COFFEE FROM A CUP, PLACED IN THE CUP HOLDER, SPILLED ONTO THE GEAR SHIFTER AND SHUT DOWN THE VEHICLE?S ENTIRE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. THE CONCERN RAISED BY THE PETITIONER WAS INVESTIGATED (SQ01-010) AND WAS CLOSED AFTER ODI CONCLUDED THAT THE FACTS DID NOT DEMONSTRATE A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT.ODI HAS SUBSEQUENTLY RECEIVED NINE MORE COMPLAINTS ALLEGING FLUID CONTAMINATION OF THE TRANSMISSION SHIFTER SINCE THE INVESTIGATION WAS CLOSED, NONE OF WHICH REPORT CRASHES OR INJURIES.THESE NINE COMPLAINANTS MAINLY EXPRESSED DISSATISFACTION WITH THE DESIGN OF THE CUP HOLDER AND THE COST OF REPLACING THE CONTAMINATED ELECTRONIC SELECTOR MODULE.SIMILARLY, IN PETITIONER?S CASE SHE WAS ABLE TO OPERATE THE VEHICLE TO A PLACE WHERE IT COULD BE SAFETY STOPPED AFTER THE LIQUID SPILLAGE.THE PETITIONER HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING AND THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.

SQ01010 · Sudden Engine Shut Down

Opened Sep 25, 2001 · Closed Feb 4, 2002

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling

No summary supplied.