NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
23 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Sep 26, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel System, GasolinePower Train
BOUGHT THIS CAR WITH 38000 ON IT. THE GET UP AND GO SEEMED SLUGGISH BUT MECHANIC SAID IT CHECKED OUT. HAD SOME MAJOR ISSUES. CAR WOULD BARELY GO, WENT DIRECTLY TO MERCEDES DEALERSHIP. DEALER SAID FUEL PUMP WAS OUT $793. ALSO SAID I NEEDED TO SERVICE THE TRANSMISSION, $350. THEY ALSO SAID I HAD A MUCH GREATER PROBLEM. A BALANCE S…
Read full complaint
BOUGHT THIS CAR WITH 38000 ON IT. THE GET UP AND GO SEEMED SLUGGISH BUT MECHANIC SAID IT CHECKED OUT. HAD SOME MAJOR ISSUES. CAR WOULD BARELY GO, WENT DIRECTLY TO MERCEDES DEALERSHIP. DEALER SAID FUEL PUMP WAS OUT $793. ALSO SAID I NEEDED TO SERVICE THE TRANSMISSION, $350. THEY ALSO SAID I HAD A MUCH GREATER PROBLEM. A BALANCE SHAFT INSIDE THE MOTOR AND QUOTED ME $4600. THE CAR NOW HAS 55,000 MILES ON IT. THE WARRANTY WAS FOR 4 YEARS OR 50,000. THE CAR IS ONE YEAR OR 5,000 MILES OUT OF WARRANTY. IT IS HARD UNDERSTAND WHY THIS TYPE OF CATASTROPHIC FAILURE IS OCCURRING SO SOON AFTER THE WARRANTY IS UP. I CHECKED THIS OUT ONLINE AND IT SEEMS LIKE I'M FAR FROM THE FIRST OWNER TO HAVE THIS PROBLEM. I SAW A LAWSUIT, TOO BAD I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PARTICIPATE. I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT MERCEDES ISN'T DOING THE RIGHT THING ON ITS OWN. PLEASE HELP! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10427522
77,015 miles · Aug 23, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED: TWO DIAGNOSTICS SUGGESTED TWO SEPARATE PROBLEMS, WORN OUT BALANCE SHAFT AND ISSUES WITH THE INTAKE AND EXHAUST CAMSHAFT. CAR IS SLUGGISH ON ACCELERATION AND OCCASIONALLY WILL NOT SHIFT OUT OF FIRST GEAR. CAR MUST BE PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF, AND THEN THE COMPUTER RESETS. THIS IS A PERIODIC PROBLEM AND…
Read full complaint
ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED: TWO DIAGNOSTICS SUGGESTED TWO SEPARATE PROBLEMS, WORN OUT BALANCE SHAFT AND ISSUES WITH THE INTAKE AND EXHAUST CAMSHAFT. CAR IS SLUGGISH ON ACCELERATION AND OCCASIONALLY WILL NOT SHIFT OUT OF FIRST GEAR. CAR MUST BE PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF, AND THEN THE COMPUTER RESETS. THIS IS A PERIODIC PROBLEM AND IS A PARTICULAR HAZARDOUS PROBLEM ENTERING HIGH SPEED HIGHWAYS, WHICH I MUST DO ON A DAILY BASIS.
NHTSA ODI #10422033
29,000 miles · Aug 15, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE MISFIRED AND THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER WHO REPLACED THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND CAM SENSOR, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE CONTACT WAS WAITING FOR A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE MISFIRED AND THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER WHO REPLACED THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND CAM SENSOR, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE CONTACT WAS WAITING FOR A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE MANUFACTURER TO PROCESS A COMPLAINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 92,000.
NHTSA ODI #10419440
85,000 miles · Aug 11, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
RECEIVED A CHECK ENGINE LIGHT NOTICE. TOOK C-230 (2006) TO DEALER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE CODE INDICATED A WORN TIMING GEAR PROBLEM AND WOULD REQUIRE MAJOR ENGINE REPAIR. THE COST ESTIMATE WAS $4000 TO $5000 TO TAKE THE ENGINE APART AND DETERMINE IF THE GEAR WAS WORN AND NEEDED REPLACEMENT. PERFORMED A INTERNET SEARCH AND FOUND…
Read full complaint
RECEIVED A CHECK ENGINE LIGHT NOTICE. TOOK C-230 (2006) TO DEALER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE CODE INDICATED A WORN TIMING GEAR PROBLEM AND WOULD REQUIRE MAJOR ENGINE REPAIR. THE COST ESTIMATE WAS $4000 TO $5000 TO TAKE THE ENGINE APART AND DETERMINE IF THE GEAR WAS WORN AND NEEDED REPLACEMENT. PERFORMED A INTERNET SEARCH AND FOUND THAT THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THESE ENGINES. CAR HAS 85,000 MILES AND WAS PURCHASED IN 2008 WITH 40,000. HAVE NOT HAD THE REPAIR PERFORMED YET. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10418558
47,000 miles · Aug 2, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingCrash
I WAS INVOLVED IN AN AUTO ACCIDENT (REAR-ENDED) ON DEC 21ST 2010. THE COLLISION RESULTED IN MY VEHICLE BEING PUSHED IN TO ANOTHER VEHICLE (TRUCK) IN FONT OF ME. THE RESULTING CRASH PRODUCED DAMAGES TO THE FRONT AND REAR OF THE CAR TOTALING 15K. I NOTICED THAT MY DASHBOARD WAS LIT UP WITH WARNING SIGNALS AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT A…
Read full complaint
I WAS INVOLVED IN AN AUTO ACCIDENT (REAR-ENDED) ON DEC 21ST 2010. THE COLLISION RESULTED IN MY VEHICLE BEING PUSHED IN TO ANOTHER VEHICLE (TRUCK) IN FONT OF ME. THE RESULTING CRASH PRODUCED DAMAGES TO THE FRONT AND REAR OF THE CAR TOTALING 15K. I NOTICED THAT MY DASHBOARD WAS LIT UP WITH WARNING SIGNALS AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AT THE SEEN OF THE COLLISION. THE REAR LIGHT WAS EXPLAINABLE AS THE LIGHT WAS KNOCKED OUT IN THE CRASH. THE ENGINE LIGHT HOWEVER WAS A BIT OF A MYSTERY. I TOOK THE CAR IN FOR REPAIRS THREE DAYS LATER AFTER CONSULTING WITH THE DRIVER AT FAULTS' INSURANCE COMPANY. THE REPAIR COMPANY NOTED THE LIGHT ALSO. I COULD ARRIVE AT NO OTHER CONCLUSION BUT THAT THE COLLISION WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY ENGINE LIGHT SUDDENLY COMING ON. THE INSURANCE COMPANY ARGUES THAT THE COLLISION HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT PARTICULAR LIGHT COMING ON. THE MATTER IS BEING DEALT WITH IN COURT. IN THE MEANTIME, I DID SOME RESEARCH AND RAN ACROSS HUNDREDS OF COMPLAINTS ON LINE, BY MERCEDES BENZ DRIVERS, COMPLAINING OF A CAM SHAFT PROBLEM THAT IS IDENTIFIED BY AN ENGINE LIGHT INITIALLY. IT APPEARS THAT A PART WAS DEFECTIVE YET NO RECALL HAS BEEN ISSUED BY MERCEDES. I'VE REACHED OUT TO MERCEDES BENZ OF AMERICA. AFTER SEVERAL CALLS RESPONDING TO MY INQUIRY, THEY STOPPED INFORMING ME OF ANY FURTHER FINDINGS. THIS AFTER PROMISING TO APPRISE ME OF THE STATUS OF MY COMPLAINT. MY ISSUE IS TWO FOLD. HOW MUCH EVIDENCE IS NECESSARY BEFORE IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS PRODUCT AND THE SERIES OF CARS THAT ARE IMPACTED BY IT, WARRANTS A RECALL? SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS WIDE-SPREAD ISSUE? I MUST TELL YOU THAT AS A CONSUMER, IT IS NO MYSTERY WHAT MOST HAVE LOST TRUST IN GOVERNMENTS ABILITY TO SERVE AND PROTECT IT'S CITIZENS IN THESE MATTERS. I FOR ONE AM DISAPPOINTED IN THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROCESS. I INITIALLY CONTACTED THIS OFFICE EIGHT MONTHS AGO AND HAVE HEARD NOTHING. REGARDS,[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) *KB
NHTSA ODI #10416667
60,000 miles · Jun 15, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD STALL WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS. AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AND CONTINUE DRIVING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE BALANCE SHAFT NEEDED TO B…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD STALL WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS. AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AND CONTINUE DRIVING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE BALANCE SHAFT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 64,037.
NHTSA ODI #10406942
42,000 miles · Mar 1, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
2006 MERCEDES C230 HAS A DEFECTIVE BALANCE SHAFT GEAR INSIDE ENGINE WHICH DRIVES THE TIMING CHAIN. MERCEDES BENZ KNOWS THAT THE MATERIALS USED WERE INSUFFICIENTLY HARDENED, CAUSING PREMATURE WEAR AND POSSIBLE SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER RESULTING IN NO POWER STEERING OR POWER BRAKES WITHOUT WARNING , THEREBY PRESENTING A DANGER TO VEH…
Read full complaint
2006 MERCEDES C230 HAS A DEFECTIVE BALANCE SHAFT GEAR INSIDE ENGINE WHICH DRIVES THE TIMING CHAIN. MERCEDES BENZ KNOWS THAT THE MATERIALS USED WERE INSUFFICIENTLY HARDENED, CAUSING PREMATURE WEAR AND POSSIBLE SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER RESULTING IN NO POWER STEERING OR POWER BRAKES WITHOUT WARNING , THEREBY PRESENTING A DANGER TO VEHICLE OCCUPANTS. MERCEDES HAS MODIFIED THE GEAR ON LATE 2006 MODELS BUT NEVER TOOK RESPONSIBILITY TO THE DEFECTIVE PARTS ALREADY SOLD IN THE EARLY 2006 PRODUCTION. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN NOTED THROUGH OUT A LARGE NUMBER OF VEHICLES IN THE MERCEDES LINE. SILENT RECALL HAS BEEN NOTED TO THE TECHNICIANS BUT NOTHING IS BEING DONE TO REPAIR THE DEFECT. MAYBE SAVE SOME LIVES IN THE PROCESS. ALSO NOTE THEY ARE CHARGING OWNERS APPROX $5000 AND DEALERS STATE IT IS HAPPENING OFTEN BETWEEN 30,000-100,000 MILES. NO WARNING OR SYMPTOMS UNTIL IT "JUST HAPPENS". *TR
NHTSA ODI #10384863
58,705 miles · Feb 14, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingUnknown Or Other
AT THE END OF JAN 2011, MY ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON IN MY 2006 C230 MERCEDES ' BENZ. I TOOK MY VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP TO GET A DIAGNOSTIC INSPECTION ON FEB 1, 2011. THE INSPECTION DETERMINED THE VEHICLE NEEDED A BALANCE SHAFT. MY VEHICLE ONLY HAS 58,705 MILES ON IT AND WARRANTY EXPIRED ON IT AT 50,000 MILES. IF DRIVEN LONGER W…
Read full complaint
AT THE END OF JAN 2011, MY ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON IN MY 2006 C230 MERCEDES ' BENZ. I TOOK MY VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP TO GET A DIAGNOSTIC INSPECTION ON FEB 1, 2011. THE INSPECTION DETERMINED THE VEHICLE NEEDED A BALANCE SHAFT. MY VEHICLE ONLY HAS 58,705 MILES ON IT AND WARRANTY EXPIRED ON IT AT 50,000 MILES. IF DRIVEN LONGER WITH THE ENGINE LIGHT ON, THE VEHICLE WOULD OF MALFUNCTION. THIS SAFETY ISSUE MAY OF CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO MISFIRE AND STOP DRIVING. MERCEDES ' BENZ USA HAS RECEIVED SEVERAL COMPLAINTS PERTAINING TO THIS ISSUE FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS AND NOTHING IS BEING DONE ABOUT IT. ALSO, SEVERAL CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS HAVE BEEN FILED ABOUT THIS ISSUE. A RECALL SHOULD BE PUT ON ENGINE M272 & M273 BALANCE SHAFT GEAR / IDLE GEAR. THIS DEFECT IN THE ENGINE IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND MAY CAUSE A MAJOR ACCIDENT OR FATALITY. THE PRICING ON THE SERVICE IS REALLY RIDICULOUS. PARTS $ 478.15 AND LABOR $1946.26. THIS PRICE WAS A GOODWILL GESTURE.
NHTSA ODI #10383514
57,000 miles · Feb 11, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C CLASS 230. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 15 MPH WHEN THE RED ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO RAN A DIAGNOSTIC TEST AND DISCOVERED THAT THE CAM SHAFT WAS SPINNING FREE AND WOULD NEED REPLACING. THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C CLASS 230. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 15 MPH WHEN THE RED ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO RAN A DIAGNOSTIC TEST AND DISCOVERED THAT THE CAM SHAFT WAS SPINNING FREE AND WOULD NEED REPLACING. THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 57,000.
NHTSA ODI #10381616
54,000 miles · Jan 20, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
THE ENGINE LIGHT WENT ON IN MY 2006 C230 MERCEDES (CURRENT MILEAGE 57,000) SINCE SEPT 2010. I LATER CONFIRMED IT'S THE PROBLEM IN THE BALANCE SHAFT, WHICH DIRECTLY IMPACT ON THE ACCELERATION AND FAILURE OF THE ENGINE. THE ENGINE SUDDEN STOPPED RUNNING FEW TIMES IN MY COMMUTE TO WORK IN A FREEWAY. LUCKILY, IT WAS DURING THE RU…
Read full complaint
THE ENGINE LIGHT WENT ON IN MY 2006 C230 MERCEDES (CURRENT MILEAGE 57,000) SINCE SEPT 2010. I LATER CONFIRMED IT'S THE PROBLEM IN THE BALANCE SHAFT, WHICH DIRECTLY IMPACT ON THE ACCELERATION AND FAILURE OF THE ENGINE. THE ENGINE SUDDEN STOPPED RUNNING FEW TIMES IN MY COMMUTE TO WORK IN A FREEWAY. LUCKILY, IT WAS DURING THE RUSH HOUR AND THE TRAFFIC WAS MOVING SLOWLY. MANY TIMES WHEN I ENTERED TO THE FREEWAY IN A MERGE LANE, THE ACCELERATION DIDN'T WORK AT ALL AND I ALMOST GOT HIT BY THE OTHER CARS IN THE MERGE LANE. THE MECHANIC ADVISED IF CONTINUE DRIVING THE VEHICLE WITHOUT REPLACING BALANCE SHAFT WILL LEAD TO A BIG DANGER TO THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER SINCE THE ENGINE CAN BE STOPPED ANYWHERE AND ANYTIME. REPLACING THE BALANCE SHAFT COST $6,000 (FROM THE DEALER) AND MERCEDES USA REFUSE TO COVER ANY PORTION OF THE REPAIR SINCE MY CAR EXCEEDS 50,000 MILES/4 YRS WARRANTY. I TALKED TO THE DEALER AND THE SERVICE ADVISER. THEY SAID THIS IS A COMMON KNOWN PROBLEM FOR MANY OF THE MERCEDES MODELS. IN FACT, IT WAS IN THEIR SERVICE BULLETIN SINCE 2007. UNFORTUNATELY MERCEDES WOULDN'T COVER ANY REPAIR UNLESS THERE?S A RECALL OR SOMEONE DIE FROM IT. I WONDER IF MERCEDES WILL WAIT UNTIL MORE INJURIES BEFORE THEY CONSIDER STOP USING THE SAME BALANCE SHAFT IN THEIR CARS. THIS BALANCE SHAFT IS A VERY SMALL PIECE LOCATED RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ENGINE. THE COST OF THE MATERIAL IS VERY INEXPENSIVE. HOWEVER, IT REQUIRES INTENSIVE LABOR BECAUSE THE ENGINE MUST BE TAKEN APART IN ORDER TO REPLACE THE BALANCE SHAFT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10378052
Official recalls
5Nov 19, 2024
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 C-Class, CLK, E-Class, and CLS vehicles. Please see the recall report for a complete list of models and model years. The glass sunroof panel may not be properly secured and can detach.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached sunroof panel can become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the sunroof panel as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed January 10, 2025. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall is an expansion of previous NHTSA recall number 22V-954. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2024120001/2/3.
Dec 23, 2022
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 C-Class, CLK, E-Class, and CLS vehicles. Please refer to MBUSA's recall report for specific vehicle model details. The glass sunroof panel may not be properly secured and may detach.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached sunroof panel may become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the sunroof panel as necessary free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed February 3, 2023. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall expands NHTSA recall number 19V-918. MBUSA's numbers for this recall are 2023010004, 2023010005, and 2023010006.
Mar 19, 2021
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2006-2007 C350, C230, C280, CLK350, E320CDI, E350 Wagon, E350, 2006 C55 AMG, CLK500, CLS500, CLS55 AMG, E500 Wagon, E500, E55 AMG, 2007 CLK550, CLS550, CLS63 AMG, E550, E63 AMG, and E63 Wagon AMG vehicles. The bonding between the glass panel and the sliding roof frame may deteriorate, possibly causing the glass panel to detach from the vehicle.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached glass panel can separate from the vehicle and become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: MBUSA will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the glass panel bonding and replace the sliding roof, as necessary, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed May 7, 2021. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall is an expansion of recall number 19V-918. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2021040012.
Dec 20, 2019
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 vehicles. The bonding between the glass panel and the sliding roof frame may deteriorate, possibly resulting in the glass panel detaching from the vehicle. For a full list of the affected models visit: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2019/RMISC-19V918-4126.pdf
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached glass panel can separate from the vehicle and become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: MBUSA will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the glass panel bonding and replace the sliding roof, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began July 10, 2020. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2020040011.
Feb 11, 2016
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (MBUSA) is recalling certain model year 2009-2010 ML320 BlueTec 4Matic, GL320 BlueTec 4Matic and R320 CDI 4Matic, 2011 E350 Cabriolet and E550 Cabriolet, 2009-2011 ML350, ML350 4Matic, ML550 4Matic, ML63 AMG, and C63 AMG, 2010-2011 ML450 4Matic Hybrid, E350 Coupe, E350 4Matic, E550 Coupe, E550 4Matic, and E63 AMG, 2011-2012 GL350 BlueTec 4Matic and R350 BlueTec 4Matic, 2009-2012 GL450 4Matic, GL550 4Matic and R350 4Matic, 2007-2008 SLK280, SLK350, and SLK55 AMG, 2011-2014 SLS AMG Coupe, 2012 SLS AMG Cabriolet, 2013-2014 SLS AMG GT and SLS AMG GT Cabriolet, 2005 C230 Kompressor and C320, 2006-2007 C230, 2006-2011 C350, 2008-2011 C300 and C300 4Matic, 2010-2012 GLK350 and GLK350 4Matic and 2007-2008 Chrysler Crossfire vehicles. Upon deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, excessive internal pressure may cause the inflator to rupture.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: MBUSA will their notify owners, and Fiat Chrysler will notify the affected Chrysler owners. Dealers for the respective brands will replace the driver's frontal air bag module, free of charge. This recall began November 2016. Mercedes-Benz owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372 and Chrysler owners may contact Fiat Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403.
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
1EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.