IllustrationENGINE WIRING HARNESS DISINTEGRATION IN MY 1996 E300D MERCEDES SEDAN. *NM
1996 Mercedes Benz E 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
Compare all E Class years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
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 16 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.
- Suspension. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 6 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 →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
0 crash reports0 fire reports0 injury reports
What owners actually said
16 reportsTHE SPRING RIGHT UPPER SPRING MOUNT ON MY 1996 MB E300 RUSTED THROUGH. THE CAR DROPPER AND I HIT THE STREET, RUINED MY RADIATOR, AND THE TOTAL REPAIR COSTS ARE GREATER THAN $4000 (VERBAL ESTIMATE). I REPORTED THIS TO MERCEDES BENZ NA AND SPOKE TO RON ST PIERRE THE NE REGIONAL MANAGER ( 800-526-0315 X7125) WHO TOLD ME THAT THE…
Read full complaint
THE SPRING RIGHT UPPER SPRING MOUNT ON MY 1996 MB E300 RUSTED THROUGH. THE CAR DROPPER AND I HIT THE STREET, RUINED MY RADIATOR, AND THE TOTAL REPAIR COSTS ARE GREATER THAN $4000 (VERBAL ESTIMATE). I REPORTED THIS TO MERCEDES BENZ NA AND SPOKE TO RON ST PIERRE THE NE REGIONAL MANAGER ( 800-526-0315 X7125) WHO TOLD ME THAT THE CAR WAS OLD AND MB WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS. UPON SEARCHING THE NHTSA WEB SITE, I HAVE SEEN ABOUT 10 + REPORTS OR SIMILAR COMPLAINTS GOING BACK 1 OR 2 YEARS AND NOTHING FROM MB REPORTING THIS AS A PROBLEM. THE CAR HAS BEEN WELL MAINTAINED BY A SINGLE GARAGE, THEY HAVE SEEN A NUMBER OF THESE FAILURES, AND WARNED ME ABOUT THIS WHEN IT HAPPENED. I AM CURRENTLY WITHOUT A CAR. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE AND POTENTIALLY A RISK OF LOSS OF CONTROL. *NM
I HAVE A 1996 MERCEDES E300D AND RECENTLY I LEARNED FROM AN INTERNET MESSAGE BOARD ABOUT A SAFETY DEFECT ON THIS CHASSIS INVOLVING THE FRONT SUSPENSION. SPECIFICALLY IT'S THE UPPER SPRING SUPPORT OR PERCH AS SOME PEOPLE CALL IT WHICH CAN RUST AWAY AND BREAK FROM THE SUPPORTING BACK WALL, RESULTING IN TOTAL LOSS OF CONTROL OF TH…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 1996 MERCEDES E300D AND RECENTLY I LEARNED FROM AN INTERNET MESSAGE BOARD ABOUT A SAFETY DEFECT ON THIS CHASSIS INVOLVING THE FRONT SUSPENSION. SPECIFICALLY IT'S THE UPPER SPRING SUPPORT OR PERCH AS SOME PEOPLE CALL IT WHICH CAN RUST AWAY AND BREAK FROM THE SUPPORTING BACK WALL, RESULTING IN TOTAL LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE RUSTING IS CAUSED BY OR AT LEAST CONTRIBUTED TO BY A POOR-QUALITY SEALANT THAT MERCEDES USES AROUND THAT AREA. AFTER SOME TIME THIS SEALANT LOSES ITS ADHESION OR STARTS TO CRACK, TRAPPING WATER UNDERNEATH IT AND STARTING CORROSION. THE UPPER SPRING SUPPORT IS ONLY SPOT WELDED IN TWO PLACES TO THE SIDE OF THE WHEEL WELL AND IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH CORROSION TO CAUSE A FAILURE. ON MY CAR THE PASSENGER SIDE IS RUSTED SO BAD THAT ONE OF THE WELDS HAS ALREADY BROKEN AND THE SPRING SUPPORT IS NOW CLOSE TO FAILURE. PEELING OFF THE SEALANT REVEALED THE TRUE EXTENT OF THE RUST AND IT IS EXTENSIVE. THE DRIVER'S SIDE LOOKED FINE AT FIRST, BUT PEELING OFF THE SEALANT REVEALED EXTENSIVE RUST AS WELL, THOUGH THE WELDS ARE STILL IN ONE PIECE. THE VEHICLE HAS NO SIGNIFICANT RUST ELSEWHERE, ONLY WHERE THE SEALANT USED TO BE AND THE SURROUNDING AREA SO I DEFINITELY BELIEVE THIS IS A MANUFACTURING/DESIGN PROBLEM. SOME OWNERS HAVE ALREADY SUFFERED A COMPLETE FAILURE OF THIS COMPONENT. LUCKILY I CAUGHT IT JUST IN TIME. AFTER SOME PUSHING, MERCEDES HAS AGREED THROUGH THE LOCAL DEALER TO COVER 50% OF MY EXPENSES TO REPAIR THIS PROBLEM. HOWEVER I BELIEVE THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR 100% OF THE EXPENSES BECAUSE IT'S A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE AND IT SHOULD BE A RECALL. WHO WOULD EXPECT A 9 YEAR OLD MERCEDES TO LOSE ITS FRONT SUSPENSION ON THE HIGHWAY? FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD THERE ALREADY IS A RECALL CAMPAIGN IN CANADA, BUT NOT IN THE US.
RIGHT FRONT SPRING PERCH MOUNT BROKE ON MY 1996 E300D MERCEDES WHILE BEGINNING TO MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN FROM A STOP SIGN CONTROLLED INTERSECTION. VEHICLE GAVE NO FOREWARNING SIGNS, AND HAD IN-FACT JUST BEEN SERVICED WEEK PRIOR. MERCEDES DENIES ANY DEFECT, AND I HAD TO PAY FOR TOWING AND REPAIR COMPLETELY. THANK GOD IT DID NO…
Read full complaint
RIGHT FRONT SPRING PERCH MOUNT BROKE ON MY 1996 E300D MERCEDES WHILE BEGINNING TO MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN FROM A STOP SIGN CONTROLLED INTERSECTION. VEHICLE GAVE NO FOREWARNING SIGNS, AND HAD IN-FACT JUST BEEN SERVICED WEEK PRIOR. MERCEDES DENIES ANY DEFECT, AND I HAD TO PAY FOR TOWING AND REPAIR COMPLETELY. THANK GOD IT DID NOT OCCUR AT HIGHWAY SPEED! I AM NOW READING THAT THIS IS HAPPENING TO HUNDREDS OF MERCEDES OWNERS, AND I JUST WANTED TO REPORT MY OWN EXPERIENCE!
1996 MERCEDES-BENZ STALLS OUT.*MR THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE STALLED UNDER NORMAL DRIVING CONDITIONS. *JB *NLM
A/C COMPRESSOR FAILED.
Official recalls
196V058000 · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
Apr 4, 1996
THE DRIVE BELT PULLEY ON THE ENGINE CAN DEVELOP FATIGUE CRACKS IN THE METAL AND BREAK. IF THE DRIVE PULLEY BREAKS, THE CAR WOULD NOT HAVE ENGINE COOLING, BATTERY CHARGING, AND/OR POWER STEERING.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: LOSS OF THESE SYSTEMS CAN CAUSE THE CAR TO OVER HEAT, LOSE POWER FROM THE BATTERY, AND LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE CAR INCREASING THE POTENTIAL FOR A VEHICLE ACCIDENT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE ENGINE CRANKSHAFT DAMPER-PULLEY ON THESE VEHICLES.
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
1PE07021 · Front Suspension Coil Spring Ejection
Opened Apr 19, 2007 · Closed Aug 9, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:springs:coil Springs
ODI HAS FOCUSED THIS INVESTIGATION ON ASSESSING THE RISKS POSED BY A SEPARATED SPRING AS (1) A ROAD HAZARD AND (2) THE POTENTIAL FOR VEHICLE CONTROL TO BE COMPROMISED AFTER THE FRONT COIL SPRING HAS BEEN EJECTED FROM ITS INTENDED POSITION IN THE VEHICLE.BOTH RISKS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH CORROSION, FLEXING, AND FRACTURE OF THE UPPER FRONT SUSPENSION MOUNTING BRACKET.TIME-IN-SERVICE FAILURE RATES ARE NOTABLY HIGHER IN SALT BELT STATES SINCE CORROSION IS A PRIMARY CONTRIBUTOR TO THE FAILURE MODE.SINCE A NUMBER OF INCIDENTS HAVE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING OPERATED, ODI IS SKEPTICAL THAT OWNERS CAN ALWAYS DETECT THE SUBTLE SIDE TO SIDE DIFFERENCE IN RIDE HEIGHT AND/OR INSPECT OR NOTICE THAT THE UPPER SUSPENSION BRACKET HAS BEEN COMPROMISED BY CORROSION.(1) ROAD HAZARD - ALTHOUGH THE (APPROX. 7 LB.) FRONT SUSPENSION SPRING THAT MAY BE EJECTED AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS COULD POSE A SERIOUS ROAD HAZARD TO PEDESTRIANS AND OTHER VEHICLES, THE OCCURRENCE RATE HAS BEEN LOW (.03% BASED ON 51 REPORTED INCIDENTS OCCURRING AND AN INITIAL POPULATION OF 172,781 VEHICLES AFTER 9 - 12 YEARS OF USE / EXPOSURE) AND THERE ARE NO KNOWN INJURIES, FATALITIES, OR PROPERTY DAMAGE REPORTS DUE TO AN EJECTED SPRING.ALSO, MANY OF THE 51 INCIDENTS OCCURRED AT LOW SPEED OR WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED OR PARKED.(2) VEHICLE CONTROL - VEHICLE HANDLING AND CONTROL COULD BE AFFECTED BY THE FRACTURE OF THE UPPER SUSPENSION MOUNT AND/OR THE ASSOCIATED SPRING EJECTION.ODI FIRST IDENTIFIED ITS CONCERN ABOUT CORROSION IN THE UPPER SUSPENSION BRACKET OF SUBJECT VEHICLES IN 2002, AT WHICH TIME MERCEDES PROVIDED A VIDEO THAT SHOWED THAT A VEHICLE COULD BE STEERED, STOPPED, AND CONTROLLED THROUGH VARIOUS MANEUVERS AT HIGH SPEEDS WITH A FRONT COIL SPRING COMPLETELY MISSING FROM THE VEHICLE. DURING PE07-021, IN ADDITION TO REVIEWING THE 2002 VIDEO-TAPE, ODI ENGINEERS DROVE AN EXEMPLAR VEHICLE WITH THE SPRING REMOVED AND SIMULATED VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF STEERING ANGLES TO ASSESS WHETHER THERE WERE ANY POSSIBLE CONDITIONS / DISPLACEMENTS IN WHICH THE SEPARATED SPRING MIGHT INTERFERE WITH THE WHEELS. IN A VEHICLE WITH THE FRONT SPRING REMOVED, THE TOP OF THE WHEEL CAN LIGHTLY CONTACT THE BOTTOM AREA OF THE WHEEL FENDER DURING HIGH ANGLE TURNS TYPICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH SLOWER SPEED MANEUVERS SUCH AS CITY DRIVING. THE LIGHT TIRE CONTACT GENERATED AN OBVIOUS GRINDING NOISE AND WOULD LIKELY ABRADE OR BEND THE EDGE OF THE FENDER WITH CONTINUED USE.HOWEVER, THE EXTENT OF THE INTERFERENCE WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO AFFECT VEHICLE STEERING AND DOES NOT OCCUR AT SMALLER TURNING ANGLES ASSOCIATED WITH HIGHWAY DRIVING.ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND AT THIS TIME.FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANT.