← New search

1997 Mercedes Benz E320

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 1997 Mercedes Benz E320 do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 42.5.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all E320 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

43 reports with mileage · 20 unknown

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 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Seat Belts. Review the 10 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

4 crash reports3 fire reports7 injury reports

Suspension complaints

32 reports
Clear category filter
110,800 miles · Aug 28, 2009
Suspension

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 MERCEDES BENZ E320. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 65 MPH HE NOTICED THAT THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY DROPPED ON THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRONT BRACE SPRING NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 110800.

NHTSA ODI #10282090

112,000 miles · Mar 27, 2008
Suspension

DRIVING MY 1997 MERCEDES BENZ E320 AT 30 MPH ALONG A SEMI-ROUGH ROAD WHEN A LOUD CLANKING BEGAN FOR NO APPARENT REASON. AFTER A MECHANIC LOOKED AT IT, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE SPRING PERCH HAD BECOME DETACHED FROM THE CHASSIS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10222482

190,000 miles · Nov 8, 2007
Suspension

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 MERCEDES BENZ E 320. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A LOUD BOOM. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE WAS ON THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A SHOP AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE MACPHERSON STRUT FAILED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 190,000.

NHTSA ODI #10208444

132,000 miles · Oct 11, 2007
Suspension

FRONT SPRING PERCH ARE RUSTED THROUGH ON BOTH SIDES OF CAR. FRONT LEFT SPRING PERCH IS ABOUT 50% RUSTED THRU. MERCEDES REPAIR SHOP FELT CAR SHOULD BE DRIVEN CAREFULLY. SAID HITTING A BIG POT HOLE COULD BREAK SPRING PERCH. REPAIR REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10205456

103,000 miles · May 27, 2007
Suspension

MY HUSBAND & I WERE OUTSIDE AND HEARD A LOUD CRASH. MY MERCEDES FELL TO THE GROUND ON THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE. IT TOOK 2 JACKS TO LIFT IT UP. WITH THE TIRE OFF HE FOUND THE SPRING PERCH COMPLETELY RUSTED OFF, THE SPRING AND HOLDER ON THE GROUND. OUR FIRST THOUGHT WAS THAT I COULD HAVE BEEN ON THE ROAD WITH MY SON WHEN IT HAPP…

Read full complaint

MY HUSBAND & I WERE OUTSIDE AND HEARD A LOUD CRASH. MY MERCEDES FELL TO THE GROUND ON THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE. IT TOOK 2 JACKS TO LIFT IT UP. WITH THE TIRE OFF HE FOUND THE SPRING PERCH COMPLETELY RUSTED OFF, THE SPRING AND HOLDER ON THE GROUND. OUR FIRST THOUGHT WAS THAT I COULD HAVE BEEN ON THE ROAD WITH MY SON WHEN IT HAPPENED. WE DID A QUICK INTERNET SEARCH AND FOUND THIS TO BE MORE COMMON THAT WE COULD IMAGINE. THE DEFECT EVEN PROMPTED A RECALL IN CANADA. I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THIS CAR WITH 103K+ MILES. ORIGINALLY IT WAS PURCHASED IN NC BUT I HAVE LIVED IN MN FOR SEVERAL YEARS NOW & DRIVE AN SUV IN THE WINTER. I CALLED MERCEDES ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE WHEN I FOUND THE CUSTOMER SERVICE CLOSED. THEY SAID THEY COULD TOW IT TUESDAY & HAVE IT ASSESSED BUT SINCE IT WAS OUT OF WARRANTY IT WOULD BE UP TO THE DEALER TO DETERMINE WHAT TO DO AND HOW MUCH TO CHARGE. THE DEFECT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECALLED IN THE US. MERCEDES IS AWARE OF THE ISSUES & DEALERS ARE PUTTING PEOPLE'S LIVES AT RISK. I BOUGHT THIS CAR B/C THE 1997 CONSUMER REPORTS RATED IT THE BEST CAR MONEY COULD BUY AND SAFETY WAS THE ONLY REASON I WAS WILLING TO PAY SO MUCH. I WAS ALMOST KILLED IN AN ACCIDENT AND WANTED THE BEST FOR MY UNBORN CHILD. THE BEST COULD HAVE KILLED US TODAY. I WOULD LIKE OTHERS TO BE AWARE OF THIS ISSUE & I WOULD LIKE IT DOCUMENTED SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN A MERCEDES DEALERSHIP WHERE IT WILL BE SWEPT UNDER THE RUG, AS I WAS TODAY WHEN THE LADY PUT ME ON HOLD & NEVER CAME BACK. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10191832

81,000 miles · Mar 4, 2007
Suspension

WHEN I CHANGED TIRES TODAY (MARCH 4, 2007), I FOUND SEVERE CORROSION/RUST ON THE FRONT SPRING PERCHES. THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE PERCH WAS ALREADY RUSTED THROUGH ON ONE SIDE. THE CAR CANNOT BE DRIVEN SAFELY. IT IS IN MY GARAGE AND HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. MANY OTHERS HAVE EXPERIENCED THE SAME ISSUES WITH MERCEDES W210 BODY ST…

Read full complaint

WHEN I CHANGED TIRES TODAY (MARCH 4, 2007), I FOUND SEVERE CORROSION/RUST ON THE FRONT SPRING PERCHES. THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE PERCH WAS ALREADY RUSTED THROUGH ON ONE SIDE. THE CAR CANNOT BE DRIVEN SAFELY. IT IS IN MY GARAGE AND HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. MANY OTHERS HAVE EXPERIENCED THE SAME ISSUES WITH MERCEDES W210 BODY STYLED CARS. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10184179

154,000 miles · Jan 19, 2007
Suspension

TL* - THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE HAS A 1997 MERCEDES BENZ E320. ON 12/30/06 WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN 40 AND 45 MPH, THERE WAS A LOUD BANG AND THE CONTACT LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TIRE COIL SPRING FELL OFF OF THE VEHICLE AND LEFT THE VEHICLE WITH NO FRONT END SUSPENSION AND NO ABILITY TO STEER. THE…

Read full complaint

TL* - THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE HAS A 1997 MERCEDES BENZ E320. ON 12/30/06 WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN 40 AND 45 MPH, THERE WAS A LOUD BANG AND THE CONTACT LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TIRE COIL SPRING FELL OFF OF THE VEHICLE AND LEFT THE VEHICLE WITH NO FRONT END SUSPENSION AND NO ABILITY TO STEER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE INCIDENT OCCURRED AT NIGHT, HE WAS DRIVING ON A WIDE ROAD, AND NO ACCIDENT ENSUED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FINALLY STOPPED, BUT THAT THE CONTACT NEVER REGAINED CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE SPRING PERCH NEEDS TO BE REBUILT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE TIRE HAS NO SPRING PUSHING IT DOWN ANYMORE. NEITHER THE WEATHER NOR THE ROAD CONDITIONS WERE A FACTOR IN THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 154000. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10179134

108,000 miles · Sep 18, 2006
Suspension

WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH THE COIL SPRING FROM THE LEFT FRONT OF THE CAR FLEW OFF. IT NEARLY MISSED A CAR DRIVING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AND A PEDESTRIAN. APPARENTLY, THE SPRING PERCH BROKE OFF THE CAR ALLOWING THE SPRING TO FLY OUT. I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS PROBLEM WITH ANY OTHER MAKE AND MODEL OF…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH THE COIL SPRING FROM THE LEFT FRONT OF THE CAR FLEW OFF. IT NEARLY MISSED A CAR DRIVING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AND A PEDESTRIAN. APPARENTLY, THE SPRING PERCH BROKE OFF THE CAR ALLOWING THE SPRING TO FLY OUT. I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS PROBLEM WITH ANY OTHER MAKE AND MODEL OF CAR. IF THIS HAD HAPPENED AT A HIGHER RATE OF SPEED THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A DEATH. THE DEALER CLAIMS THIS IS A RARE DEFECT ALTHOUGH RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET SAYS IT IS VERY COMMON. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10168565

115,000 miles · Jul 12, 2006
SuspensionCrash

CAR BEGAN TO RIDE ABNORMALLY; VIBRATION IN THE FRONT SUSPENSION AND NO MOVEMENT FROM THE FRONT SUSPENSION AS WOULD NORMALLY BE OBSERVED AS A RESULT OF SHOCK ABSORBER TRAVEL. BROUGHT THE CAR TO A BODY SHOP TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT. AS I PULLED INTO THE PARKING LOT THE FRONT SUSPENSION TOTALLY COLLAPSED AND THE FRONT SPRINGS FELL OU…

Read full complaint

CAR BEGAN TO RIDE ABNORMALLY; VIBRATION IN THE FRONT SUSPENSION AND NO MOVEMENT FROM THE FRONT SUSPENSION AS WOULD NORMALLY BE OBSERVED AS A RESULT OF SHOCK ABSORBER TRAVEL. BROUGHT THE CAR TO A BODY SHOP TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT. AS I PULLED INTO THE PARKING LOT THE FRONT SUSPENSION TOTALLY COLLAPSED AND THE FRONT SPRINGS FELL OUT OF THE BOTTOM OF THE CAR. RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET, CONVERSATIONS WITH THE BODY SHOP AND THE LOCAL MERCEDES BENZ DEALER ALL CONFIRM THAT THIS IS A KNOWN DEFECT FROM MERCEDES THAT THE MANUFACTURER IS UNWILLING TO RECALL. THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF DOCUMENTED CASES ON THE INTERNET. HAD THIS INCIDENT HAPPENED TO ME WHILE TRAVELING ON A HIGHWAY I AND MY FAMILY COULD HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED OR KILLED. CAR HAS BEEN IN THE BODY SHOP FOR NEARLY 2 WEEKS AS THE PARTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FROM MERCEDES BENZ IN GERMANY. I AM FORCED PAY FOR A $2800 REPAIR, AS WELL AS RENT A CAR FOR WEEKS WITH NO ESTIMATED TIME OF ARRIVAL OF THE NECESSARY PART TO REPAIR THE CAR. THIS TYPE OF FAILURE OF A FRAME WELD SHOULD NEVER OCCUR ON ANY VEHICLE. THE FACT THAT MERCEDES HAS NOT BEEN FORCED TO ISSUE A RECALL IS OUTRAGEOUS. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10162248

90,000 miles · May 12, 2006
StructureSuspension

CAR (1997 E 320 WITH 90K MILES) WAS IN FOR ROUTINE 90K MAINTENANCE AND MECHANIC FOUND CRACKED SPRING PERCH ASSEMBLY. DEALER CALLED TO TELL ME IT MUST BE FIXED, CAR IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND THAT A FATAL CRASH COULD RESULT AT HIGH SPEEDS. BUT TOLD ME THAT BECAUSE CAR IS OUT OF WARRANTY, THEY WILL NOT PAY FOR IT. LATER TOLD ME THEY W…

Read full complaint

CAR (1997 E 320 WITH 90K MILES) WAS IN FOR ROUTINE 90K MAINTENANCE AND MECHANIC FOUND CRACKED SPRING PERCH ASSEMBLY. DEALER CALLED TO TELL ME IT MUST BE FIXED, CAR IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND THAT A FATAL CRASH COULD RESULT AT HIGH SPEEDS. BUT TOLD ME THAT BECAUSE CAR IS OUT OF WARRANTY, THEY WILL NOT PAY FOR IT. LATER TOLD ME THEY WILL PAY FOR HALF AS PART OF "GOODWILL WARRANTY." HALF??? WHAT IF THERE WAS A CRASH DUE TO THIS? WHAT IF I HAD NOT BROUGHT IT IN FOR ROUTINE SERVICE? I WAS TOLD BY AN UNNAMED SOURCE AT THE DEALER THAT THEY SEE "TONS OF THESE PROBLEMS WITH THE E CLASS, FROM 1996-2000 MODELS." HE ALSO SAID THAT THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL ON THE AFFECTED E CLASS. ANOTHER SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME THAT THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHEN THE OTHER ONE COULD BREAK. BUT THAT THEY WOULD NOT PROACTIVELY REPLACE IT BEFORE IT SHOWS SIGNS OF TROUBLE. HE BASICALLY TOLD ME THAT I SHOULD TAKE THE 50% GOODWILL WARRANTY AND SHUT UP OR THEY WOULD PULL THE OFFER OFF THE TABLE!!! UNBELIEVABLE THAT A COMPANY LIKE MERCEDES BENZ WOULD TOLERATE THAT KIND OF CUSTOMER ABUSE FROM A PUNK SERVICE MANAGER. I THOUGHT I WOULD BE A LIFELONG MERCEDES CUSTOMER, BUT AFTER THIS HORRIBLE CUSTOMER SERVICE, I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER. TOO BAD, BECAUSE THE LOANER CAR I AM DRIVING WHILE MY REPAIR IS BEING DONE IS A FANTASTIC CAR (I'M IN THE MARKET FOR A NEW ONE) AND I'D BUY ONE TOMORROW IF IT WERE NOT FOR THIS. INSTEAD, I WILL BE BUYING A LEXUS. MERCEDES SHOULD BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY WITH THIS WELL-DOCUMENTED PROBLEM INSTEAD OF PROTECTING CORPORATE PROFITS. SHAME ON YOU MERCEDES BENZ. THIS IS BAD BUSINESS. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10157449

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

1

PE07021 · 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.