IllustrationSRS. ETS. ABA LIGHTS ON. BUZZING. *TR
2000 Mercedes Benz ML320
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most ML320 years
Owner complaints for the 2000 Mercedes Benz ML320 are substantially higher than the model-year median of 28.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all ML320 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
90–25K
2025–50K
2250–75K
1775–100K
20100–150K
19150K+
107 reports with mileage · 59 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.
- Steering. Review the 45 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 27 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 20 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
13 crash reports6 fire reports13 injury reports
Air Bags complaints
14 reportsDEFECTIVE PASSENGER SEAT OCCUPANCY SENSOR TURNS AIRBAG AND SEAT-BELT TENSIONER OFF WHENEVER THERE'S A PASSENGER RIDING IN THE CAR, PREVENTING THE PASSENGER-SIDE AIRBAG FROM DEPLOYING AND THE SEAT-BELT FROM WORKING PROPERLY. *TR
I HAVE BEEN THE OWNER OF A 2000 MERCEDES ML320 FOR ABOUT 6 YEARS. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED FROM THE DEALER WITH APPROX. 30,000 MILES. TODAY IT HAS APPROX 73,000 MILES. SINCE OWNING IT, I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PROBLEMS WHICH WERE ALL OUT OF WARRANTY AND WHICH I FEEL WERE UNWARRANTED AND WERE NOT SERIOUSLY ATTENDED TO BY MB OR THE DEALE…
Read full complaint
I HAVE BEEN THE OWNER OF A 2000 MERCEDES ML320 FOR ABOUT 6 YEARS. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED FROM THE DEALER WITH APPROX. 30,000 MILES. TODAY IT HAS APPROX 73,000 MILES. SINCE OWNING IT, I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PROBLEMS WHICH WERE ALL OUT OF WARRANTY AND WHICH I FEEL WERE UNWARRANTED AND WERE NOT SERIOUSLY ATTENDED TO BY MB OR THE DEALER: THIS COMPLAINT FORM WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO COMPLETE ACCORDING TO THE FIELDS PROVIDED. THE EQUIPMENT INFORMATION INCLUDED IS NOT CORRECT AND WAS INCLUDED JUST TO GET TO THE FORM. I FELT THAT THE PROBLEMS WITH THE CAR SHOULD BE REPORTED SPECIFICALLY THE ESP LIGHT AND THE AIR BAG PROBLEMS AT ABOUT 51,000 MILES, THE AIRBAG BECAME INOPERATIVE. I WAS TOLD THAT IT WOULD COST ABOUT $2000 TO REPAIR AND CORRECT. DEALER OFFERED A SMALL ADJUSTMENT. I CHOSE NOT TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT. AT ABOUT 65,000 MILES, I BEGAN HAVING VERY LOUD NOISES THAT SEEMED TO COME FROM THE CRANKSHAFT AND APPEARED TO BE A BRAKE PROBLEM. DEALER DID TRY TO DETERMINE WHAT IT WAS, BUT COULDN'T ISOLATE THE PROBLEM UNLESS "HE HAD TO TAKE THE WHOLE CAR APART" THERE WAS A RELATED PROBLEM BECAUSE THE ESP LIGHT WOULD COME ON INTERMITTENTLY THAT THE DEALER ADVISED COULD NOT BE ISOLATED UNLESS I DID THE WORK ON THE BRAKE AND THE CRANKSHAFT:" AT ABOUT 72,000 MILES, THE CAR DEVELOPED OIL LEAKS FROM THE MOTOR. EST. COST OF REPAIR WAS $2000. WE ARE WATCHING AND WAITING. IN MAY, I WAS ADVISED THAT THERE IS A RECALL NOTICE ON THE CRUISE CONTROL OF THE CAR. NO WORD ON THAT ISSUE SINCE. BECAUSE OF THE CRUISE CONTROL NOTICE I RECEIVED, I WAS PROMPTED TO WRITE YOU ABOUT THESE OTHER ISSUES AND BECAME FURTHER CONCERNED ABOUT THE ESP LIGHT AND THE FAULTY AIR BAG THE CARE HAS HAD., CAR IS DRIVEN AN AVERAGE OF 150 MILES A WEEK IN MOSTLY CITY DRIVING. CAR IS SERVICED BUT NOT BY THE DEALER BECAUSE OF THE HIGH COST AND RELATIVE DISSATISFACTION FROM THE SERVICE PROVIDED. UPDATED 07/27/11 *TR
SRS LIGHT CAME ON 2006. I CALLED DEALER WHO TOLD ME IT WAS LIKELY A FAILED CHILD SENSOR IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. I WAS ADVISED THE SRS WAS STILL INTACT AND THAT THESE SENSORS ARE KNOWN TO FAIL [MB 2000 ML 320]. AUGUST 2008 DEALERSHIP ADVISED ME THAT I'VE HAD NO SRS WORKING SINCE THE LIGHT WENT ON AND SO I PAID $900 TO HAVE A $2…
Read full complaint
SRS LIGHT CAME ON 2006. I CALLED DEALER WHO TOLD ME IT WAS LIKELY A FAILED CHILD SENSOR IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. I WAS ADVISED THE SRS WAS STILL INTACT AND THAT THESE SENSORS ARE KNOWN TO FAIL [MB 2000 ML 320]. AUGUST 2008 DEALERSHIP ADVISED ME THAT I'VE HAD NO SRS WORKING SINCE THE LIGHT WENT ON AND SO I PAID $900 TO HAVE A $291 PART REPLACED - $700 IN LABOR. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT A SAFETY FEATURE LIGHT WARNING LIKE THE SRS - AND A FAILED SENSOR - NEEDS TO BE A MANUFACTURERS RESPONSIBILITY. *TR
THIS IS A COMPLAINT CONCERNING A 2000 MERCEDES BENZ ML 320. THE SRS WARNING LIGHT COMES INDICATING THAT THE AIR BAG SYSTEM IS NOT FUNCTIONING. FIRST TIME WAS APRIL 2006, VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO NAPERVILL MERCEDES BENZ. ADVISED THAT THERE WOULD BE A $300 DIAGNOSTIC CHARGE. PROBLEM WAS "BABY SMART" SENSOR IN RIGHT FRONT SEAT. I…
Read full complaint
THIS IS A COMPLAINT CONCERNING A 2000 MERCEDES BENZ ML 320. THE SRS WARNING LIGHT COMES INDICATING THAT THE AIR BAG SYSTEM IS NOT FUNCTIONING. FIRST TIME WAS APRIL 2006, VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO NAPERVILL MERCEDES BENZ. ADVISED THAT THERE WOULD BE A $300 DIAGNOSTIC CHARGE. PROBLEM WAS "BABY SMART" SENSOR IN RIGHT FRONT SEAT. I WAS TOLD THAT I COULD EITHER EAT THE $300 CHARGE OR HAVE IT FIXED. FINAL BILL WAS $1,063.86 PROBLEM RE-APPEARED FEBRUARY 2008. CALLED SAME DEALER AND WAS ADVISED THAT SAME PROCEDURE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO FIX. I HAVE DECLINED TO GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN. CHECKED ON INTERNET BY GOOGLING "ML 320 SRS FAILURE" AND FOUND NUMEROUS CASES OF SAME PROBLEM. CHECKED FOR RECALLS AND DID NOT FIND ANYTHING. *TR
THE CONSUMER'S MERCEDES BENZ M L 320 SLOWED DOWN ON ITS OWN. THE CONSUMER PULLED OVER PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND RESTARTED IT. *BF AFTER THIS INCIDENT THE CONSUMER PARKED IN A MALL PARKING LOT. WHEN SHE RETURNED TO THE VEHICLE THE SHIFT LEVER WOULD NOT MOVE OUT OF PARK. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER. AFTER THE VEHICLE WAS…
Read full complaint
THE CONSUMER'S MERCEDES BENZ M L 320 SLOWED DOWN ON ITS OWN. THE CONSUMER PULLED OVER PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND RESTARTED IT. *BF AFTER THIS INCIDENT THE CONSUMER PARKED IN A MALL PARKING LOT. WHEN SHE RETURNED TO THE VEHICLE THE SHIFT LEVER WOULD NOT MOVE OUT OF PARK. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER. AFTER THE VEHICLE WAS PICKED UP FROM THE DEALER IT WENT INTO STICK MODE AGAIN. THE SRS LIGHT ILLUMINATE ON THE DASH. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TOT HE DEALER AND WHEN IT WAS RETURNED TO THE CONSUMER THE LIGHT WAS STILL ON. THE ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THE FRONT END VIBRATED. *NM
WHILE DRIVING 25 MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A SIDE IMPACT COLLISION. THE AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. DRIVER AND PASSENGER SUSTAINED SEVERE NECK AND BACK INJURIES. *AK THE VEHICLE WAS STRUCK ON THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE. THE VEHICLE WAS CONSTANTLY IN FOR SERVICE FOR RELATED REPAIRS. *SC *JB
VEHICLE WAS ALWAYS BEING SERVICED AND THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY IN A SEVERE ACCIDENT. *PH THE CONSUMER WAS STRUCK BY ANOTHER DRIVER AND CAUSED DAMAGE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE VEHICLE. BOTH SIDES OF THE DOORS WERE SMASHED AND THERE WAS EXTENSIVE DAMAGE IN THE PASSENGER'S CABIN. OTHER PROBLEMS ARE AS FOLLOWED: THE ENGINE LI…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE WAS ALWAYS BEING SERVICED AND THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY IN A SEVERE ACCIDENT. *PH THE CONSUMER WAS STRUCK BY ANOTHER DRIVER AND CAUSED DAMAGE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE VEHICLE. BOTH SIDES OF THE DOORS WERE SMASHED AND THERE WAS EXTENSIVE DAMAGE IN THE PASSENGER'S CABIN. OTHER PROBLEMS ARE AS FOLLOWED: THE ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON, ENGINE LOW LEVEL OIL LIGHT HAD COME ON, WHEN THE RIGHT FRONT AND LEFT REAR WINDOWS WERE ERRATIC WHEN GOING DOWN, THE CIGARETTE LIGHTER WAS INOPERATIVE, THE REAR CARGO ACCESSORY PLUG WAS INOPERATIVE, THE TRIM ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE LEFT FRONT SEAT CRACKED, THERE WAS A BULDGE ON THE RIGHT REAR TIRE, LUG BOLTS WERE MISSING ON THE RIGHT REAR WHEEL AND THE REAR PADS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, THERE WAS A NOISE HEARD IN THE REAR WHEN GOING OVER BUMPS, THE POWER SUPPLY PLUG IN THE REAR CARGO AREA WAS INOPERATIVE, THE LIGHT BEHIND THE CLIMATE CONTROL PANEL WAS INOPERATIVE, THE LEFT FRONT WINDOW WAS INTERMITTENT, THE LEFT FRONT PARK LIGHT WAS INOPERATIVE, THE LEFT FRONT DOOR WAS NOT CLOSING DUE TO THE LATCHING, THE REAR ELECTRICAL PLUG IN THE REAR CARGO AREA WAS INOPERATIVE, THE MATERIAL ON THE CENTER CONSOLE WRINKLED, THE SUNROOF WOULD BIND WHEN OPENED, THE REAR TIRE HAD A KNOT ON THE SIDEWALL, WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS FILLED WITH FUEL THE FUEL GAUGE WOULD GO DOWN, THERE WAS A NOISE IN HE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL WHEN DRIVEN AT LOW SPEEDS, THERE WAS A WHINING NOISE WHEN TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL AND THE STEERING WAS STIFF. *SC
VARIOUS PROBLEMS INVOLVING 2000 MERCEDES BENZ ML320 / ALSO AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY.*MR CONSUMER WAS STRUCK BY ANOTHER VEHICLE CAUSING DAMAGE TO BOTH SIDES OF THE VEHICLE. ALL THE DOORS WERE SMASHED IN YET NONE OF THE SIX AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. IN ADDITION, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED WHILE DRIVING. VEHICLE HAS BEE…
Read full complaint
VARIOUS PROBLEMS INVOLVING 2000 MERCEDES BENZ ML320 / ALSO AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY.*MR CONSUMER WAS STRUCK BY ANOTHER VEHICLE CAUSING DAMAGE TO BOTH SIDES OF THE VEHICLE. ALL THE DOORS WERE SMASHED IN YET NONE OF THE SIX AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. IN ADDITION, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED WHILE DRIVING. VEHICLE HAS BEEN TO THE MECHANIC MANY TIMES FOR REPAIRS BUT TO NO AVAIL. CONSUMER FELT VEHICLE MAY BE DEFECTIVE AND WOULD LIKE TO EXCHANGE OR GET MONEY BACK. *PH
I WAS SEVERELY INJURED WHEN MY 2000 MERCEDES-BENZ ML320 FAILED TO STEER IN AN ATTEMPTED U-TURN RESULTING IN IMPACT WITH A TREE. I WAS HOSPITALIZED WITH THREE FACIAL FRACTURES (EYE SOCKET, JAW, AND NOSE). THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE REASON FOR THE ACCIDENT WAS FAILURE OF THE CARS STEERING MECHANISM WHICH HAS SUBSEQUENTLY BEE…
Read full complaint
I WAS SEVERELY INJURED WHEN MY 2000 MERCEDES-BENZ ML320 FAILED TO STEER IN AN ATTEMPTED U-TURN RESULTING IN IMPACT WITH A TREE. I WAS HOSPITALIZED WITH THREE FACIAL FRACTURES (EYE SOCKET, JAW, AND NOSE). THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE REASON FOR THE ACCIDENT WAS FAILURE OF THE CARS STEERING MECHANISM WHICH HAS SUBSEQUENTLY BEEN RECALLED. I ALSO FEEL THE DEALERSHIP LIED IN CONNECTION WITH THE ACCIDENT. THE CAR (SUV) SUSTAINED MAJOR DAMAGE. I HAVE AN ONGOING MEDICAL ISSUE. *JB
Official recalls
0No 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
4PE10050 · Brake Lamp Switch Failure.
Opened Dec 21, 2010 · Closed May 4, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch; Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
ODI opened the investigation based on reports that the subject vehicle brake lamp switch (switch) failure caused 1) inoperative brake lamps (stay on or fail to illuminate), and/or 2) shift interlock failure (shifter locked in park), and/or 3) the cruise control to fail to cancel with brake application.Consumers also reported the illumination of a warning lamp on the instrument panel.The switch contains three sets of electrical contacts and a (normally extended) spring loaded plunger that actuates the contacts as it moves.As installed in the vehicle, the plunger contacts the brake pedal arm and is pushed into the switch; as the driver applies the pedal the plunger extends.One set of contacts (BLS) operates the stop lamps, a second set (EWM) controls the shift interlock system, and a third set (BS) is used by an on-board diagnostic (OBD) system to monitor switch operation.The cruise control monitors the BLS signal to determine when the brake is applied, the primary way the system is disabled when set.The relative timing of contact actuation in response to plunger movement allows the OBD system to detect a switch fault.When a fault is detected a malfunction indication lamp (MIL) is illuminated (driver alert), a diagnostic trouble code (DTC) is stored (for the service technician), and cruise control operation is inhibited (as a failsafe).In its response to ODI's January 2011 information request letter, MB explained its assessment of switch failures which was based primarily on evaluation of field return failures.MB identified both 1) electrical contact and 2) mechanical switch failure mechanisms.According to MB's analysis, electrical contact failure is the predominate failure type and the failure consequence depends on which contact fails.For instance MB claims that BLS contact failures are momentary in nature and do not affect brake light operation but are nonetheless detected by the OBD system, resulting in a DTC and subsequent replacement.Electrical contact failures of the BS and EWM contacts result in a DTC also, and EWM contact failures result in the shifter being stuck in the park (which can be overridden by the consumer).Accordingly MB maintains that electrical contact failures of the switch have no safety consequence since the brake lamps remain operational and the cruise control is always disabled.MB determined that mechanical failures of the switch, which are rare in their assessment, can result from internal wear and/or increased switch operating temperatures.High temperatures occur due to overheating of the BLS contacts and can cause the internal plastic components to melt.In one scenario overheated BLS contacts may melt to the extended plunger and are damaged when the brake pedal is released resulting in the brake lights staying on.In another scenario the increased temperatures and/or internal wear can cause the plunger to stick in the fully depressed position.In this case the cruise may not cancel when the brake is applied and the driver may have to use high brake pedal forces or other means (shifting to neutral or using the cruise master switch) to disengage the cruise.Additionally the vacuum assist can be depleted if the driver pumps the brakes resulting in reduced braking effectiveness and even higher pedal forces.In its March 31, 2011 defect notification, MB stated that to remediate the potential need for excessive brake force it would conduct a safety recall (11V-208) to replace the switch with a more robustly designed component.The recall includes 136,751 model year 2000 - 2002 M-Class and model year 2000 - 2004 M-Class AMG vehicles.Owner notification letters will be mailed
Additional source detail variants (4)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
ODI opened the investigation based on reports that the subject vehicle brake lamp switch (switch) failure caused 1) inoperative brake lamps (stay on or fail to illuminate), and/or 2) shift interlock failure (shifter locked in park), and/or 3) the cruise control to fail to cancel with brake application.Consumers also reported the illumination of a warning lamp on the instrument panel.The switch contains three sets of electrical contacts and a (normally extended) spring loaded plunger that actuates the contacts as it moves.As installed in the vehicle, the plunger contacts the brake pedal arm and is pushed into the switch; as the driver applies the pedal the plunger extends.One set of contacts (BLS) operates the stop lamps, a second set (EWM) controls the shift interlock system, and a third set (BS) is used by an on-board diagnostic (OBD) system to monitor switch operation.The cruise control monitors the BLS signal to determine when the brake is applied, the primary way the system is disabled when set.The relative timing of contact actuation in response to plunger movement allows the OBD system to detect a switch fault.When a fault is detected a malfunction indication lamp (MIL) is illuminated (driver alert), a diagnostic trouble code (DTC) is stored (for the service technician), and cruise control operation is inhibited (as a failsafe).In its response to ODI's January 2011 information request letter, MB explained its assessment of switch failures which was based primarily on evaluation of field return failures.MB identified both 1) electrical contact and 2) mechanical switch failure mechanisms.According to MB's analysis, electrical contact failure is the predominate failure type and the failure consequence depends on which contact fails.For instance MB claims that BLS contact failures are momentary in nature and do not affect brake light operation but are nonetheless detected by the OBD system, resulting in a DTC and subsequent replacement.Electrical contact failures of the BS and EWM contacts result in a DTC also, and EWM contact failures result in the shifter being stuck in the park (which can be overridden by the consumer).Accordingly MB maintains that electrical contact failures of the switch have no safety consequence since the brake lamps remain operational and the cruise control is always disabled.MB determined that mechanical failures of the switch, which are rare in their assessment, can result from internal wear and/or increased switch operating temperatures.High temperatures occur due to overheating of the BLS contacts and can cause the internal plastic components to melt.In one scenario overheated BLS contacts may melt to the extended plunger and are damaged when the brake pedal is released resulting in the brake lights staying on.In another scenario the increased temperatures and/or internal wear can cause the plunger to stick in the fully depressed position.In this case the cruise may not cancel when the brake is applied and the driver may have to use high brake pedal forces or other means (shifting to neutral or using the cruise master switch) to disengage the cruise.Additionally the vacuum assist can be depleted if the driver pumps the brakes resulting in reduced braking effectiveness and even higher pedal forces.In its March 31, 2011 defect notification, MB stated that to remediate the potential need for excessive brake force it would conduct a safety recall (11V-208) to replace the switch with a more robustly designed component.The recall includes 136,751 model year 2000 - 2002 M-Class and model year 2000 - 2004 M-Class AMG vehicles.Owner notification letters will be mailed
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
ODI opened the investigation based on reports that the subject vehicle brake lamp switch (switch) failure caused 1) inoperative brake lamps (stay on or fail to illuminate), and/or 2) shift interlock failure (shifter locked in park), and/or 3) the cruise control to fail to cancel with brake application.Consumers also reported the illumination of a warning lamp on the instrument panel.The switch contains three sets of electrical contacts and a (normally extended) spring loaded plunger that actuates the contacts as it moves.As installed in the vehicle, the plunger contacts the brake pedal arm and is pushed into the switch; as the driver applies the pedal the plunger extends.One set of contacts (BLS) operates the stop lamps, a second set (EWM) controls the shift interlock system, and a third set (BS) is used by an on-board diagnostic (OBD) system to monitor switch operation.The cruise control monitors the BLS signal to determine when the brake is applied, the primary way the system is disabled when set.The relative timing of contact actuation in response to plunger movement allows the OBD system to detect a switch fault.When a fault is detected a malfunction indication lamp (MIL) is illuminated (driver alert), a diagnostic trouble code (DTC) is stored (for the service technician), and cruise control operation is inhibited (as a failsafe).In its response to ODI's January 2011 information request letter, MB explained its assessment of switch failures which was based primarily on evaluation of field return failures.MB identified both 1) electrical contact and 2) mechanical switch failure mechanisms.According to MB's analysis, electrical contact failure is the predominate failure type and the failure consequence depends on which contact fails.For instance MB claims that BLS contact failures are momentary in nature and do not affect brake light operation but are nonetheless detected by the OBD system, resulting in a DTC and subsequent replacement.Electrical contact failures of the BS and EWM contacts result in a DTC also, and EWM contact failures result in the shifter being stuck in the park (which can be overridden by the consumer).Accordingly MB maintains that electrical contact failures of the switch have no safety consequence since the brake lamps remain operational and the cruise control is always disabled.MB determined that mechanical failures of the switch, which are rare in their assessment, can result from internal wear and/or increased switch operating temperatures.High temperatures occur due to overheating of the BLS contacts and can cause the internal plastic components to melt.In one scenario overheated BLS contacts may melt to the extended plunger and are damaged when the brake pedal is released resulting in the brake lights staying on.In another scenario the increased temperatures and/or internal wear can cause the plunger to stick in the fully depressed position.In this case the cruise may not cancel when the brake is applied and the driver may have to use high brake pedal forces or other means (shifting to neutral or using the cruise master switch) to disengage the cruise.Additionally the vacuum assist can be depleted if the driver pumps the brakes resulting in reduced braking effectiveness and even higher pedal forces.In its March 31, 2011 defect notification, MB stated that to remediate the potential need for excessive brake force it would conduct a safety recall (11V-208) to replace the switch with a more robustly designed component.The recall includes 136,751 model year 2000 - 2002 M-Class and model year 2000 - 2004 M-Class AMG vehicles.Owner notification letters will be mailed
Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
ODI opened the investigation based on reports that the subject vehicle brake lamp switch (switch) failure caused 1) inoperative brake lamps (stay on or fail to illuminate), and/or 2) shift interlock failure (shifter locked in park), and/or 3) the cruise control to fail to cancel with brake application.Consumers also reported the illumination of a warning lamp on the instrument panel.The switch contains three sets of electrical contacts and a (normally extended) spring loaded plunger that actuates the contacts as it moves.As installed in the vehicle, the plunger contacts the brake pedal arm and is pushed into the switch; as the driver applies the pedal the plunger extends.One set of contacts (BLS) operates the stop lamps, a second set (EWM) controls the shift interlock system, and a third set (BS) is used by an on-board diagnostic (OBD) system to monitor switch operation.The cruise control monitors the BLS signal to determine when the brake is applied, the primary way the system is disabled when set.The relative timing of contact actuation in response to plunger movement allows the OBD system to detect a switch fault.When a fault is detected a malfunction indication lamp (MIL) is illuminated (driver alert), a diagnostic trouble code (DTC) is stored (for the service technician), and cruise control operation is inhibited (as a failsafe).In its response to ODI's January 2011 information request letter, MB explained its assessment of switch failures which was based primarily on evaluation of field return failures.MB identified both 1) electrical contact and 2) mechanical switch failure mechanisms.According to MB's analysis, electrical contact failure is the predominate failure type and the failure consequence depends on which contact fails.For instance MB claims that BLS contact failures are momentary in nature and do not affect brake light operation but are nonetheless detected by the OBD system, resulting in a DTC and subsequent replacement.Electrical contact failures of the BS and EWM contacts result in a DTC also, and EWM contact failures result in the shifter being stuck in the park (which can be overridden by the consumer).Accordingly MB maintains that electrical contact failures of the switch have no safety consequence since the brake lamps remain operational and the cruise control is always disabled.MB determined that mechanical failures of the switch, which are rare in their assessment, can result from internal wear and/or increased switch operating temperatures.High temperatures occur due to overheating of the BLS contacts and can cause the internal plastic components to melt.In one scenario overheated BLS contacts may melt to the extended plunger and are damaged when the brake pedal is released resulting in the brake lights staying on.In another scenario the increased temperatures and/or internal wear can cause the plunger to stick in the fully depressed position.In this case the cruise may not cancel when the brake is applied and the driver may have to use high brake pedal forces or other means (shifting to neutral or using the cruise master switch) to disengage the cruise.Additionally the vacuum assist can be depleted if the driver pumps the brakes resulting in reduced braking effectiveness and even higher pedal forces.In its March 31, 2011 defect notification, MB stated that to remediate the potential need for excessive brake force it would conduct a safety recall (11V-208) to replace the switch with a more robustly designed component.The recall includes 136,751 model year 2000 - 2002 M-Class and model year 2000 - 2004 M-Class AMG vehicles.Owner notification letters will be mailed
Vehicle Speed Control
ODI opened the investigation based on reports that the subject vehicle brake lamp switch (switch) failure caused 1) inoperative brake lamps (stay on or fail to illuminate), and/or 2) shift interlock failure (shifter locked in park), and/or 3) the cruise control to fail to cancel with brake application.Consumers also reported the illumination of a warning lamp on the instrument panel.The switch contains three sets of electrical contacts and a (normally extended) spring loaded plunger that actuates the contacts as it moves.As installed in the vehicle, the plunger contacts the brake pedal arm and is pushed into the switch; as the driver applies the pedal the plunger extends.One set of contacts (BLS) operates the stop lamps, a second set (EWM) controls the shift interlock system, and a third set (BS) is used by an on-board diagnostic (OBD) system to monitor switch operation.The cruise control monitors the BLS signal to determine when the brake is applied, the primary way the system is disabled when set.The relative timing of contact actuation in response to plunger movement allows the OBD system to detect a switch fault.When a fault is detected a malfunction indication lamp (MIL) is illuminated (driver alert), a diagnostic trouble code (DTC) is stored (for the service technician), and cruise control operation is inhibited (as a failsafe).In its response to ODI's January 2011 information request letter, MB explained its assessment of switch failures which was based primarily on evaluation of field return failures.MB identified both 1) electrical contact and 2) mechanical switch failure mechanisms.According to MB's analysis, electrical contact failure is the predominate failure type and the failure consequence depends on which contact fails.For instance MB claims that BLS contact failures are momentary in nature and do not affect brake light operation but are nonetheless detected by the OBD system, resulting in a DTC and subsequent replacement.Electrical contact failures of the BS and EWM contacts result in a DTC also, and EWM contact failures result in the shifter being stuck in the park (which can be overridden by the consumer).Accordingly MB maintains that electrical contact failures of the switch have no safety consequence since the brake lamps remain operational and the cruise control is always disabled.MB determined that mechanical failures of the switch, which are rare in their assessment, can result from internal wear and/or increased switch operating temperatures.High temperatures occur due to overheating of the BLS contacts and can cause the internal plastic components to melt.In one scenario overheated BLS contacts may melt to the extended plunger and are damaged when the brake pedal is released resulting in the brake lights staying on.In another scenario the increased temperatures and/or internal wear can cause the plunger to stick in the fully depressed position.In this case the cruise may not cancel when the brake is applied and the driver may have to use high brake pedal forces or other means (shifting to neutral or using the cruise master switch) to disengage the cruise.Additionally the vacuum assist can be depleted if the driver pumps the brakes resulting in reduced braking effectiveness and even higher pedal forces.In its March 31, 2011 defect notification, MB stated that to remediate the potential need for excessive brake force it would conduct a safety recall (11V-208) to replace the switch with a more robustly designed component.The recall includes 136,751 model year 2000 - 2002 M-Class and model year 2000 - 2004 M-Class AMG vehicles.Owner notification letters will be mailed
PE07007 · Electronic Stability Control Malfunction
Opened Feb 1, 2007 · Closed Jul 11, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electronic Stability Control:automatic (asc)
ODI OPENED PE07-007 AFTER RECEIVING 4 COMPLAINTS WITHIN A 6 WEEK PERIOD ALLEGING INCIDENTS OF UNCOMMANDED BRAKE APPLICATION IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000 THROUGH 2001 MERCEDES M CLASS SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE REPORTS OR GATHERED IN SUBSEQUENT CONSUMER INTERVIEWS INDICATED THAT THE INCIDENTS WERE CAUSED BY FAULTS IN THE ELECTRONIC STABILITY PROGRAM (ESP) SYSTEM WHICH WERE REPAIRED BY REPLACING THE YAW RATE SENSORS.ALTHOUGH THE SAME YAW RATE SENSOR IS USED IN APPROXIMATELY 800,000 OTHER MERCEDES M-CLASS, C-CLASS AND SLK MODELS, TO DATE THERE HAS BEEN ONLY ONE RELATED COMPLAINT TO ODI IN THOSE VEHICLES. DURING THIS INVESTIGATION MERCEDES BENZ PROVIDED ODI WITH 327 COMPLAINTS RELATED TO THE ESP SYSTEM IN THE MY 2000 THROUGH 2001 M CLASS VEHICLES.SEVEN OF THE COMPLAINTS SUBMITTED BY MERCEDES ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNCOMMANDED BRAKE ACTIVATION WHILE DRIVING, WITH TWO OF THESE INVOLVING VEHICLES IDENTIFIED IN THE ODI COMPLAINTS.NONE OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTED IN CRASH OR INJURY.HOWEVER, THE OWNERS DID EXPRESS SAFETY CONCERNS DUE TO THE SUDDEN, UNEXPECTED CHANGE IN VEHICLE SPEED AND DIRECTION. ON MAY 10, 2007 MERCEDES BENZ MET WITH NHTSA TO PROVIDE A TECHNICAL PRESENTATION AND CONDUCT A DRIVING DEMONSTRATION OF THE ESP SYSTEM PERFORMANCE WITH SIMULATED ELECTRICAL FAULTS IN THE YAW RATE SENSOR.MERCEDES SHOWED THAT THE ESP SYSTEM IS PROGRAMMED TO DIAGNOSE ELECTRICAL FAULTS AND THAT BRAKE APPLICATIONS RESULTING FROM YAW RATE SENSOR ELECTRICAL FAULTS ARE VERY SHORT IN DURATION (0.3 SECONDS OR LESS) AND DO NOT AFFECT VEHICLE CONTROL OR STABILITY. NINE OF THE CONSUMER COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND MERCEDES ALLEGED BRAKE ACTIVATIONS LONGER THAN 0.3 SECONDS, WITH SEVERAL ALLEGING THAT THE INCIDENT LASTED UNTIL THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP.A COMPLAINT VEHICLE THAT ALLEGED MULTIPLE INCIDENTS WAS EVALUATED BY ODI AT THE VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TEST CENTER (VRTC) IN EAST LIBERTY, OHIO.VRTC WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE CONDITION.DUE TO THE LOW COMPLAINT RATE AND ONLY ONE NEW COMPLAINT TO ODI OR MERCEDES SINCE JANUARY 2007, THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN CLOSED.ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND OTHER MERCEDES PRODUCTS USING THE SAME YAW RATE SENSOR AND MERCEDES WILL PROVIDE UPDATES ON FIELD EXPERIENCE (COMPLAINTS, FIELD REPORTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS) THROUGH THE END OF 2007.
PE03058 · Engine Crankshaft Pulley Failure
Opened Dec 17, 2003 · Closed Apr 22, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline:belts And Associated Pulleys
THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY HARMONIC BALANCER FAILURE THAT COULD RESULT IN LOSS OF POWER-STEERING ASSIST.ODI HAS RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 546 NON-DUPLICATIVE REPORTS THAT ALLEGE ENGINE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY HARMONIC BALANCER FAILURE ON ALL MERCEDES-BENZ VEHICLES USING THE SUBJECT COMPONENT.THE SUBJECT COMPONENT FAILURES ARE PROGRESSIVE IN NATURE AND ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINTS AND WARRANT CLAIMS INVOLVED A FAILURE THAT HAD PROGRESSED FAR ENOUGH TO EFFECT POWER STEERING PERFORMANCE (6 OF 55 ODI COMPLAINTS REFERENCE INCREASED STEERING EFFORT).THERE HAVE BEEN NO CRASHES OR INJURIES RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND 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 BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE SUMMARY REPORT ATTACHED FOR FURTHER DETAIL.
PE03006 · Power Steering Hose Assembly Leakage
Opened Feb 13, 2003 · Closed Apr 4, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering:hydraulic Power Assist:hose, Piping, And Connections; Steering:hydraulic Power Assist:power Steering Fluid
THE HOSE CLAMP USED TO SECURE THE POWER STEERING FLUID COOLING HOSE TO THE STEERING FLUID COOLER MAY NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT CLAMPING FORCE FOR THE CONNECTION.THE LOSS OF POWER STEERING FLUID MAY RESULT IN GRADUAL REDUCTION IN POWER STEERING ASSIST (I.E., INCREASED STEERING EFFORT) OVER TIME, WITH POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO THE POWER STEERING PUMP. THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN A FEW INCIDENTS OF HOSE SEPARATION FROM THE FITTING, THAT HAVE RESULTED IN MORE RAPID REDUCTIONS OF POWER STEERING.TESTING CONDUCTED BY MERCEDES-BENZ INDICATES THAT THE LEAKED FLUID IS NOT LIKELY TO BE EXPOSED TO HOT ENGINE COMPONENTS.THERE ARE NO KNOWN ALLEGATIONS THAT THE DEFECT CONDITION HAS CAUSED A VEHICLE FIRE. MERCEDES-BENZ WILL CONDUCT A VOLUNTARY RECALL CAMPAIGN FOR THE SUBJECT M-CLASS VEHICLES.MERCEDES-BENZ WILL INSTALL A NEW HOSE CLAMP ON THE POWER STEERING HOSE TO THE POWER STEERING COOLER OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.DURING CLAMP REPLACEMENT, THE POWER STEERING COOLING HOSE WILL BE INSPECTED AND REPLACED AS NECESSARY.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:hydraulic Power Assist:hose, Piping, And Connections
THE HOSE CLAMP USED TO SECURE THE POWER STEERING FLUID COOLING HOSE TO THE STEERING FLUID COOLER MAY NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT CLAMPING FORCE FOR THE CONNECTION.THE LOSS OF POWER STEERING FLUID MAY RESULT IN GRADUAL REDUCTION IN POWER STEERING ASSIST (I.E., INCREASED STEERING EFFORT) OVER TIME, WITH POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO THE POWER STEERING PUMP. THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN A FEW INCIDENTS OF HOSE SEPARATION FROM THE FITTING, THAT HAVE RESULTED IN MORE RAPID REDUCTIONS OF POWER STEERING.TESTING CONDUCTED BY MERCEDES-BENZ INDICATES THAT THE LEAKED FLUID IS NOT LIKELY TO BE EXPOSED TO HOT ENGINE COMPONENTS.THERE ARE NO KNOWN ALLEGATIONS THAT THE DEFECT CONDITION HAS CAUSED A VEHICLE FIRE. MERCEDES-BENZ WILL CONDUCT A VOLUNTARY RECALL CAMPAIGN FOR THE SUBJECT M-CLASS VEHICLES.MERCEDES-BENZ WILL INSTALL A NEW HOSE CLAMP ON THE POWER STEERING HOSE TO THE POWER STEERING COOLER OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.DURING CLAMP REPLACEMENT, THE POWER STEERING COOLING HOSE WILL BE INSPECTED AND REPLACED AS NECESSARY.
Steering:hydraulic Power Assist:power Steering Fluid
THE HOSE CLAMP USED TO SECURE THE POWER STEERING FLUID COOLING HOSE TO THE STEERING FLUID COOLER MAY NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT CLAMPING FORCE FOR THE CONNECTION.THE LOSS OF POWER STEERING FLUID MAY RESULT IN GRADUAL REDUCTION IN POWER STEERING ASSIST (I.E., INCREASED STEERING EFFORT) OVER TIME, WITH POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO THE POWER STEERING PUMP. THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN A FEW INCIDENTS OF HOSE SEPARATION FROM THE FITTING, THAT HAVE RESULTED IN MORE RAPID REDUCTIONS OF POWER STEERING.TESTING CONDUCTED BY MERCEDES-BENZ INDICATES THAT THE LEAKED FLUID IS NOT LIKELY TO BE EXPOSED TO HOT ENGINE COMPONENTS.THERE ARE NO KNOWN ALLEGATIONS THAT THE DEFECT CONDITION HAS CAUSED A VEHICLE FIRE. MERCEDES-BENZ WILL CONDUCT A VOLUNTARY RECALL CAMPAIGN FOR THE SUBJECT M-CLASS VEHICLES.MERCEDES-BENZ WILL INSTALL A NEW HOSE CLAMP ON THE POWER STEERING HOSE TO THE POWER STEERING COOLER OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.DURING CLAMP REPLACEMENT, THE POWER STEERING COOLING HOSE WILL BE INSPECTED AND REPLACED AS NECESSARY.