IllustrationMotor vehicle accident head on and the airbags did not deploy.
2002 Mercedes Benz ML500
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 ML500 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
60–25K
125–50K
150–75K
275–100K
7100–150K
3150K+
20 reports with mileage · 7 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 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 5 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. 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.
1 crash reports0 fire reports1 injury reports
What owners actually said
27 reportsThere is a serious defect in the YAW rate sensors in these Mercedes ML W163's. Thank God I was driving down a secluded road and nobody was behind me, but my vehicles brakes locked up, on their own, even with my foot on the accelerator pedal, with no warning lights or warning signals. I have no error codes, and my vehicle is we…
Read full complaint
There is a serious defect in the YAW rate sensors in these Mercedes ML W163's. Thank God I was driving down a secluded road and nobody was behind me, but my vehicles brakes locked up, on their own, even with my foot on the accelerator pedal, with no warning lights or warning signals. I have no error codes, and my vehicle is well maintained. There are many many people that are having the same issue with their Mercedes ML's. Some people have experienced this happening to them at freeway speeds. The YAW rate sensors are at fault, and send a signal to the ABS pump which in turn locks up the brakes without even touching the brake pedal! This is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS to everyone in the vehicle, and to ANY other vehicle in the area. People can DIE! Again.. This is a terrible defective function of a sensor that will spontaneously apply the brakes fully to lock up automatically with no persuasion from the driver. It is extremely dangerous and can cause fatal injuries. This has been researched thru many Mercedes forums including benzworld.org, mbworld.org, Mercedesforum.com, and ml w163 Facebook forum, all of which many ML owners have experienced the braking system lockup, and in some cases accidents have occurred. Another unfortunate issue in this happening, is that the brake lights do not light up when this sudden braking happens due to the YAW rate sensor malfunction. If there is a vehicle behind a Mercedes ML when this sudden braking occurs, there is NO WARNING LIGHTS, and can cause a serious accident and injury or death! Many people, including myself, do not feel safe behind the wheel of our Mercedes ML's for fear of the brakes locking up in their own because of this poorly programmed default function of a possible faulty YAW rate sensor. This is the worst default function to ever have a vehicle do. I now steer clear of other Mercedes ML's in the road knowing they can automatically lock their brakes for no apparent reason. Please research this and take action!
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCEDES-BENZ ML500. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND THE LOW RANGE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT PULLED THE VEHICLE OVER AND TURNED OFF THE ENGINE. ONCE RESTARTED, THE VEHICLE OPERATED NORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE KEY FOB WAS UPDAT…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCEDES-BENZ ML500. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND THE LOW RANGE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT PULLED THE VEHICLE OVER AND TURNED OFF THE ENGINE. ONCE RESTARTED, THE VEHICLE OPERATED NORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE KEY FOB WAS UPDATED AND AN OIL CHANGE WAS PERFORMED; HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE INDEPENDENT MECHANIC AND THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. WALTER'S MERCEDES-BENZ OF RIVERSIDE (3213 ADAMS ST, RIVERSIDE, CA 92504, (951) 441-6182) WAS CONTACTED AND STATED THAT DIAGNOSTIC TESTING WAS NEEDED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 201,000.
HOUSE FROM POWER STEERING POMP IS LEAKING , DURING DRIVE I LOOSE POWER STEERING FLUID AND ALMOST I HIT CAT FROM ANOTHER LINE.
THIS WAS THE 3RD TIME IT HAPPENED, THIS TIME ON THE FREEWAY IN CALIFORNIA AND LASTED UNTIL THE CAR CAME TO A STOP. THE CAR WENT INTO BREAK MODE ON ITS OWN, THE CAR FISHTAILED AND CAME TO A STOP BEFORE RECOVERING. LUCKILY THE CAR BEHIND ME WAS ABLE TO STOP, I HEARD BREAKS SCREECHING, BUT NO KNOWN CRASHES. I SCARED ME TO DEATH …
Read full complaint
THIS WAS THE 3RD TIME IT HAPPENED, THIS TIME ON THE FREEWAY IN CALIFORNIA AND LASTED UNTIL THE CAR CAME TO A STOP. THE CAR WENT INTO BREAK MODE ON ITS OWN, THE CAR FISHTAILED AND CAME TO A STOP BEFORE RECOVERING. LUCKILY THE CAR BEHIND ME WAS ABLE TO STOP, I HEARD BREAKS SCREECHING, BUT NO KNOWN CRASHES. I SCARED ME TO DEATH AS THIS COULD HAVE IT COULD HAVE CAUSE A MULTI-CAR CRASH. I PULLED OFF THE FWY AND INTO A NEARBY GAS STATION AND CALLED AAA TO TOW MY VEHICLE TO THE MERCEDES REPAIR CENTER. THEY CANNOT RE-CREATE THE PROBLEM AND I WILL NOT TAKE MY CAR BACK UNTIL I AM SURE THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN FIXED. MERCEDES NEEDS TO RE-OPEN THIS CASE AND FIND OUT WHAT IS HAPPENING. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
I, 12 YEARS AGO WAS DRIVING MY ML 500 MERCEDES ON US 23 BETWEEN ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN AND SYLVANIA, IN OHIO. MY CAR SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER. I FORTUNATELY WAS ABLE TO SWERVE TO THE RIGHT AND THE CAR STOPPED. THIS OCCURRED TWICE. I HAVE SINCE SOLD MY CAR SEVERAL YEARS AGO. I CALLED MY DEALERSHIP IN SYLVANIA AT THE TIME, AND T…
Read full complaint
I, 12 YEARS AGO WAS DRIVING MY ML 500 MERCEDES ON US 23 BETWEEN ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN AND SYLVANIA, IN OHIO. MY CAR SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER. I FORTUNATELY WAS ABLE TO SWERVE TO THE RIGHT AND THE CAR STOPPED. THIS OCCURRED TWICE. I HAVE SINCE SOLD MY CAR SEVERAL YEARS AGO. I CALLED MY DEALERSHIP IN SYLVANIA AT THE TIME, AND THEY CHECKED WITH MERCEDES, WHO RELAYED THAT IT HAS TO DO WITH THE WEIGHT OF THE KEYS ON MY KEYCHAIN. THIS SOUNDED EERILY SIMILAR TO WHAT APPARENTLY HAS OCCURRED WITH THE GM CARS BEING RECALLED. PLEASE MAKE SURE THIS ISSUE IS INVESTIGATED FURTHER SO THAT NO INJURIES THAT CAN BE PREVENTED HAPPEN . REGARDS, *TR
POWER STEERING FLUID LEAKING IN SMALL DRIPS WHEN PARKED. HARD TO STEER AT TIMES AND MAKES LOUD NOISE. HAVE CONCERNS THAT STEERING MAY BE AFFECTED AND CAUSE TOTAL LOSS OF STEERING. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCEDES ML500. WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT AT ANY SPEED, THE CONTACT NOTICED AN OPTICAL DISTORTION ON THE REAR VIEW MIRROR WHICH AFFECTED HIS VISIBILITY OF THE VEHICLES LOCATED IN THE REAR. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING WHERE THE TECHNICIAN STATED THE REAR VIEW MIRROR HAD TO B…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCEDES ML500. WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT AT ANY SPEED, THE CONTACT NOTICED AN OPTICAL DISTORTION ON THE REAR VIEW MIRROR WHICH AFFECTED HIS VISIBILITY OF THE VEHICLES LOCATED IN THE REAR. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING WHERE THE TECHNICIAN STATED THE REAR VIEW MIRROR HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THE INTERIOR OF THE MIRROR CONTAINED LIQUID WHICH DETERIORATED OVER TIME AND CAUSED THE DISTORTION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 97,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCEDES BENZ ML 500. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BY AN AUTHORIZED DEALER UNDER THE RECALL ASSOCIATED WITH NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 08V465000 (STEERING: HYDRAULIC POWER ASSIST: HOSE, PIPING, AND CONNECTIONS). WHEN RECEIVING THE VEHICLE FROM THE AUTHORIZED DEALER, THE CONTACT BEGAN TO NOTICE POWER STEE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCEDES BENZ ML 500. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BY AN AUTHORIZED DEALER UNDER THE RECALL ASSOCIATED WITH NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 08V465000 (STEERING: HYDRAULIC POWER ASSIST: HOSE, PIPING, AND CONNECTIONS). WHEN RECEIVING THE VEHICLE FROM THE AUTHORIZED DEALER, THE CONTACT BEGAN TO NOTICE POWER STEERING FLUID LEAKING ONTO THE GROUND WHEREVER THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT POWER STEERING FLUID WAS LEAKING FROM THE VEHICLE BUT NO REMEDY WAS OFFERED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE PERSISTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 100,726 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 101,000.
2002 MERCEDES BENZ ML 500. CONSUMER WRITES REGARDING VEHICLE BRAKE FAILURE *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE BRAKES FAILED ON THE VEHICLE DUE TO THE BRAKE LINES LEAKING. *JB
Official recalls
101V290000 · Suspension:front:control Arm:upper Arm
Sep 10, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE LEFT FRONT UPPER CONTROL ARM MAY NOT MEET THE SPECIFIED STRENGTH REQUIREMENTS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE CONTROL ARM COULD FAIL, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE LEFT FRONT UPPER CONTROL ARM. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN SEPTEMBER 29, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT MERCEDES-BENZ AT 1-800-367-6372.
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
3PE10050 · 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
EA08009 · Brake Line Chafe
Opened Apr 28, 2008 · Closed Dec 16, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND MERCEDES AND WARRANTY CLAIM DATA SUBMITTED BY MERCEDES INDICATES THAT THE ALLEGED DEFECT HAS OCCURRED AT A LOW RATE (36.5 COMPLAINTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND 0.29 PERCENT WARRANTY CLAIM RATE), WITH NO DISCERNABLE DEFECT TREND INDICATING THAT THE RATE OF CHAFING RELATED BRAKE LINE FAILURES IS INCREASING.THERE HAVE BEEN NO NEW COMPLAINTS SINCE JANUARY 2009.WHEN THE ANALYSIS IS LIMITED TO INCIDENTS OF BRAKE LINE LEAKAGE THAT RESULTED IN ALLEGATIONS OF REDUCED BRAKE EFFECTIVENESS, THE RATE DROPS EVEN FURTHER (22.3 COMPLAINTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND 0.04 PERCENT WARRANTY CLAIM RATE). MERCEDES PROVIDED DATA SHOWING THAT IN THE RARE INSTANCES WHEN CHAFING DID PROGRESS TO BRAKE LINE LEAKAGE THE DRIVER WOULD BE IMMEDIATELY ALERTED TO A PROBLEM BY ILLUMINATION OF THE BRIGHT YELLOW ESP/BAS WARNING LAMP AND CHANGES IN BRAKE PEDAL FEEL.CONTINUED OPERATION WITH A LEAKING BRAKE LINE WOULD RESULT IN ILLUMINATION OF THE BRIGHT RED BRAKE WARNING LAMP AND AN AUDIBLE CHIME DUE TO LOW MASTER CYLINDER RESERVOIR LEVEL. CONTINUED OPERATION WITH THE BRAKE WARNING LAMP ILLUMINATED WOULD ULTIMATELY DRAIN THE RESERVOIR FOR THE AFFECTED CIRCUIT, RESULTING IN LOSS OF THE CIRCUIT AND AN APPROXIMATELY 80% INCREASE IN STOPPING DISTANCES. SURVEYS CONDUCTED BY ODI AND VRTC INDICATE THAT ROUTING ANOMALIES MAY BE MORE COMMON THAN THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA SUGGEST FOR THE SUBJECT LINE BUNDLE, WITH LINE CONTACT OR OTHER ROUTING ANOMALY NOTED IN 13 OF 51 VEHICLES SURVEYED BY ODI AND VRTC (25.5%).WHILE EVIDENCE OF CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL LINE AND SUBJECT BRAKE IN A PARTICULAR VEHICLE IS NOT NECESSARILY PREDICTIVE OF EVENTUAL LINE FAILURE/LEAKAGE, SIGNIFICANT CHAFING WEAR WAS NOTED IN TWO SURVEY VEHICLES (3.9%).TO ADDRESS CONCERNS WITH LINE ROUTING AND ENSURE THAT LINES WITH EVIDENT CHAFING DO NOT PROGRESS TO A LEAK CONDITION, MERCEDES WILL CONDUCT AN OWNER NOTIFICATION PROGRAM INSTRUCTING OWNERS TO BRING THE VEHICLES TO A DEALER FOR A FREE INSPECTION AND REPAIR.LINES THAT DO NOT HAVE A SPACER (RUBBER GROMMET OR OMEGA-CLIP) BETWEEN THE SUBJECT FUEL AND BRAKE LINES WILL HAVE AN OMEGA-CLIP SPACER INSTALLED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE LINES.BRAKE LINES WITH CHAFE MARKS WILL BE REPLACED. ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN CLOSED. THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST. THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS REFER TO THE EA08-009 CLOSING REPORT.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND MERCEDES AND WARRANTY CLAIM DATA SUBMITTED BY MERCEDES INDICATES THAT THE ALLEGED DEFECT HAS OCCURRED AT A LOW RATE (36.5 COMPLAINTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND 0.29 PERCENT WARRANTY CLAIM RATE), WITH NO DISCERNABLE DEFECT TREND INDICATING THAT THE RATE OF CHAFING RELATED BRAKE LINE FAILURES IS INCREASING.THERE HAVE BEEN NO NEW COMPLAINTS SINCE JANUARY 2009.WHEN THE ANALYSIS IS LIMITED TO INCIDENTS OF BRAKE LINE LEAKAGE THAT RESULTED IN ALLEGATIONS OF REDUCED BRAKE EFFECTIVENESS, THE RATE DROPS EVEN FURTHER (22.3 COMPLAINTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND 0.04 PERCENT WARRANTY CLAIM RATE). MERCEDES PROVIDED DATA SHOWING THAT IN THE RARE INSTANCES WHEN CHAFING DID PROGRESS TO BRAKE LINE LEAKAGE THE DRIVER WOULD BE IMMEDIATELY ALERTED TO A PROBLEM BY ILLUMINATION OF THE BRIGHT YELLOW ESP/BAS WARNING LAMP AND CHANGES IN BRAKE PEDAL FEEL.CONTINUED OPERATION WITH A LEAKING BRAKE LINE WOULD RESULT IN ILLUMINATION OF THE BRIGHT RED BRAKE WARNING LAMP AND AN AUDIBLE CHIME DUE TO LOW MASTER CYLINDER RESERVOIR LEVEL. CONTINUED OPERATION WITH THE BRAKE WARNING LAMP ILLUMINATED WOULD ULTIMATELY DRAIN THE RESERVOIR FOR THE AFFECTED CIRCUIT, RESULTING IN LOSS OF THE CIRCUIT AND AN APPROXIMATELY 80% INCREASE IN STOPPING DISTANCES. SURVEYS CONDUCTED BY ODI AND VRTC INDICATE THAT ROUTING ANOMALIES MAY BE MORE COMMON THAN THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA SUGGEST FOR THE SUBJECT LINE BUNDLE, WITH LINE CONTACT OR OTHER ROUTING ANOMALY NOTED IN 13 OF 51 VEHICLES SURVEYED BY ODI AND VRTC (25.5%).WHILE EVIDENCE OF CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL LINE AND SUBJECT BRAKE IN A PARTICULAR VEHICLE IS NOT NECESSARILY PREDICTIVE OF EVENTUAL LINE FAILURE/LEAKAGE, SIGNIFICANT CHAFING WEAR WAS NOTED IN TWO SURVEY VEHICLES (3.9%).TO ADDRESS CONCERNS WITH LINE ROUTING AND ENSURE THAT LINES WITH EVIDENT CHAFING DO NOT PROGRESS TO A LEAK CONDITION, MERCEDES WILL CONDUCT AN OWNER NOTIFICATION PROGRAM INSTRUCTING OWNERS TO BRING THE VEHICLES TO A DEALER FOR A FREE INSPECTION AND REPAIR.LINES THAT DO NOT HAVE A SPACER (RUBBER GROMMET OR OMEGA-CLIP) BETWEEN THE SUBJECT FUEL AND BRAKE LINES WILL HAVE AN OMEGA-CLIP SPACER INSTALLED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE LINES.BRAKE LINES WITH CHAFE MARKS WILL BE REPLACED. ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN CLOSED. THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST. THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS REFER TO THE EA08-009 CLOSING REPORT.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND MERCEDES AND WARRANTY CLAIM DATA SUBMITTED BY MERCEDES INDICATES THAT THE ALLEGED DEFECT HAS OCCURRED AT A LOW RATE (36.5 COMPLAINTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND 0.29 PERCENT WARRANTY CLAIM RATE), WITH NO DISCERNABLE DEFECT TREND INDICATING THAT THE RATE OF CHAFING RELATED BRAKE LINE FAILURES IS INCREASING.THERE HAVE BEEN NO NEW COMPLAINTS SINCE JANUARY 2009.WHEN THE ANALYSIS IS LIMITED TO INCIDENTS OF BRAKE LINE LEAKAGE THAT RESULTED IN ALLEGATIONS OF REDUCED BRAKE EFFECTIVENESS, THE RATE DROPS EVEN FURTHER (22.3 COMPLAINTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND 0.04 PERCENT WARRANTY CLAIM RATE). MERCEDES PROVIDED DATA SHOWING THAT IN THE RARE INSTANCES WHEN CHAFING DID PROGRESS TO BRAKE LINE LEAKAGE THE DRIVER WOULD BE IMMEDIATELY ALERTED TO A PROBLEM BY ILLUMINATION OF THE BRIGHT YELLOW ESP/BAS WARNING LAMP AND CHANGES IN BRAKE PEDAL FEEL.CONTINUED OPERATION WITH A LEAKING BRAKE LINE WOULD RESULT IN ILLUMINATION OF THE BRIGHT RED BRAKE WARNING LAMP AND AN AUDIBLE CHIME DUE TO LOW MASTER CYLINDER RESERVOIR LEVEL. CONTINUED OPERATION WITH THE BRAKE WARNING LAMP ILLUMINATED WOULD ULTIMATELY DRAIN THE RESERVOIR FOR THE AFFECTED CIRCUIT, RESULTING IN LOSS OF THE CIRCUIT AND AN APPROXIMATELY 80% INCREASE IN STOPPING DISTANCES. SURVEYS CONDUCTED BY ODI AND VRTC INDICATE THAT ROUTING ANOMALIES MAY BE MORE COMMON THAN THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA SUGGEST FOR THE SUBJECT LINE BUNDLE, WITH LINE CONTACT OR OTHER ROUTING ANOMALY NOTED IN 13 OF 51 VEHICLES SURVEYED BY ODI AND VRTC (25.5%).WHILE EVIDENCE OF CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL LINE AND SUBJECT BRAKE IN A PARTICULAR VEHICLE IS NOT NECESSARILY PREDICTIVE OF EVENTUAL LINE FAILURE/LEAKAGE, SIGNIFICANT CHAFING WEAR WAS NOTED IN TWO SURVEY VEHICLES (3.9%).TO ADDRESS CONCERNS WITH LINE ROUTING AND ENSURE THAT LINES WITH EVIDENT CHAFING DO NOT PROGRESS TO A LEAK CONDITION, MERCEDES WILL CONDUCT AN OWNER NOTIFICATION PROGRAM INSTRUCTING OWNERS TO BRING THE VEHICLES TO A DEALER FOR A FREE INSPECTION AND REPAIR.LINES THAT DO NOT HAVE A SPACER (RUBBER GROMMET OR OMEGA-CLIP) BETWEEN THE SUBJECT FUEL AND BRAKE LINES WILL HAVE AN OMEGA-CLIP SPACER INSTALLED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE LINES.BRAKE LINES WITH CHAFE MARKS WILL BE REPLACED. ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN CLOSED. THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST. THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS REFER TO THE EA08-009 CLOSING REPORT.
PE08002 · Brake Line Rupture
Opened Jan 10, 2008 · Closed Apr 28, 2008
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
MERCEDES-BENZ'S RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER FOR PE08-002 INDICATED THAT THE SUBJECT FUEL/BRAKE LINE BUNDLE (PART NO. A1634201526) WAS USED WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT CHANGE FROM MODEL YEAR 1998 THROUGH 2002 ON ALL M-CLASS LIGHT TRUCK VEHICLES.MERCEDES FURTHER INDICATED THAT IN 2002 A PROBLEM WAS IDENTIFIED IN PRODUCTION THAT COULD CAUSE UNWANTED CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL AND BRAKE LINES.IN MAY 2002, A PRODUCTION ACTION WAS AUTHORIZED AS A RESULT OF POST-PRODUCTION INSPECTIONS OF VEHICLES EXHIBITING CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL AND BRAKE LINES.THE ACTION AUTHORIZED THE USE OF ADDITIONAL PLASTIC SPACER CLIPS TO ELIMINATE SUCH CONTACT.MERCEDES HAS INDICATED THAT CONTACT BETWEEN THE LINES IS MORE LIKELY IN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH V-8 ENGINES DUE TO LESS FREE SPACE IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. ODIHAS RECEIVED ONE COMPLAINT FROM THE OWNER OF A MY2001 ML430 THAT WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH BECAUSE OF SUDDEN LOSE OF BRAKE EFFECTIVENESS. INSPECTION OF THE VEHICLE AFTER THE CRASH SHOWED THAT THE LOSS OF BRAKING WAS THE DIRECT RESULT OF CHAFFING OF THE FUEL LINE ON THE BRAKE LINE THAT CAUSED THE SUDDEN LOSE OF BRAKE LINE PRESSURE WHEN COMING TO A NORMAL TRAFFIC STOP.THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA08-009) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND POTENTIAL SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE RUPTURE OF THE FUEL LINE/BRAKE LINE BECAUSE OF CHAFFING IN ALL MERCEDES M-CLASS VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH V-8 ENGINES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
MERCEDES-BENZ'S RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER FOR PE08-002 INDICATED THAT THE SUBJECT FUEL/BRAKE LINE BUNDLE (PART NO. A1634201526) WAS USED WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT CHANGE FROM MODEL YEAR 1998 THROUGH 2002 ON ALL M-CLASS LIGHT TRUCK VEHICLES.MERCEDES FURTHER INDICATED THAT IN 2002 A PROBLEM WAS IDENTIFIED IN PRODUCTION THAT COULD CAUSE UNWANTED CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL AND BRAKE LINES.IN MAY 2002, A PRODUCTION ACTION WAS AUTHORIZED AS A RESULT OF POST-PRODUCTION INSPECTIONS OF VEHICLES EXHIBITING CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL AND BRAKE LINES.THE ACTION AUTHORIZED THE USE OF ADDITIONAL PLASTIC SPACER CLIPS TO ELIMINATE SUCH CONTACT.MERCEDES HAS INDICATED THAT CONTACT BETWEEN THE LINES IS MORE LIKELY IN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH V-8 ENGINES DUE TO LESS FREE SPACE IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. ODIHAS RECEIVED ONE COMPLAINT FROM THE OWNER OF A MY2001 ML430 THAT WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH BECAUSE OF SUDDEN LOSE OF BRAKE EFFECTIVENESS. INSPECTION OF THE VEHICLE AFTER THE CRASH SHOWED THAT THE LOSS OF BRAKING WAS THE DIRECT RESULT OF CHAFFING OF THE FUEL LINE ON THE BRAKE LINE THAT CAUSED THE SUDDEN LOSE OF BRAKE LINE PRESSURE WHEN COMING TO A NORMAL TRAFFIC STOP.THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA08-009) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND POTENTIAL SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE RUPTURE OF THE FUEL LINE/BRAKE LINE BECAUSE OF CHAFFING IN ALL MERCEDES M-CLASS VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH V-8 ENGINES.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
MERCEDES-BENZ'S RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER FOR PE08-002 INDICATED THAT THE SUBJECT FUEL/BRAKE LINE BUNDLE (PART NO. A1634201526) WAS USED WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT CHANGE FROM MODEL YEAR 1998 THROUGH 2002 ON ALL M-CLASS LIGHT TRUCK VEHICLES.MERCEDES FURTHER INDICATED THAT IN 2002 A PROBLEM WAS IDENTIFIED IN PRODUCTION THAT COULD CAUSE UNWANTED CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL AND BRAKE LINES.IN MAY 2002, A PRODUCTION ACTION WAS AUTHORIZED AS A RESULT OF POST-PRODUCTION INSPECTIONS OF VEHICLES EXHIBITING CONTACT BETWEEN THE FUEL AND BRAKE LINES.THE ACTION AUTHORIZED THE USE OF ADDITIONAL PLASTIC SPACER CLIPS TO ELIMINATE SUCH CONTACT.MERCEDES HAS INDICATED THAT CONTACT BETWEEN THE LINES IS MORE LIKELY IN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH V-8 ENGINES DUE TO LESS FREE SPACE IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. ODIHAS RECEIVED ONE COMPLAINT FROM THE OWNER OF A MY2001 ML430 THAT WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH BECAUSE OF SUDDEN LOSE OF BRAKE EFFECTIVENESS. INSPECTION OF THE VEHICLE AFTER THE CRASH SHOWED THAT THE LOSS OF BRAKING WAS THE DIRECT RESULT OF CHAFFING OF THE FUEL LINE ON THE BRAKE LINE THAT CAUSED THE SUDDEN LOSE OF BRAKE LINE PRESSURE WHEN COMING TO A NORMAL TRAFFIC STOP.THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA08-009) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND POTENTIAL SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE RUPTURE OF THE FUEL LINE/BRAKE LINE BECAUSE OF CHAFFING IN ALL MERCEDES M-CLASS VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH V-8 ENGINES.