2010 Mercedes-Benz C63

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened an investigation based on consumer allegations of loss of rear lighting in model year (MY) 2008-2011 Mercedes Benz C-Class vehicles.Complainants alleged that one or both rear lighting assemblies fail to illuminate (i.e., all lights housed within the assembly extinguish, including the stop, tail, and turn signal functions) or illuminate dimly.In some reports, complainants also alleged that the failure was accompanied by a burning smell emanating from the trunk of the vehicle.When examined, these vehicles showed evidence of overheating at the lighting assembly harness connector, including damaged (blackened) wiring and plastic.The rear lighting failures typically involved one side of the vehicle however in some cases both assemblies failed (although probably not simultaneously).ODI identified 5 fire and one injury allegations during the course of this investigation.Two fires occurred while the vehicles were parked.One originated in the vicinity of the driver?s side light assembly where the fire and associated damage was confined to the trunk area, and the fire self extinguished due to oxygen starvation.As a result of the fire, the vehicle was repurchased by Mercedes and salvaged.The second fire originated on the passenger's side and required fire department response to extinguish; the fire damaged the tail light and surrounding body panels as well as the trunk area and wiring.The vehicle was repaired and returned to service.Two firesoccurred while the vehicle was being driven.In the first instance, the driver detected an odor and pulled over to observe smoking and a small flame at the lighting assembly wiring in the trunk.The owner was able to extinguish the fire before any significant damage occurred.In the second instance, the driver smelled smoke, pulled over, and opened the trunk to find smoke and sparks emanating from the forward facing side of the tail light.The driver was able to extinguish the sparks and drive the vehicle to the dealer. A fifth fire was reported by a fleet manager who observed a vehicle with fire damage originating near one of the tail light assemblies.The injury incident occurred when a technician burned their hand while diagnosing a failed light.The technician touched the tail light wiring which was hot enough to burn him although the injury did not require medical attention.On April 10th, 2014, Mercedes notified ODI that it would conduct a safety recall to remedy the rear light assemblies in approximately 252,867 MY 2008 - 2011 C-Class vehicles including the C300, C350 and C63 AMG models.Each rear light assembly has separate bulbs that act as brake, tail lamp, backup and turn signal indicators.The bulbs are mounted in a bulb carrier which uses a common electrical ground circuit at the harness connection.According to Mercedes, oxidation due to the use of dissimilar metals on the harness and bulb carrier electrical connectors can result in increased resistance and a subsequent dimming or loss of lighting function.The heat caused by the increased resistance/oxidation can also lead to the melting of the surrounding plastic, or in some cases, present a fire hazard.In conducting recall 14V-171, Mercedes dealers will inspect the left and right bulb carriers and harness connectors for the presence of dissimilar electrical connectors and/or evidence of related thermal damage; affected bulb carriers and/or harness connectors will be replaced free of charge.Mercedes notes that service replacement bulb carriers produced from January 2012 eliminate the dissimilar metal condition and that these bulb carriers will not requ

TL* TAKATA RECALL. THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 MERCEDES-BENZ C63. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 16V363000 (AIR BAGS). THE DEALER (MERCEDES-BENZ OF SACRAMENTO, 1810 HOWE AVE, SACRAMENTO, CA 95825, 888-479-0451) WAS CONTACTED AND CONFIRMED THAT THE PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE RECALL REMEDY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. VIN TOOL CONFIRMS PARTS NOT AVAILABLE. *TT CONSUMER STATED BOTH DRIVER AND PASSENGER AIRBAGS WERE RECALLED. IT HAS BEEEN 3 YEARS THAT CONSUMER FILED A COMPLAINT STILL NO DATE FOR REPLACEMENT.*JB

NHTSA ID

11166005

Incident

Jan 9, 2019

I BOUGHT MY MERCEDES BRAND NEW, AND THERE SEEMS TO BE MULTIPLE PEOPLE WITH SAME ISSUE. I HAVE A LITTLE OVER 40000 MILES, AND MY CAR IS HAVING STARTING ISSUES. I TURN THE KEY, AND EVERYTHING COMES ON BUT THE CAR WON'T START, AND GOES INTO AN EMERGENCY COOL DOWN MODE WITH THE ENGINE FANS TURNING ON FULL BLAST. IT MAY BE THE ELECTRONIC IGNITION SYSTEM (EIS) THAT A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE SAME ISSUE MENTION. MERCEDES NEEDS TO DO A RECALL, AS THIS SEEMS TO BE A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ID

10703812

Incident

Apr 1, 2015

Mileage

40,050 mi

AN ALERT ON MY DASH BOARD SCREEN TELLING ME THAT MY BRAKE AND TAIL LIGHT MAY NOT BE FUNCTIONING. I HAVE READ THAT THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF COMPLAINTS WITH MERCEDES C SERIES CARS FROM 2008, 2009, 20010, 20011 THAT HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE TAIL LIGHT GROUND, MAY HAVE EVEN CAUSED FIRES IN SOME. I'M CONCERNED THIS MAY HAPPEN. *TR

NHTSA ID

10559336

Incident

Oct 9, 2013

Mileage

43,000 mi

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) has extended the warranty for the rear subframe on the vehicles listed below, from the original New Vehicle Limited Warranty of 4 years/50,000 miles to 20 years/unlimited miles, and applies to the vehicle regardless of ownership. This warranty extension applies to the replacement of the rear subframe under the standard warranty terms and conditions in the even the subframe experiences corrosion with perforation (holes). The extended warranty is applicable to the following vehicles: Model Year Model (platform) WIS reference 2005 - 2011 SLK-Class (R171) AR35.10-P-0010V 2012 - 2017 SLK-Class (R172) AR35.10-P-0010V 2012 - 2016 CLS-Class (C218) AR35.10-P-0010EW 2013 - 2016 SL-Class (R231) AR35.10-P-0010RK 2008 - 2015 C-Class Sedan/Coupe (W/C204) AR35.10-P-0010CW 2010 - 2015 GLK-Class (X204) AR35.10-P-0010CW 2010 - 2016 E-Class Sedan/Wagon (W/S212) AR35.10-P-0010EW 2010 - 2017 E-Class Coupe/Cabrio (C/A207) AR35.10-P-0010CW All models require cavity preservation on the rear axle carrier after the replacement according to AR35.10-P-0010-03A.

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) has extended the warranty for the rear subframe on the vehicles listed below, from the original New Vehicle Limited Warranty of 4 years/50,000 miles to 20 years/unlimited miles, and applies to the vehicle regardless of ownership. This warranty extension applies to the replacement of the rear subframe under the standard warranty terms and conditions in the event the subframe experiences corrosion with perforation (holes). The extended warranty is applicable to the following vehicles: Model Year Model (platform) WIS reference 2005 - 2011 SLK-Class (R171) AR35.10-P-0010V 2012 - 2017 SLK-Class (R172) AR35.10-P-0010V 2012 - 2016 CLS-Class (C218) AR35.10-P-0010EW 2013 - 2016 SL-Class (R231) AR35.10-P-0010RK 2008 - 2015 C-Class Sedan/Coupe (W/C204) AR35.10-P-0010CW 2010 - 2015 GLK-Class (X204) AR35.10-P-0010CW 2010 - 2016 E-Class Sedan/Wagon (W/S212) AR35.10-P-0010EW 2010 - 2017 E-Class Coupe/Cabrio (C/A207) AR35.10-P-0010CW All models require cavity preservation on the rear axle carrier after the replacement according to AR35.10-P-0010-03A.

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) has extended the warranty for the rear subframe on the vehicles listed below, from the original New Vehicle Limited Warranty of 4 years/50,000 miles to 20 years/unlimited miles, and applies to the vehicle regardless of ownership. This warranty extension applies to the replacement of the rear subframe under the standard warranty terms and conditions in the event the subframe experiences corrosion with perforation (holes). The extended warranty is applicable to the following vehicles: Model Year Model (platform) Model Year Model (platform) 2005 - 2011 SLK-Class (R171) 2008 - 2015 C-Class Sedan/Coupe (W/C204) 2012 - 2017 SLK-Class (R172) 2010 - 2015 GLK-Class (X204) 2012 - 2016 CLS-Class (C218) 2010 - 2016 E-Class Sedan/Wagon (W/S212) 2013 - 2016 SL-Class (R231) 2010 - 2017 E-Class Coupe/Cabrio (C/A207) Only the following damage code can be claimed for the replacement of the rear subframe due to corrosion with perforation: Damage Code: 35441 47 Always check VMI to determine if a vehicle is covered under this 20 years/unlimited miles extended warranty. Please

Complaint The garage door hand transmitter cannot be initialized with the integrated garage door opener in the inside rearview mirror. Cause 1. The integrated garage door opener (GDO) is not compatible with the opening system installed in the garage. 2. The garage door drive uses a rolling code system. In contrast to the fixed code system, the LED in the mirror in this case flashes green after programming. 3. When the handheld remote control is initialized with the integrated GDO, the distance between the handheld remote control and the GDO is too long or too short. 4. The maximum programming time of the hand transmitter was exceeded. The hand transmitter switches itself off after 10s to 20s. However, the garage door opener needs up to 30s to learn the code. 5. The maximum programming time of the integrated GDO was exceeded. The integrated GDO has aborted programming unsuccessfully. 6. The GDO cannot be programmed after replacement (See #9). 7. The batteries of the hand transmitter are too weak. 8. A part of the signal was not registered correctly. 9. The GDO is not programmed to US standards. 10. Errors with Chamberlin MyQ, Liftmaster MyQ, or Craftsman AssureLink systems causing loss of synchronization. Remedy Note: The numbering of the remedies refers to the numbering of the causes. 1. Installation of a universal receiver. Order via the Homelink Hotline. 2. In the case of garage door drives with rolling code system, synchronization of the garage door drive must also be performed. 3. Keep the correct distance when initializing! This can vary between 5 and 20 cm depending on the system. If the initialization attempt is unsuccessful, repeat the initialization process, changing the distance between the hand transmitter and the mirror.

Complaint The range of the integrated garage door opener (GTO) is too short. Cause 1. Vehicles equipped with infrared windows and/or a heated windshield may suffer from complaints involving low transmission power. 2. When comparing the range between the integrated GTO and the garage door hand transmitter, the garage door hand transmitter is tested outside the vehicle. 3. The garage door hand transmitter is being aimed towards the garage door, but the vehicle is in a different position. 4. The garage door drive is old. Remedy 1. The lower level of transmission power is mainly perceived by customers who did not have any infrared windows (code 595) or all-round infrared windows (code 596) or heated windshield (code 597) in their previous model or who have another model without this special equipment in their fleet. The loss in transmission has technical reasons, i.e. a thin metal film is fitted in the windows. Please consider these codes and advise the customer accordingly! Replacing parts does not remedy the problem. 2. Perform the comparison test between the integrated GDO and the garage door hand transmitter under identical conditions. The garage door hand transmitter must be inside the vehicle and must be held at the height of the inside rearview mirror. 3. The customer instinctively aims the garage door hand transmitter towards the door. However, the transmission direction of the integrated GDO depends on the position of the inside rearview mirror, and thus depends directly on the position of the vehicle relative to the receiving antenna of the garage door drive.

After starting the engine, the instrument cluster shows the "EBD not available, diagnosis/test stand" message in yellow.