RoadVitals

1998 Mercedes-Benz E Class

Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data

Data refreshed

Owner complaintsComplaints are reports submitted to NHTSA by owners and drivers. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a complaint does not establish that a defect exists. Volume is influenced by how many of a vehicle were sold, how long it has been on the road, and how much attention an issue has received.
24
Latest Oct 29, 2008
Safety recallsA safety recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle has a safety-related defect or does not comply with a federal motor vehicle safety standard. Recall repairs are free. Whether a specific vehicle is covered depends on its VIN — a recall listed for a model year does not necessarily apply to every vehicle of that year.
0
InvestigationsNHTSA opens an investigation to examine whether a safety defect may exist. An open investigation is not a determination that a defect exists, and many investigations close without a recall. Investigations can, however, lead to one.
2
Crash or fire reportedComplaints whose submitter recorded that a crash or a fire occurred. These are the reporter's own answers on the NHTSA form, not verified findings.
1

Overview

Our database contains 24 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 1998 Mercedes-Benz E Class, most frequently naming the suspension, electrical and transmission categories. 2 NHTSA investigations name it; and 6 manufacturer communications are on file.

Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.

What owners report

Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded

  • Suspension724.1%
  • Electrical413.8%
  • Transmission413.8%
  • Engine413.8%
  • Fuel system13.4%
  • Interior & seats13.4%
  • Exterior lighting13.4%
  • Steering13.4%

Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.

Safety recalls

No recalls in our database for this model year

That does not guarantee a specific vehicle is unaffected — recalls are issued against VINs, and new campaigns are announced regularly. Check a VIN on NHTSA.gov.

Safety investigations

NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.

PE07021ClosedPreliminary Evaluation

FRONT SUSPENSION COIL SPRING EJECTION

Opened Apr 19, 2007
Closed Aug 9, 2007

ODI HAS FOCUSED THIS INVESTIGATION ON ASSESSING THE RISKS POSED BY A SEPARATED SPRING AS (1) A ROAD HAZARD AND (2) THE POTENTIAL FOR VEHICLE CONTROL TO BE COMPROMISED AFTER THE FRONT COIL SPRING HAS BEEN EJECTED FROM ITS INTENDED POSITION IN THE VEHICLE.BOTH RISKS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH CORROSION, FLEXING, AND FRACTURE OF THE UPPER FRONT SUSPENSION MOUNTING BRACKET.TIME-IN-SERVICE FAILURE RATES ARE NOTABLY HIGHER IN SALT BELT STATES SINCE CORROSION IS A PRIMARY CONTRIBUTOR TO THE FAILURE MODE.SINCE A NUMBER OF INCIDENTS HAVE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING OPERATED, ODI IS SKEPTICAL THAT OWNERS CAN ALWAYS DETECT THE SUBTLE SIDE TO SIDE DIFFERENCE IN RIDE HEIGHT AND/OR INSPECT OR NOTICE THAT THE UPPER SUSPENSION BRACKET HAS BEEN COMPROMISED BY CORROSION.(1) ROAD HAZARD - ALTHOUGH THE (APPROX. 7 LB.) FRONT SUSPENSION SPRING THAT MAY BE EJECTED AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS COULD POSE A SERIOUS ROAD HAZARD TO PEDESTRIANS AND OTHER VEHICLES, THE OCCURRENCE RATE HAS BEEN LOW (.03% BASED ON 51 REPORTED INCIDENTS OCCURRING AND AN INITIAL POPULATION OF 172,781 VEHICLES AFTER 9 - 12 YEARS OF USE / EXPOSURE) AND THERE ARE NO KNOWN INJURIES, FATALITIES, OR PROPERTY DAMAGE REPORTS DUE TO AN EJECTED SPRING.ALSO, MANY OF THE 51 INCIDENTS OCCURRED AT LOW SPEED OR WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED OR PARKED.(2) VEHICLE CONTROL - VEHICLE HANDLING AND CONTROL COULD BE AFFECTED BY THE FRACTURE OF THE UPPER SUSPENSION MOUNT AND/OR THE ASSOCIATED SPRING EJECTION.ODI FIRST IDENTIFIED ITS CONCERN ABOUT CORROSION IN THE UPPER SUSPENSION BRACKET OF SUBJECT VEHICLES IN 2002, AT WHICH TIME MERCEDES PROVIDED A VIDEO THAT SHOWED THAT A VEHICLE COULD BE STEERED, STOPPED, AND CONTROLLED THROUGH VARIOUS MANEUVERS AT HIGH SPEEDS WITH A FRONT COIL SPRING COMPLETELY MISSING FROM THE VEHICLE. DURING PE07-021, IN ADDITION TO REVIEWING THE 2002 VIDEO-TAPE, ODI ENGINEERS DROVE AN EXEMPLAR VEHICLE WITH THE SPRING REMOVED AND SIMULATED VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF STEERING ANGLES TO ASSESS WHETHER THERE WERE ANY POSSIBLE CONDITIONS / DISPLACEMENTS IN WHICH THE SEPARATED SPRING MIGHT INTERFERE WITH THE WHEELS. IN A VEHICLE WITH THE FRONT SPRING REMOVED, THE TOP OF THE WHEEL CAN LIGHTLY CONTACT THE BOTTOM AREA OF THE WHEEL FENDER DURING HIGH ANGLE TURNS TYPICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH SLOWER SPEED MANEUVERS SUCH AS CITY DRIVING. THE LIGHT TIRE CONTACT GENERATED AN OBVIOUS GRINDING NOISE AND WOULD LIKELY ABRADE OR BEND THE EDGE OF THE FENDER WITH CONTINUED USE.HOWEVER, THE EXTENT OF THE INTERFERENCE WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO AFFECT VEHICLE STEERING AND DOES NOT OCCUR AT SMALLER TURNING ANGLES ASSOCIATED WITH HIGHWAY DRIVING.ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND AT THIS TIME.FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANT.

SUSPENSION:FRONT:SPRINGS:COIL SPRINGS
PE03058ClosedPreliminary Evaluation

ENGINE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY FAILURE

Opened Dec 17, 2003
Closed Apr 22, 2004

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.

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:GASOLINE:BELTS AND ASSOCIATED PULLEYS

Recent owner complaints

Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words

Body & structureSuspension
Filed Oct 29, 2008

I AM WRITING REGARDING AN INVESTIGATION INTO MERCEDES BENZ E300 (W210 CHASSIS) FAILURES. WHILE DRIVING ON THE MASSACHUSETTS TURNPIKE, ROUTE 90 ON MONDAY, MY SPRING PERCH FAILED, BROKE AWAY FROM THE VEHICLE AND WAS LOST ON THE HIGHWAY. THE PERCH LET GO WITH A VERY LOUD BANG, THEN A PRONOUNCED BUMP (PRESUMABLY AS THE REAR TIRE DROVE OVER THE SPRING ASSEMBLY.) THE CAR SUDDENLY DROPPED HARD ON THE FRONT RIGHT BUMP STOPS. LOTS OF WARNING LIGHTS - BAS, ASR, ETC. I THOUGHT I BLEW A TIRE OR HIT SOME ROAD DAMAGE. SURPRISINGLY, JUST A LITTLE SWERVE IN THE LEFT LANE AND I MADE IT TO THE RIGHT SHOULDER AFTER A 1/4 MILE. I HAD HEARD OF THE SPRING PERCH FAILURES FROM THE USER FORUMS AT WWW.MERCEDESSHOP.COM. AT THIS POINT I WAS PRETTY SURE IT WAS A PERCH OR POSSIBLY SOMETHING WORSE BECAUSE THERE WAS NO TIRE SMOKE, BURNING OR NOISE. I CHECKED THE TIRES & DROVE IT 15 MILES HOME. PUT IT UP ON JACKS & FOUND NO SPRING AT ALL & SOME DISCONNECTED SENSOR WIRES. DROVE IT 10 MILES TO MY INDEPENDENT SHOP. WAITING FOR WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. STILL NO WORD FROM THE DEALER HE CONTACTED. I GUESS THAT'S MY NEXT MOVE. *TR

NHTSA ID
10247135
Incident
Oct 27, 2008
Mileage
201,500 mi
Suspension
Filed Jun 2, 2007

1998 MERCEDES BENZ E-320, SPEED <15 MPH HAD THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE COIL SPRING EJECTED AND HOUSING COMPLETELY SEPARATED FROM THE VEHICLE MAKING THE FRONT END DROP DOWN ONTO DRIVER'S SIDE FRONT TIRE WITHOUT WARNING. THE IMPINGEMENT OF THE BODY ONTO THE TIRE AND WHEEL AND/OR THE SPRING ITSELF PRECLUDED ANY STEERING CONTROL. THE COIL SPRING MOUNT OR "SADDLE" HAD SEPARATED FROM THE WELDED POINT TO THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. MERCEDES OFFERRED TO PAY 25% OF THE REPAIR FEE DUE TO EXCELLENT SERVICE HISTORY. WE REPEATEDLY REQUESTED A TEAM FROM MERCEDES TO INSPECT THE VEHICLE BECAUSE THIS VEHICLE WOULD BE IDEAL TO INVESTIGATE AS NO OTHER COMPLICATING CRASH HAD OCCURRED. THEY REFUSED THIS. MY WIFE AUTHORIZED THE REPAIR BUT INDICATED THAT WE WANTED ALL PARTS TO BE SAVED FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY THE NHTSA.THE NEXT DAY, THE SERVICE MANAGER REPORTED THAT MERCEDES NOW OFFERRED TO PAY 50% OF REPAIR COST BUT REQUIRED A "WAIVER" BE SIGNED TO "HOLD HARMLESS" MERCEDES FROM ANY FURTHER PROBLEMS OR DAMAGES INCURRED WITH THIS PART OF THE VEHICLE. WE REFUSED TO SIGN ANY WAIVER AS IT IS OUR EXPECTATION THAT THE REPAIR BE COMPLETED IN A MANNER TO ENSURE THE VEHICLE'S FUTURE SAFETY. WE CONTACTED THE BODY SHOP WITH THE PLAN TO INFORM MERCEDES THAT WE WOULD BE TOWING THE VEHICLE TO ANOTHER SHOP FOR FURTHER INSPECTION/ REPAIR. WE WERE INFORMED THE REPAIR HAD ALREADY BEEN COMPELTED AND THAT THE CAR WAS NOW AT THE DEALERSHIP FOR ALLIGNMENT BUT OLD PARTS WERE SAVED FOR US. MERCEDES NEVER INFORMED US OF ANY OPEN INVESTIGATION REGARDING THIS VEHICLE EVEN WHEN DIRECTLY ASKED THIS QUESTION. WE ANTICIPATE THE REPAIR TO EXCEED $1,000 PLUS TOWING. I DISAGREE WITH INFORMATION PROVIDED BY MERCEDES IN EARLIER INVESTIGATIONS INDICATING THAT THIS FAILURE WOULD NOT RESULT IN A LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. I COMPLETELY LOST ALL ABILITY TO STEER THE VEHICLE AND WAS ONLY ABLE TO STOP WITHOUT CRASHING BECAUSE IT OCCURRED AT LOW SPEED WITH NO OTHER VEHICLES OR OBJECTS AROUND ME. *TR

NHTSA ID
10192300
Incident
May 29, 2007
Mileage
153,000 mi
Suspension
Filed Jul 31, 2006

THE MAIN SUSPENSION SPRING FROM MY RIGHT FRONT TIRE FELL OUT ON THE GARAGE FLOOR AND THE CAR CAME DOWN ON THE TIRE. TWO MINUTES BEFORE THE CAR WAS BEING DRIVING ON THE ROAD AT 60 MPH AND HAD IT OCCURRED TWO MINUTES EARLIER SOMEONE WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED. THE POOR DESIGN BY MB CAUSED EXCESS RUST AND FAILURE IN THE 1998 MB E320. *JB

NHTSA ID
10163953
Incident
Jul 13, 2006
Suspension
Filed Jun 7, 2006

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS AT A STOP, THE FRONT END COLLAPSED TO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP, WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE SPRING PERCH FRACTURED. THE SPRING PERCH WAS REPLACED.

NHTSA ID
10159242
Incident
Jun 7, 2006
Mileage
140,000 mi
Engine
Filed Mar 22, 2006

CATALYTIC CONVERTER LOOSE INSIDE, RATTLING AND NOT EFFECTIVE. *JB

NHTSA ID
10153386
Incident
Feb 14, 2006
Mileage
156,982 mi
Tires & wheels
Filed Mar 3, 2006

TIRES OVERHEAT ON DRY PAVEMENT, CAUSING DECREASED TRACTION. *JB

NHTSA ID
10151735
Incident
Jan 1, 2006
Mileage
150,000 mi
Suspension
Filed Jan 3, 2006

1998 MERCEDES BENZ E300D 4 DOOR SEDAN. DRIVER SIDE SPRING PERCH IS RUSTED AND PEELING OFF DUE TO MANUFACTURING DEFECT. CAR IS DANGEROUS TO DRIVE THE WAY IT IS DUE TO THIS MANUFACTURING DEFECT. THIS IS A KNOWN ISSUE ON MANY FORUMS AS WELL AS PREVIOUS HTTP://WWW.MERCEDESSHOP.COM/SHOPFORUM/SHOWTHREAD.PHP3?T=95228. *NM

NHTSA ID
10146834
Incident
Dec 15, 2005
Mileage
115,000 mi
Transmission
Filed Dec 13, 2005

AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION FAILURE, STAYS ON 1ST. GEAR (ROUGH RUN). TOOK TO AUTHORIZED MBZ REPAIR STATION, THEY RESET THE "COMPUTER" AND RUN APPROXIMATELY 450 MILES OK AND AGAIN THE SAME PROBLEM. WENT BACK AND THEY FLUSHED THE TRANSMISSION AND RESET AGAIN "COMPUTER FAULTS", RUN AGAIN FOR 75 MILES AND SAME PROBLEM, AND SO ON.....*JB

NHTSA ID
10145133
Incident
Sep 9, 2005
Mileage
139,500 mi

Manufacturer communications

A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.

LI68.05-P-059193

EQUIPMENT:ELECTRICAL:ANTI-THEFT DEVICES

SENTEX gate operator with Clik Card Remote not compatible with Homelink

8210196

EXTERIOR LIGHTING:FOG LIGHTS

REVISED REPAIR PROCEDURE AND ADDITIONAL APPLICABLE MODELS. MODEL 170, 202, 208 AND 210 MODELS. FRONT FOG LAMP(S) INOPERATIVE. MERCEDES-BENZ. *TT MODEL YEARS: 1994-2004. UPDATED 09/09/08. *PE

885040

STRUCTURE:BODY:TRUNK LID

TRUNK LID OPENS OR CLOSES TOO QUICKLY WHILE OPERATING WITH REMOTE TRUNK LID CONTROL BUTTON. *TT

5410117

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

CONSUMER SHUTOFF DISPLAYED IN INSTRUMENT CLUSTER WHILE DRIVING. *TT

PSIMBNA4020M

TIRES

UPDATED INFORMATION TO REFLECT ADDITON OF APPROVED TIRES. *YC

980420187-98

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:GASOLINE

SOME VEHICLES MAY EXPERIENCE A ENGINE RATTLE NOISE.

Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.

Compare model years

Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model

Mercedes-Benz E Class by model year
YearComplaintsRecallsInvestigationsIssue Index
2008500
2006101144.1
2005931
2004154049.9
2003454046.7
2002800
2001150238.7
2000341343.5
1999131239.6
1998Viewing240237.7
1997381243.9
1996162143.7
1995212048.5
1994382053.8
1993720
1992020
1991010
1990010
1989010
1988010
1987010
1986010
1985010

Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.