2013 Mercedes-Benz E330

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.

On April 10, 2020, NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a defect petition from Mr. Surjit Singh alleging premature corrosion of the rear brake lines in his 2013 Mercedes-Benz E350 sedan. The petitioner states that he was recently informed by a Mercedes dealer service department that his car had severely rusted brake lines that need[ed] to be replaced immediately at a cost of about $3300. He further stated that the dealer service advisor informed him that he had seen the issue on many cars like his. The petitioner requested ?that NHTSA launch an investigation into this serious issue of rusting brake lines on [his] 2013 Mercedes E350.? The brake line corrosion reported by the petitioner did not result in brake line leakage or any compromise in brake system performance before it was detected in a dealer vehicle inspection. The petitioner submitted a complaint to NHTSA documenting his experience (NHTSA ID 11319024).On April 24, 2020, ODI opened Defect Petition DP20-004 to evaluate the petitioner?s request. ODI conducted a search for all consumer complaints and Early Warning Reporting (EWR) data related to allegations of brake line corrosion or leakage in 2013 Mercedes-Benz E350 sedans and similarly equipped vehicles. The 2013 E350 is a fourth-generation Mercedes-Benz E-Class vehicle (W212 platform), which was first sold in the United States in 2009 as a 2010 model. Mercedes-Benz sold approximately 245 thousand model year 2010 through 2015 E-Class sedan and wagon vehicles in the United States with the same brake line design as the petitioner?s vehicle.ODI?s search for complaints and EWR data in 2013 Mercedes E350 vehicles found no additional records related to the alleged defect. Expanding the search to all W212 platform vehicles identified just one incident, a complaint alleging unspecified brake line corrosion and leakage in a 2011 Mercedes-Benz E550 (NHTSA ID 10902081). The complaint did not allege that the brake line leakage resulted in reduced brake performance, crash, or injury. The resulting failure rate of 0.4 failures per hundred thousand vehicles is extremely low for a population that includes vehicles that have been in service for over ten years. After reviewing the available data, ODI has not identified evidence of a defect trend in the subject E-Class vehicles that would support opening a defect investigation into premature brake line corrosion failure. NHTSA is authorized to issue an order requiring notification and remedy of a defect if the Agency?s investigation shows a defect in design, construction, or performance of a motor vehicle that presents an unreasonable risk to safety. 49 U.S.C. ?? 30102(a)(9), 30118. Since the information before the Agency is not indicative of a vehicle-based defect, it is unlikely that any investigation opened because of granting this petition would result in an order concerning the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect. Therefore, upon full consideration of the information presented in the petition and the potential risks to safety, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action if warranted or the potential for a future finding that a safety-related defect exists based upon additional information the agency may receive.A Federal Register notice further detailing NHTSA?s reasons for denial of the petition will be forthcoming.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 MERCEDES-BENZ E330. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 10 MPH, THE "VEHICLE INOPERATIVE, SEE OWNER'S MANUAL" WARNING MESSAGE ILLUMINATED AND THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE; HOWEVER, AFTER DRIVING A SHORT DISTANCE, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO MERCEDES-BENZ OF WILMINGTON (LOCATED AT 3801 LANCASTER PIKE, WILMINGTON, DE 19805, (302) 995-2211) TO BE DIAGNOSED, BUT THE MECHANIC WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE A DEFINITE CAUSE FOR THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT A SOFTWARE UPDATE MAY BE NECESSARY TO PREVENT THE FAILURE FROM RECURRING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE SOFTWARE UPDATE STILL HAD NOT BEEN PERFORMED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS INFORMED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.

NHTSA ID

11240408

Incident

Jul 26, 2019

Mileage

29,000 mi

WHEN YOU START UP THE CAR THERE IS A LOUD TAPPING/RATTLING NOISE SOUND. YOU CAN ALSO HEAR THIS NOISE WHILE IDLING IN TRAFFIC. IF I STOP AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT THE NOISE APPEARED TO GET LOUDER. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD BY THE SERVICE MANAGER THAT M BENZ HAS RECTIFIED THE PROBLEM IN THE ENGINE BY PUTTING INSULATION. I HAVE ALSO SPOKEN TO OTHER OWNERS WHO HAD TO REBUILD THE ENTIRE MOTOR IN ODOR TO STOP THE NOISE. AS A CONSUMER, I AM ASKING FOR YOUR HELP BECAUSE I AM NOT SURE WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS CAR AS IT GIVES OFF AN ODOR AND I AM NOT SURE IF THE FUEL INJECTORS ARE LEAKING. PLEASE HELP AS I DO NOT WANT TO PUT MYSELF OR MY FAMILY IN DANGER. *TR

NHTSA ID

10543266

Incident

May 15, 2013

Mileage

10,000 mi

Single throttle lift-off clunking noise from the side shaft when moving off (audible at the outboard end). The noise is heard once in each instance when changing direction of travel. Note: Sound file in attachment Cause If the complaint is eliminated by experimentally loosening the outboard collar nut (by 1 turn), the problem is due to cracking of the microweld between the wheel bearing inner race and the joint housing of the side shaft. Note: The collar nut must always be replaced after being loosened. See also LI33.20-P-078406 Remedy Coat contact surface of side shaft with wheel bearing with Molykote paint. To do this, proceed as follows: 1. Remove side shafts 2. Clean contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing before") before coating with Molykote, using "spirit" (free of dust and grease) 3. Coat contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing after") with Molykote and leave to dry for "one hour" in removed condition 4. Reinstall side shafts Note: Before using the antifriction coating (Molykote), stir it or shake it thoroughly for (at least 1 minute).

Complaint There are several types of complaint about noises or poor windshield wiper wiping performance: A: Wiper blades squeaking, chattering, shuddering B: The windshield is not wiped completely (streaking) C: During the downward movement water is pulled back onto the windshield from the A-pillar (Figure 1) D: After windshield cleaning, water keeps spraying onto the windshield for several wipe cycles (Figure 2) A1: The windshield and wiper blades are contaminated with residues from car washing facilities, identifiable by the water beading. The resulting differences in the friction values between the wiper blades and the windshield can excite the wiper blades to vibrate. Note: It is mostly wax residue from the washer system, but also water-repellent nano-particle coating for paint and/or silicone-based washer fluid, that could cause this problem. A partially dry windshield also has different friction values, which can likewise result in squeaking of the wiper blades A2: The wiper blades are worn by mechanical damage (wiper lip damaged by ice or insect debris, or deformed by long periods of disuse). A3: Incorrect angle of incidence of the wiper arms to the windshield. Because of this, the rubber lip of the wiper blade may not flip over at the reversal point. Cause B: B1: Wax/ dirt residues on the windshield B2: Wiper blades deformed or worn B3: Downforce of wiper arm not OK (Figure 3) Cause C: Water is pulled back onto the windshield by the differential pressure created as the wiper arm moves downwards. Cause D: Washer water collects in the fastening of the wiper blade and is blown onto the windshield by the airstream over several wipe cycles. Note and supporting information: Wiper blades are wear parts which, even when "not used" for long periods (kept in park position), may become permanently deformed and damaged. Further stresses on the rubber wiper blade arise due to various environmental influences which progressively change the effectiveness of the rubber wiper blade and accelerate the aging process. Due to the natural aging process and wear, the wiper blades should be replaced twice a year, preferably in Spring and Fall (see operator's manual). Remedy Remedy A: A1: Cleaning entire windshield with A 000 986 40 71. A2: Checking water's flow behavior after windshield has been cleaned (see Video 1). If, after cleaning, there are still areas with water beading, then the cleaning process must be carried out again until a rejection reaction is no longer present. • Note: On the vehicle in the video (Video 1), water still beads on the bottom left of the windshield. The windshield is still not properly clean, even though it appears to be clean. The windshield is only properly clean when there are no more areas on the windshield where water beads. A3: Replace wiper blades with genuine wiper blades. Important: Only exchange wiper blades if windshield no longer has water-repellent areas Note: Replacement of wiper blades is not covered under warranty and can be replaced at the expense of the customer. Remedy B: B1: Clean windshield with intensive cleaner A 000 986 40 71. Important: Do not clean the wiper blades otherwise the graphite coating will be damaged. B2: Replace wiper blades with genuine wiper blades • Note: Replacement of wiper blades is not covered under warranty and can be replaced at the expense of the customer. B3: Check the wiper arm for excessive resistance in the bearing. Restore mobility or replace wiper arm if necessary. Remedy C: Problem inherent in design for which there is no technical remedy. Exception: X204 up to 02/2014. In these vehicles, it is possible to install the design configuration of vehicles as of 02/2014. This includes wiper arms (styled arms) with improved behavior in this respect. It is also necessary to replace the wiper blades because the styled arms feature a Top Lock connection (previously Side Lock).

Complaint Headlamp, front fog lamp leaky or fogged. Cause Fogging of the headlamps is a natural phenomenon, which can occur under certain climatic conditions. It does not lead to any technical impairment of the headlamp. If a pressure compensation diaphragm is fitted in the housing cover, then the lamp unit is a "closed system". Remedy Headlamp: Remedy 1 Clearing fogged/condensed LED headlamps: 1. Drive vehicle into workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4 °F) and connect the exhaust extraction. Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine and connect battery support via a charger. 3. Open the hood. 4. Switch on the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Clearing of fogged/condensed LED headlamps and LED rear lamps on electric vehicles: 1. Drive the vehicle into the workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4°F). 2. Connect battery backup via a charger. 3. Open the front-end flap and ensure sufficient ventilation. 4. Switch on the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Clearing fogged/condensed halogen/xenon headlamps: 1. Drive the vehicle into the workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4°F). Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine. 3. Open the hood. 4. Switch off the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Note: If there is no visible reduction in condensation, check the headlamp for malfunctions. (see Remedy 2) It is not physically possible to defog the headlamps completely. Fogging does not impair the operation or the service life of the headlamp. Note: Only implement Remedy 1 for model series 463 (from model year 2018) and model series 465. Remedy 2 A defective headlamp can be identified as follows: 1. Check the headlamp for external damage and that the cover caps and the diaphragm are correctly seated. 2. Check the electrical connectors of the plugs and pins. 3. Check for leak tightness according to LI82.10-P-078307. The test can only be conducted on headlamps. 4. If the headlamp or the rear lamp has any external damage, replace the component part in accordance with the WIS instructions. Note: External damage to the headlamp/rear lamp or faulty seating of the cover caps does not present a warranty or goodwill case. Note: With headlamps, it is possible to install desiccant packs if the problem occurs repeatedly. • Open ventilation system LI82.10-P-078302 • Closed ventilation system LI82.10-P-078304

Complaint Single throttle lift-off clunking noise from the side shaft when moving off (audible at the outboard end). The clunk is heard once when changing from forward to reverse (and vice versa). Note: Sound file in attachment Cause If the complaint is eliminated by experimentally loosening the outboard collar nut (by 1 turn), the problem is due to micromovement in the connection between the wheel bearing inner race and the joint housing of the side shaft. Note: The collar nut must always be replaced after being loosened and must be tightened to the specified torque. Remedy Coat contact surface of side shaft with wheel bearing with Molykote paint. To do this, proceed as follows: 1. Remove outboard side shafts (extract outer joint gearing from wheel hub) 2. Clean contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing before") before coating with Molykote, using "spirit" (free of dust and grease) 3. Coat contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing after") using Molykote and leave to dry for one hour in removed condition 4. Reinstall side shafts

Complaint Headlamps leaking or fogged Cause The fogging of the headlamp is a natural phenomenon which can occur under certain climatic conditions. In contrast to a leaky headlamp, physical fogging does not result in a technical impairment of the headlamp. A leak test must be performed to determine if physical fogging exists or if the headlamp is leaky. Remedy Check for external damage: You can identify a damaged headlamp in the following way: For headlamps with a closed system 1. Check the headlamps for any external damage and check also for correct seating of the Gore-diaphragm/correct latching of the cover caps. 2. If the headlamp exhibits any external damage, replace the headlamp. For headlamps with an open system 1. Check the headlamps for any external damage and seal off the vent, then make sure the cover caps are latched correctly into place. 2. If the headlamp exhibits any external damage, replace the headlamp. Note: External damage to the headlamp does not present a warranty or goodwill case. 1. Clear fogged/condensed LED headlamps and LED rear lamps: 1. Drive the vehicle into the workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4°F). Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine and connect battery support via a charger. 3. Open the hood or trunk. 4. Switch on the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). 7. If the condensation has disappeared, nothing else has to be done. Note: If defrosting has been performed, you can skip the first step. 2. Leak test of headlamp with overpressure: • Connect test adapter to pressure tester. (Figure 1) • Check test adapter for leak tightness. To do so, connect plug and coupling (picture 2) and apply a maximum overpressure of 30 mbar. The pressure must remain constant. If the pressure does not remain constant, use a new adapter. • All vents have to be sealed with sealing compound and the existing diaphragm with the stamp (picture 3 [3]). (Picture 4) Make allowance for the different headlamp variants here (there are different outlet openings). • Check if the headlamp needs to be removed to gain access to the diagnostic socket on the headlamp housing. • Plug the adapter onto the diagnostic socket on the headlamp housing. (Picture 5). • Apply a maximum of 30 mbar overpressure to the headlamp housing. Note: If the maximum overpressure of 50 mbar is exceeded the headlamp seal will be damaged (picture 6). • If a pressure drop of less than 10 mbar is measured within 30 seconds, the headlamp is tight and there is natural physical condensation. • If a higher pressure drop than 10 mbar is measured within 30 seconds, the headlamp is leaky. Note: The leaky position can be localized with the aid of soap suds. If the pressure test is not passed, the headlamp is leaky. If the cause cannot be rectified, the headlamp must be replaced. Note: If the headlamp is replaced, no dry packs may be installed on the new replacement headlamp. AR82.10-P-5455WT was created for the pressure test. This AR can be used as a reference manual for all closed headlamps. In the event of an open headlamp system, the vent ducts must be sealed before the pressure test.

Complaint Headlamp, front fog lamp leaky or fogged Cause Fogging of the headlamps is a natural phenomenon, which can occur under certain climatic conditions. It does not lead to any technical impairment of the headlamp. Remedy NOTE: If a pressure compensation diaphragm is fitted in the housing cover, then the lamp unit is a "closed system". Headlamp: Remedy 1 Clearing fogged/condensed LED headlamps and LED rear lamps: 1. Drive vehicle into workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4 °F) and connect the exhaust extraction. Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine and connect battery support via a charger. 3. Open the hood or trunk. 4. Switch on the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Clearing fogged/condensed halogen/xenon headlamps: 1. Drive the vehicle into the workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4°F). Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine. 3. Open the hood. 4. Switch off the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Note: If there is no visible reduction in the formation of condensation, check the headlamp for damage. (See Remedy 2) It is not physically possible to defog the headlamps completely. Fogging does not impair the operation or the service life of the headlamp. Remedy 2 A damaged headlamp can be identified as follows: 1. Check the headlamp for external damage and that the cover caps and the diaphragm are correctly seated. 2. Check the electrical connectors of the plugs and pins. 3. Check for leak tightness in accordance with LI82.10-P-078896 The test can only be conducted on headlamps. 4. If the headlamp or the rear lamp has any external damage, replace the component part in accordance with the WIS instructions.