Timing Chain on CLK Snapped - Garage trying to wash their hands of it

milmo

A friend has a Mercedes CLK, bought from new and serviced like clockwork in the merc dealership where it was bought. The car was bought in 2006 and had 120k miles of motorway driving done

It was a once in a lifetime/special occasion purchase and treated as such.

It had been serviced the week before by the same garage but last week it wouldn't start and it turns out to be the timing chain.

The garage, who took her business for the past six years is now refusing to take any responsibility and are saying that the warranty is up. To add insult to injury they want money up front before they will carry out a diagnostic.

I can accept that certain parts go on a car due to wear and tear, and that it is up to the owner to bear the costs under these circumstances., I do not accept however that a timing chain, which is expected to last the lifetime of the car, falls into this category.

The initial back of the envelope quotes are in the thousands and my friend is quite upset.

My take on it is that the garage/Mercedes Ireland are hoping we'll cough up or bugger off if they hold out and that we should confront them.

Where do we stand? All advice gratefully received

Drummerboy08

I'm not being smart but do you expect warranty on a 6 year old car?

Regardless of service history and condition, things do go wrong. Timing chains have a habit of stretching too, they dont always last the lifetime of the car.

Unfortunately your friend will have to cough up here, I'd be bringing the car to a good indy.

MidlandsM

if the warranty's up, it's up. Sh1t happens .........sorry, but hope she gets sorted.

AltAccount

+1

Unless you think the garage contributed to the failure, through action or negligence, I don't see how you could have a complaint regarding this.

milmo

Drummer,

Timing chains are not supposed to break, or else the manufacturer would require you to change them as they do with timing belts.

I already said that I expect items to go on cars and that it's the owners responsibility when this happens. But there are items that I don't expect to go on cars. I don't expect the steering wheel to come off in my hands, I don't expect the axles to shear, and I don't expect the timing chain to snap etc etc.

Also 120k miles isn't a lot in the context of a modern car that's been regularly maintained by the dealer. If the dealer had even expected the slightest possibility of this occurring they should have said when the car was being serviced the week before this happened. They, like my friend did not expect this to happen because it is not supposed to happen. I am of the firm opinion that my friend shouldn't pay for their problem.

Mercedes trade on their quality and reliability and charge accordingly.

George Dalton

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I'd be bringing the car to a good indy.

This.

The first thing to do is get it out of the dealer. They will be the most expensive option for having it repaired.

Nissan doctor

milmo wrote: »

Mercedes trade on their quality and reliability and charge accordingly.

This is true, but some very basic research would show that these two traits are extremely shaky, at best, on modern Mercs.


If they want you to pay up front for diagnostics, how do they know that the chain had failed?

I would get a second opinion and if the chain has failed, then the repair work will cost vastly less in an independent garage then in Mercedes.

Diagnosis of the fault and extent of the damage can be done quickly and easily with the right equipment and requires no stripping of the engine.

Cuddlesworth

This could be brought down the court route. Irish law doesn't recognise any fixed period for warranty purposes, a car that price treated exactly as Mercedes recommend would justify some attempt at compensation.

MidlandsM

milmo wrote: »

Timing chains are not supposed to break

..in a perfect world...yes, but back in the real world, they DO break.

And merc's of that era and this era are FAR from perfect.

spiggotpaddy

I'm afraid your friend may have to just "take it on the chin".
You can look across the bonnet at the three point star and think that you have bought a slice of premium quality, but its just a machine and machines break. Thats life. It has a chain driving the camshafts just like a nissan micra.
I blame the ridiculous oil change intervals, a lot of petrol mercs do small mileage, and it may take a long time for the service needed info to be displayed.

milmo

Nissan Doctor,

She had it transported initially to the nearest dealership in the county where it broke down and they gave her this diagnosis (after payment)

smcgiff

milmo wrote: »

Mercedes trade on their quality and reliability and charge accordingly.

Mercedes, quality and reliability all in the one sentence. I think I see where you went wrong.

bucketybuck

milmo wrote: »

Timing chains are not supposed to break, or else the manufacturer would require you to change them as they do with timing belts.

I already said that I expect items to go on cars and that it's the owners responsibility when this happens. But there are items that I don't expect to go on cars. I don't expect the steering wheel to come off in my hands, I don't expect the axles to shear, and I don't expect the timing chain to snap etc etc.

Also 120k miles isn't a lot in the context of a modern car that's been regularly maintained by the dealer. If the dealer had even expected the slightest possibility of this occurring they should have said when the car was being serviced the week before this happened. They, like my friend did not expect this to happen because it is not supposed to happen.

Thats nice and all, timing chains shouldn't break. Now whats your point? Cars shouldn't spontaneously self-combust either, if a ten year car happened to disappear in a whoosh of flame one day do you think your local garage should be expected to hand you a new one?

Is it the garages fault the chain broke? No, it isn't. So why should they be expected to pay for it? Their contractual obligations expired years ago, and their statutory obligations before that even.

I am of the firm opinion that my friend shouldn't pay for their problem.

Its not their problem though, is it.

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

This could be brought down the court route. Irish law doesn't recognise any fixed period for warranty purposes, a car that price treated exactly as Mercedes recommend would justify some attempt at compensation.

Stop giving advice on the internet, theres a good chap.

AltAccount

milmo wrote: »

I already said that I expect items to go on cars and that it's the owners responsibility when this happens. But there are items that I don't expect to go on cars. I don't expect the steering wheel to come off in my hands, I don't expect the axles to shear, and I don't expect the timing chain to snap etc etc.

If any of those things happen after 6 years, 4 years and 80,000kms since the warranty ran out, then you'll have to suck it up unfortunately.

The warranty ran out before the banking crisis started properly here, and the car has driven twice around the world since then - just for a little perspective...

djimi

Why on earth would you think that the garage would have any responsibility in this? Did she ask them to check the timing chain during the service and they said it was okay? Because this is about the only scenario that I can think of where they might be in any way at fault for this.

milmo

Guys,

Many thanks for the posts so far.

As for the general "machines break" lines of thought I agree completely in principle but the issue with any warranty is the amount of time that passes after sale before such a breakage could be reasonably expected to occur. If it was reasonable for a timing chain to break at all we wouldn't be having this discussion. While all manufactured parts are liable to break there are ones that shouldn't, statistically or otherwise, and when they do, it is not for the customer to pick up the tab.

She has replaced other parts on the car without complaint. This just happens to be the one bit of the engine that connects most of the other moving parts of the engine together, and when it breaks, every other bit that it controls is also affected. It is not reasonable to expect such a critical part to break without the manufacturer either advising of preventative measures (change it after X miles) or covering the damage when those statistical anomalies occur.

Mercedes do not require it to be changed like a timing belt because they do not expect it to break. It is designed to last for the lifetime of the car (120k is not the expected lifetime of a merc engine). She would have been better off had the car had a timing belt as she could have changed it and not been in this position.

MidlandsM

milmo wrote: »

Guys,

Many thanks for the posts so far.

As for the general "machines break" lines of thought I agree completely in principle but the issue with any warranty is the amount of time that passes after sale before such a breakage could be reasonably expected to occur. If it was reasonable for a timing chain to break at all we wouldn't be having this discussion. While all manufactured parts are liable to break there are ones that shouldn't, statistically or otherwise, and when they do, it is not for the customer to pick up the tab.

She has replaced other parts on the car without complaint. This just happens to be the one bit of the engine that connects most of the other moving parts of the engine together, and when it breaks, every other bit that it controls is also affected. It is not reasonable to expect such a critical part to break without the manufacturer either advising of preventative measures (change it after X miles) or covering the damage when those statistical anomalies occur.

Mercedes do not require it to be changed like a timing belt because they do not expect it to break. It is designed to last for the lifetime of the car (120k is not the expected lifetime of a merc engine). She would have been better off had the car had a timing belt as she could have changed it and not been in this position.

a lot of what you recite is rubbish to be honest........

djimi

milmo wrote: »

Guys,

Many thanks for the posts so far.

As for the general "machines break" lines of thought I agree completely in principle but the issue with any warranty is the amount of time that passes after sale before such a breakage could be reasonably expected to occur. If it was reasonable for a timing chain to break at all we wouldn't be having this discussion. While all manufactured parts are liable to break there are ones that shouldn't, statistically or otherwise, and when they do, it is not for the customer to pick up the tab.

She has replaced other parts on the car without complaint. This just happens to be the one bit of the engine that connects most of the other moving parts of the engine together, and when it breaks, every other bit that it controls is also affected. It is not reasonable to expect such a critical part to break without the manufacturer either advising of preventative measures (change it after X miles) or covering the damage when those statistical anomalies occur.

Mercedes do not require it to be changed like a timing belt because they do not expect it to break. It is designed to last for the lifetime of the car (120k is not the expected lifetime of a merc engine). She would have been better off had the car had a timing belt as she could have changed it and not been in this position.

No offense but you really need to come back to the real world with your line of thinking. Some parts arent expected to break, thats fair enough, but they are still mechanical parts, and if/when they do break (rare an occurance as it might be) it is still up to the owner to have them replaced/repaired. Its bloody awful when things like this happen, but it really is part of owning something mechanical like car. Once the warranty is up you are on your own.

Cuddlesworth

bucketybuck wrote: »

Stop giving advice on the internet, theres a good chap.

I'm not sure where to start with this. Besides the stupid ignorance and the patronising comment.

We have the best consumer warranty law in Europe, possibly the world. She paid a small fortune for the car, she serviced and treated it exactly as Mercedes recommended and a non-wear and tear part broke. While she might not be expecting 100% of the cost paid for, she could argue for part payment by Mercedes.

Owen

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

This could be brought down the court route. Irish law doesn't recognise any fixed period for warranty purposes, a car that price treated exactly as Mercedes recommend would justify some attempt at compensation.

While that law applies to the likes of a TV which must last for a reasonable amount of time (6 years, so well beyond a 2 year warranty), it's much more difficult to apply that actual law to a mechanical device which must b serviced at certain intervals, and can be abused by the owner. It's a bit silly to be giving the OP advice based on this.

Nissan doctor

milmo wrote: »

Guys,

Many thanks for the posts so far.

As for the general "machines break" lines of thought I agree completely in principle but the issue with any warranty is the amount of time that passes after sale before such a breakage could be reasonably expected to occur. If it was reasonable for a timing chain to break at all we wouldn't be having this discussion. While all manufactured parts are liable to break there are ones that shouldn't, statistically or otherwise, and when they do, it is not for the customer to pick up the tab.

She has replaced other parts on the car without complaint. This just happens to be the one bit of the engine that connects most of the other moving parts of the engine together, and when it breaks, every other bit that it controls is also affected. It is not reasonable to expect such a critical part to break without the manufacturer either advising of preventative measures (change it after X miles) or covering the damage when those statistical anomalies occur.

Mercedes do not require it to be changed like a timing belt because they do not expect it to break. It is designed to last for the lifetime of the car (120k is not the expected lifetime of a merc engine). She would have been better off had the car had a timing belt as she could have changed it and not been in this position.

Its unfortunate because if it has actually broken, then there will be a lot of damage, but at the same time, while it would be rare for a chain to actually break, its not impossible.
I mean, if the heater controls stopped working and had to be replaced would you also be complaining?, or the power steering pump/motor? Neither of those have replacement intervals or are specifically inspected during a service, so should manufacturers pay for their replacement regardless of the age of the car?

Remember as well that your dealing with what is generally the least helpful brand when it comes to warranty and customer service and assuming that their word is fact is a mistake that too many people make.

milmo

bucketybuck wrote: »

I work in service, and you would not believe the amount of times I have passed onto salesmen details of people interested in buying, only to find out afterwards that they never bothered responding to the potential customers.

The mind boggles. If I was in sales I would be all over a customer who was actually showing serious interest, instead of just window shopping, but these guys never even bothered giving them a call.

I knew a guy up north with a fleet of Mercedes. He went out and bought 15 Volvos. I met him a few months later and when just chatting, asked him why he didnt stick with us in Mercedes. "Sure I left four of five messages for X to call out to me and do a deal, and I never heard a thing from him. So **** him says I".

A man buying mercs for decades, lost to Volvo because the useless twat of a salesman never bothered his hole to respond to a sure thing.

bucketybuck wrote: »

Stop giving advice on the internet, theres a good chap.

BB,

I'm looking for impartial advice. Yours appear not to be. Please let me determine what advice to take before you start issuing condescending slapdowns to others please

bucketybuck

milmo wrote: »

BB,

I'm looking for impartial advice. Yours appear not to be. Please let me determine what advice to take before you start issuing condescending slapdowns to others please

Its rather silly to think my advice here is not impartial. What, you think I work for the garage in question? :rolleyes: I don't even work in car dealerships.

Cuddlesworth

milmo wrote: »

BB,

I'm looking for impartial advice. Yours appear not to be. Please let me determine what advice to take before you start issuing condescending slapdowns to others please

Keep in mind that most of those here posting against trying for compensation are working in the trade.

Nissan doctor

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Keep in mind that most of those here posting against trying for compensation are working in the trade.

But remember also that the merc garage who have the car are the only ones give the OP biased advice.

bucketybuck

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Keep in mind that most of those here posting against trying for compensation are working in the trade.

Thats very true. I think he should try the soccer forum for some real impartial advice. No point asking people who deal with these situation regularly.

Owen

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Keep in mind that most of those here posting against trying for compensation are working in the trade.

And consequently actually know what they're talking about having dealt with similar situations before.

Your pretty feeble attempt to pull some sort of conspiracy theory into this would be fine if we all worked for the particular dealership in question. But don't let that stop you having a go at people who do work in the trade offering free and usually accurate advice in this forum regularly.

johnos1984

Op there is no way the dealership should or will cover the cost of this. Also it won't stand up in court as any reasonable period will now have passed. I've taken major bills in the chin in the past too due to lifetime parts failing. Btw I'm not in the trade but I do have extensive knowledge of consumer protection legislation.

Bigcheeze

You're probably better off writing to Mercedes Ireland (or whatever they're called) instead of the dealer.

Manufacturers will do lots of stuff well out of warranty that they don't necessarily have a legal obligation to do. If anything should be done long outside of warranty, it's this.

milmo

Nissan doctor wrote: »

Its unfortunate because if it has actually broken, then there will be a lot of damage, but at the same time, while it would be rare for a chain to actually break, its not impossible.
I mean, if the heater controls stopped working and had to be replaced would you also be complaining?, or the power steering pump/motor? Neither of those have replacement intervals or are specifically inspected during a service, so should manufacturers pay for their replacement regardless of the age of the car?

Remember as well that your dealing with what is generally the least helpful brand when it comes to warranty and customer service.

ND,

I fully get that parts break and my point all along has been about the nature of the part and the probability of it breaking given its design parameters. Anything that can be made can break. Moveable, electrical parts etc go all the time, and she has replaced many items over the years without complaint provided it they have lasted a reasonable amount of time. All the parts you mention are parts that could reasonably need to be replaced due to fair wear and tear.

This issue hinges on whether Mercedes expected that a critical part like this could break through fair wear and tear, and provided any options/advice to prevent this from occurring. Those of us with timing belts are advised to change them at laid down intervals because they are expected to eventually break from wear and tear, but no such advice was ever issued to her by Merc because they do not expect timing chains to break. If they do not expect it to happen themselves it can only be inferred that such breakages are not reasonable fair wear and tear, and therefore should not be the responsibility of the car owner.

This was just an issue of replacing one part (i.e the chain) then it would be like the examples you cited, but this failure of this part has resulted in catastrophic damage to the engine. It is not reasonable for Merc to shrug their shoulders and go ehh...

Owen

Anyone else wondering what the point of this thread is if the OP is asking for advice, but unwilling to listen to anyone with a different point of view?

johnos1984

My reading of it is that the owner is happy to pay any bill as long as it isn't a big one. I now know why I don't have the patience to work in a dealership.

How many more people do you need to repeat the point for you that parts break and the car is about 4 years out of warranty with 120 k miles on it

Nissan doctor

milmo wrote: »

ND,

I fully get that parts break and my point all along has been about the nature of the part and the probability of it breaking given its design parameters. Anything that can be made can break. Moveable, electrical parts etc go all the time, and she has replaced many items over the years without complaint provided it they have lasted a reasonable amount of time. All the parts you mention are parts that could reasonably need to be replaced due to fair wear and tear.

This issue hinges on whether Mercedes expected that a critical part like this could break through fair wear and tear, and provided any options/advice to prevent this from occurring. Those of us with timing belts are advised to change them at laid down intervals because they are expected to eventually break from wear and tear, but no such advice was ever issued to her by Merc because they do not expect timing chains to break. If they do not expect it to happen themselves it can only be inferred that such breakages are not reasonable fair wear and tear, and therefore should not be the responsibility of the car owner.

This was just an issue of replacing one part (i.e the chain) then it would be like the examples you cited, but this failure of this part has resulted in catastrophic damage to the engine. It is not reasonable for Merc to shrug their shoulders and go ehh...

Its not expected for any non service part to break at any specific interval, but they do, and on a 6 year old car it would be naive to assume that a manufacturer, merc especially, would cover it. Its not like it has way below average mileage or anything.

IMO, you posted here looking for advice, almost 100% of people are saying one thing, but you still think the opposite, so its pointless really.

If(read when) you get no joy from Mercedes, I hope you at least take the advise of having it diagnosed by a trusted independent garage for a second opinion, remembering that many main dealers aren't arsed to actually repair major faults...they would likely just make you pay for a whole new engine.

Bigcheeze

Which engine is in yours OP ?

Mercedes Hit With Timing Chain Issues on 2004-2006 V6 and V8 Models


http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/mercedes-hit-with-timing-chain-issues/

Mercedes-Benz is currently trying to recapture the number one position in global luxury sales, but a quality problem on its home turf in Germany seems to be undermining confidence in the brand. Autobild reports that the M272 V6 and M273 V8 engines used a sintered steel timing chain gear made of various materials starting in 2004, but switched to conventional steel in 2006, eliminating the problem with gear wear. The problem: nobody seems to know how many vehicles built between 2004 and 2006 are affected. Mercedes claims, based on secret internal defect tracking, that one percent, or about 1,500 vehicles, are affected. If you have a vehicle with one of these engines built between 04 and 06 and your check engine light comes on, Mercedes encourages you to visit your M-B dealer rather than an independent shop, as Mercedes is offering free repairs to affected customers. And as Autobild’s Matthias Mötsch argues, when your motto is “the best or nothing,” the only answer to a situation like this is to fix 100% of the defects for free.

Drummerboy08

OP, there really isn't much you can do here. Your friend isnt obliged to get anything back from either the dealer or the manufacturer.

From someone who's dealt with this kind of thing before, here's how I see your friend's options -

1. Take the bill on the chin, get the car back, and chalk it down to experience. As I said before, cars do and will continue to break down.

2. Go the legal route. Drag the dealer and/or the manufacturer through the courts system kicking and screaming. This could possibly take years to solve, and in the meantime the car isn't fixed. You'll also have to pay for an independent engineer's report up front, out of your own pocket.

3. Take the car to a good indy, thus reducing the cost of the original main dealer estimate straight away.

What I would be doing at this stage is asking the dealer to speak to Mercedes Ireland for goodwill. You can also contact Mercedes, and ask for it, while explaining it's a one owner car, with a full Mercedes history from new. They may or may not offer some of the costs, or reduce the parts etc.

Do not go in all guns blazing, citing that the chain shoulnt snap etc. Unless you are a mechanic or are otherwise qualified to make such a statement, chances are the person on the other end of the phone will know more about these issues.

johnos1984

If I'm not mistaken the recall only affects cars in the home market. Good luck enforcing it here

Bigcheeze

johnos1984 wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken the recall only affects cars in the home market. Good luck enforcing it here

Keep digging

FrontDoor

The thread started is not getting the full story here.

Manufacturers often cover issues out of warranty. They might even cover the issue in one jurisdiction and not in another.

VW are a case in point, with injectors finally being replaced free of charge on some TDI engines.

Ultimately, there are two courses of action available. Stump up and pay the repair costs and get on with life or stump up the costs and try to establish if the car suffered from a known fault that was recognised by MB. Perhaps even MB rectify this fault elsewhere, free of charge.

One thing is certain, you will not be told any of this by MB. The internet is your friend. Perhaps not this corner of it though .

johnos1984

Bigcheeze wrote: »

johnos1984 wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken the recall only affects cars in the home market. Good luck enforcing it here

Keep digging

What?

A grave for them too end up in with a large legal bill, repair cost and stress of pursuing it

milmo

Owen wrote: »

Anyone else wondering what the point of this thread is if the OP is asking for advice, but unwilling to listen to anyone with a different point of view?

johnos1984 wrote: »

My reading of it is that the owner is happy to pay any bill as long as it isn't a big one. I now know why I don't have the patience to work in a dealership.

How many more people do you need to repeat the point for you that parts break and the car is about 4 years out of warranty with 120 k miles on it

Gents,

This isn't supposed to be adversarial, but there's no reason why it can't be robust. I have listened to a few people who appear to be of one general view, but weight of numbers doesn't mean that I can't examine or challenge it. I'm also hoping that there may be more than one perspective on all of this given the amount of people on boards.

Other than the "tough ****" argument that she is going to get at the dealership anyway, there is the argument relating to what is reasonable or what is not. The owner is willing to pay bills for work/parts that are reasonable.. We are trying to establish what is reasonable and what is not. Other than citing warranty that parts break, that issue hasn't been examined.

I posted and I sought advice, and am perfectly willing to listen to what people have to say so long as it's constructive. I also have the right to challenge and examine the issue in order to test each standpoint's merits. Because I question a standpoint doesn't mean I am unwilling to listen, nor does it mean that I should be dismissed. There have been posters here who have made valid points, which I may not like, but I respect because they were made fairly.

The two quoted above don't fall into this category

Nissan doctor

What other repairs, outside of standard servicing/wear items, have they had done?

kona

Who said the chain snapped? perhaps its stretched and the timing is out, hence the car not starting. Chains have a tendancy to do this when they have a high mileage.
Id imagine if it snapped it would have been alot more dramatic than bringing it to a garage to get diagnosed.

lomb

Most manufacturers only design their cars to last 10 years at the average 10000 miles a year so thats 100k miles so unfortunately your friend is s***out of luck.

If I was her Id be looking for another (cheap) used engine after a proper diagnosis.

George Dalton

milmo wrote: »

We are trying to establish what is reasonable and what is not.

My opinion (for what it is worth) is that expecting Mercedes to stump up for a new engine is not reasonable. By the same token paying for a new engine plus main dealer labour rates for fitting out of your own pocket is not practical.

That leaves you with either pressing Mercedes for a substantial goodwill claim to offset the cost of repairs. This will be time consuming and unlikely to succeed in any case given the age and mileage of the car. Or your other option is paying a good independent garage to repair your own engine at a reasonable cost.

Bohrio

milmo wrote: »

ND,

I fully get that parts break and my point all along has been about the nature of the part and the probability of it breaking given its design parameters. Anything that can be made can break. Moveable, electrical parts etc go all the time, and she has replaced many items over the years without complaint provided it they have lasted a reasonable amount of time. All the parts you mention are parts that could reasonably need to be replaced due to fair wear and tear.

This issue hinges on whether Mercedes expected that a critical part like this could break through fair wear and tear, and provided any options/advice to prevent this from occurring. Those of us with timing belts are advised to change them at laid down intervals because they are expected to eventually break from wear and tear, but no such advice was ever issued to her by Merc because they do not expect timing chains to break. If they do not expect it to happen themselves it can only be inferred that such breakages are not reasonable fair wear and tear, and therefore should not be the responsibility of the car owner.

This was just an issue of replacing one part (i.e the chain) then it would be like the examples you cited, but this failure of this part has resulted in catastrophic damage to the engine. It is not reasonable for Merc to shrug their shoulders and go ehh...

What I think most people here, if not everyone, is trying to say is that things break. You take for instance a transmission or a crankshaft, they can snap at anytime too although they are expected to last for a long long time.

You might want to try putting some pressure on mercedes, write the head office and see what happens but this things happen

the_syco

How many times a year did your friend check the oil?

=-=

If the chain had gone, would it be cheaper replacing the engine?

AltAccount

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I'm not sure where to start with this. Besides the stupid ignorance and the patronising comment.

We have the best consumer warranty law in Europe, possibly the world. She paid a small fortune for the car, she serviced and treated it exactly as Mercedes recommended and a non-wear and tear part broke. While she might not be expecting 100% of the cost paid for, she could argue for part payment by Mercedes.

How do you reckon a chain that rotates at thousands of times per minute, with no wet lubrication system, isn't a wear and tear part?

Bigcheeze wrote: »

Which engine is in yours OP ?

Mercedes Hit With Timing Chain Issues on 2004-2006 V6 and V8 Models


http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/mercedes-hit-with-timing-chain-issues/

Mercedes-Benz is currently trying to recapture the number one position in global luxury sales, but a quality problem on its home turf in Germany seems to be undermining confidence in the brand. Autobild reports that the M272 V6 and M273 V8 engines used a sintered steel timing chain gear made of various materials starting in 2004, but switched to conventional steel in 2006, eliminating the problem with gear wear. The problem: nobody seems to know how many vehicles built between 2004 and 2006 are affected. Mercedes claims, based on secret internal defect tracking, that one percent, or about 1,500 vehicles, are affected. If you have a vehicle with one of these engines built between 04 and 06 and your check engine light comes on, Mercedes encourages you to visit your M-B dealer rather than an independent shop, as Mercedes is offering free repairs to affected customers. And as Autobild’s Matthias Mötsch argues, when your motto is “the best or nothing,” the only answer to a situation like this is to fix 100% of the defects for free.

1% of V6 & V8 engines? How many cars in ROI would that represent? Is this really relevant?
Did any engine warning light come on?

milmo wrote: »

Gents,

This isn't supposed to be adversarial, but there's no reason why it can't be robust. I have listened to a few people who appear to be of one general view, but weight of numbers doesn't mean that I can't examine or challenge it. I'm also hoping that there may be more than one perspective on all of this given the amount of people on boards.

Other than the "tough ****" argument that she is going to get at the dealership anyway, there is the argument relating to what is reasonable or what is not. The owner is willing to pay bills for work/parts that are reasonable.. We are trying to establish what is reasonable and what is not. Other than citing warranty that parts break, that issue hasn't been examined.

I posted and I sought advice, and am perfectly willing to listen to what people have to say so long as it's constructive. I also have the right to challenge and examine the issue in order to test each standpoint's merits. Because I question a standpoint doesn't mean I am unwilling to listen, nor does it mean that I should be dismissed. There have been posters here who have made valid points, which I may not like, but I respect because they were made fairly.

The two quoted above don't fall into this category

When you say "reasonable" bill, can you put a Euro figure on it?

Nissan doctor

the_syco wrote: »

How many times a year did your friend check the oil?

=-=

If the chain had gone, would it be cheaper replacing the engine?

On such a new modern car.... a proper repair would likely be a lot cheaper as a new engine from Mercedes would be very expensive and there is unlikely to be many second hand units available.

Nissan doctor

AltAccount wrote: »

How do you reckon a chain that rotates at thousands of times per minute, with no wet lubrication system, isn't a wear and tear part?

Chains are lubricated by engine oil.

bucketybuck

milmo wrote: »

Gents,

This isn't supposed to be adversarial, but there's no reason why it can't be robust. I have listened to a few people who appear to be of one general view, but weight of numbers doesn't mean that I can't examine or challenge it. I'm also hoping that there may be more than one perspective on all of this given the amount of people on boards.

Other than the "tough ****" argument that she is going to get at the dealership anyway, there is the argument relating to what is reasonable or what is not. The owner is willing to pay bills for work/parts that are reasonable.. We are trying to establish what is reasonable and what is not. Other than citing warranty that parts break, that issue hasn't been examined.

I posted and I sought advice, and am perfectly willing to listen to what people have to say so long as it's constructive. I also have the right to challenge and examine the issue in order to test each standpoint's merits. Because I question a standpoint doesn't mean I am unwilling to listen, nor does it mean that I should be dismissed. There have been posters here who have made valid points, which I may not like, but I respect because they were made fairly.

The two quoted above don't fall into this category

Sounds as if whats reasonable is whatever you want to hear at any given time.

Face it, what you want to hear is you/your mate shouldnt have to pay for your repairs. You have this nebulous idea that because generally timing chains don't break, then yours shouldnt have broken, therefore its not up to you to pay. Which is a lovely ideal, just super.

But if its not your fault, you have to accept that its not the dealers fault either. Nor is it the manufacturers. Its nobodies fault. That chain that has been spinning at a very high RPM for six years and 120000 kms happened to break, and its nobodies fault. So why should the dealer be thousands of euro out of pocket repairing YOUR car? Why? beyond some vague notion that they just should.

High pressure pumps are not a service item, should they replace yours if it failed? Steering columns should last the lifetime of the car, should they replace yours in another four years if it gives trouble? If after ten years your wiper linkage fails, should they have to replace it for free? Why not? It should last the lifetime of the vehicle afterall?

AltAccount

Nissan doctor wrote: »

Chains are lubricated by engine oil.

Cheers ND, my mistake