Last post on Aug 14, 2013 at 8:07 PM
You are in the Mercedes Benz M-Class
What is this discussion about?
Mercedes-Benz M-Class, Mercedes-Benz ML55 AMG, SUV
#6875 of 8199 Starmark? by sjmurray2
Mar 14, 2003 (6:58 pm)
You picked the wrong day to bring up this question.
$900 to replace the radio because Starmark doesn't consider the radio 'necessary'.
It seems the Starmark warranty is crafted to cover things that last on Mercedes, rather than protect you on parts that are not reliable.
The Starmark inspection also means little. When I got my Starmark'd car, the wipers didn't work right, the sensor for the oil level was broken and the dealer blew the repair and then the dealer repaired a number of other items they evidently didn't notice on their first inspection.
The radio really kills me though. This is the 3rd radio in a 2000 ML320 with 58,000 miles. The SA says he'll ask MB if they'll 'help' with the cost.
The ML is great to drive but it is the shop every six months for something. The power windows in the ML will break, its a given. When I complained my driver window switch broke, the SA told me "that's nothing, usually more than one break at a time". Nice consolation.
To EDXIAN, I would recommend against buying a 1999. Supposedly the 2000 is better but I am seriously thinking of dumping this to avoid future big dollar repairs, so I would avoid a 1999.
My brother-in-law had a 1999 ML for about 2 years before trading it in on a BMW X5 which he loves. Now I understand why.
Consumer Reports just rated MB as the second worst quality car (above Cadillac) and specifically mentioned the M class and C class as the reasons why.
The dealer gave me a C240 sedan as a loaner today which I loved (most of the their loaners are Altimas but I always get a Benz because the first month I owned the car they had it as much as I did) but MB quality scares me so much I'll get a 3 Series if I want a car like.
If MB spent as much on quality control as they do on advertising, it would be a worthwhile automobile.
#6876 of 8199 ML320 height pitch noise
Mar 20, 2003 (10:08 am)
I own a 1998 ML320, this is a piece junk, only this junk don't go in to the water. since the day one this SUV give me nothing but trouble. now when I start the car in the cold days, it give me a height pitch noise it last 2-3 min. I tried turn off the fan, it still there, it is not from the engine, I can't hear from outside, is anyone else have this problem? please help...
#6878 of 8199 Oil level light
Apr 02, 2003 (10:28 am)
The first time to own the MB ever, I bought 2000 ML320 in Nov.2002. On the day I picked up the turck from dealer and drove to home, the oil level light came up so I took it to the dealer to add some oil. It has been 4 month and drove for around 3500 miles, I noticed the oil level light again. When I took it to the dealer they've said that it is normal for MB to burn about 1 QT per every 1,000 miles. ??? Is this true??
Anybody have same experience?
#6879 of 8199 Re. Oil level light
Apr 02, 2003 (12:11 pm)
No, 1 QT of oil per 1,000 miles way is too much, I dont have to add any oil between oil changes, around 7,000 miles, I just cant go to the 10,000 recommended miles. Did you buy from an MBZ dealer? How many miles does the truck have?
Apr 02, 2003 (12:54 pm)
The Oil burnout is a serious problem. I had the same issue on my '98 ML 320. There has been a class action lawsuit regarding this matter. The engine needs to be rebuilt due to excessive wear on the piston rings and valves which is leading to this problem. Mine happened at 49K miles and the dealer rebuilt the engine. MBZ has recognized the problem in the class action lawsuit and is rebuilding engines for free if the vehicle has not reached 150K miles. I do have a copy of all of this info that MBZ mailed to me incase you need it.
#6881 of 8199 ML-320 Oil Burning
Apr 02, 2003 (2:26 pm)
Any oil burning is definitely a problem. The Mercedes manual says oil should not have to be added between required oil changes. The oil level light on my 1999 ML-320 flashed on in Jan 2002 after a round trip of 2000 miles. The dealer has been conducting their so called "oil consumption test" for the past year. They are now on test 2 of part 2. This is related to the class action against Maercedes involving engine problems due to use of natural oil rather than synthetic oil in FSS equipped vehicles. Now my engine sounds like a beer truck hauling a full load up a steep hill & I am visiting my dealer on April 4 2003 about this. Just like a lot of you I like this "truck". It handles beautifully,it is sure footed in all kinds of bad weather, it looks good. Mercedes has made a big mistake by using cheap parts,(tires,brakes) and poor quality control. I am selling this 1999 ML-320 with 33,500 miles on it before the warranty expires in July 2003. It has the roof rack & towing package,brand new Michelin XC tires plus other
goodies. Asking price $2600. I am located near Utica NY.
#6882 of 8199 Any oil burning
Apr 02, 2003 (2:46 pm)
"Any oil burning" is not necessarily a problem and I've never seen MB say that engines can't use oil between oil changes.
Most mfgs publish max oil consumption figures that are quite high - in the range of qt/1K. At this level, I'd complain and they will usually do something, but once I was in the range of qt/3K, I'd just live with it. Oil consumption is an annoyance, but as long as it isn't excessive, it has nothing to do with how "good" the engine is or how reliable it will be. It's just one of those things that varies from engine to engine.
The class action suit has to do with extended oil changes when non-synthetic was used. If you suffer a lubrication related failure and non-syn was used when serviced by MB, then they'll fix it up to (I recall) 100K.
#6883 of 8199 ML-320 Oil Burning
Apr 02, 2003 (3:13 pm)
I paid about $40,000 for this so called "high quality vehicle". I don't intend to carry a few quarts of oil in the back especially when I never had any oil related problems in Chevrolets, Fords,VW's - all costing much less than the ML-320.
#6884 of 8199 Oil consumption not a quality indicator
Apr 02, 2003 (5:43 pm)
Suit yourself, but having to carry a $4 qt of oil and put it the engine every four-months or so seems like a hell of a reason to reject an otherwise good car.
My point: People get all excited about oil consumption, WAY out of proportion to the neglible expense/hassle. And it has virtually nothing to do with the overall quality of a vehicle. In fact, there is some evidence that engine features in more expensive Euro cars that promote long life and durability (e.g., Nikasil cylinder coatings) do tend to make break-in more difficult and somewhat increase the chances of higher oil consumption.
But mostly a random noise thing across samples, whether it is Chevy, Ford, VW, or MB. The oil consumption you get with a new car is mostly a roll of the dice, with some minor influence on how the car was broken in. It has nothing to do with quality.