← New search

2006 Mercedes Benz C230

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most C230 years

Owner complaints for the 2006 Mercedes Benz C230 are substantially higher than the model-year median of 39.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

77 reports with mileage · 39 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Engine. Review the 30 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 28 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

6 crash reports0 fire reports3 injury reports

What owners actually said

116 reports
33,800 miles · Oct 12, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY DURING MORNING RUSH HOUR WHEN I NOTICED THAT THE CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE OVER 35 MPH. I MOVED THE CAR OFF THE HIGHWAY AND STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. ONCE I STOPPED THE CAR IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AT ALL WHEN I STEPPED ON THE GAS. I HAD TO PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND THEN MOVE IT BACK TO DRIV…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY DURING MORNING RUSH HOUR WHEN I NOTICED THAT THE CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE OVER 35 MPH. I MOVED THE CAR OFF THE HIGHWAY AND STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. ONCE I STOPPED THE CAR IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AT ALL WHEN I STEPPED ON THE GAS. I HAD TO PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND THEN MOVE IT BACK TO DRIVE TO GET THE CAR TO MOVE. THE CAR WOULD JUMP AND LURCH FORWARD WHEN I SHIFTED GEARS. I DROVE THE CAR DIRECTLY TO THE DEALER. THE MERCEDES DEALER TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE SOFTWARE AND THAT THE SOFTWARE WOULD NEED TO BE UPDATED. I WENT TO PICK UP MY CAR AFTER THE "SOFTWARE " WAS UPDATED ($1,700 COST) AND DROVE THE CAR ABOUT 10 MILES WHEN I NOTICED THAT THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT HAD COME ON. I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO THE MERCEDES DEALER TO LET THEM KNOW THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS NOW ON. THE MERCEDES DEALER TOLD ME I HAVE A DEFECTIVE BALANCE SHAFT THAT NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED. THE MERCEDES DEALER ASK ME IF I HAD KEPT UP THE OIL CHANGES ON THE CAR. I TOLD THE THEM THAT I HAD. THE MERCEDES DEALER TOLD ME THAT I HAVE TO PAY $2,500 JUST FOR THEM TO TAKE THE ENGINE APART AND THAT THE TOTAL REPAIR WILL COST AROUND $6,000. I JUST PURCHASED THE CAR IN JULY 2010 ( 14 MONTHS OWNERSHIP) WITH ABOUT 19,500 MILES ON IT. *KB

NHTSA ODI #10429596

60,089 miles · Oct 4, 2011
Fuel System, Gasoline

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 75 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL SHOP WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE FUEL FILTER WAS DIRTY AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 75 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL SHOP WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE FUEL FILTER WAS DIRTY AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,089 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 61,499.

NHTSA ODI #10428706

100,731 miles · Sep 28, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

ON MARCH 12, 2011, DURING AN "A" SERVICE, I WAS INFORMED BY MY MECHANIC, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED DUE TO THE LEFT INTAKE CAM SENSOR WAS DEFECTIVE BUT IT WAS NOT A BIG CONCERN. ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2011, DURING A "B" SERVICE, MY MECHANIC STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED AGAIN FOR THE LEFT INTAKE CAM AND TH…

Read full complaint

ON MARCH 12, 2011, DURING AN "A" SERVICE, I WAS INFORMED BY MY MECHANIC, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED DUE TO THE LEFT INTAKE CAM SENSOR WAS DEFECTIVE BUT IT WAS NOT A BIG CONCERN. ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2011, DURING A "B" SERVICE, MY MECHANIC STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED AGAIN FOR THE LEFT INTAKE CAM AND THE RIGHT EXHUAST CAM ADJUSTER MAGNETS WERE DEFECTIVE OR THE BALANCE SHAFT WAS WORN. AT THIS POINT THE CAR WAS RUNNING OK BUT HE SAID IF HE RUNS A DIAGNOSTIC TEST ON THE ENGINE AGAIN IN THE NEAR FUTURE AND IT READS A SECOND PROBLEM ON THE RIGHT SIDE CAM SIDE, THERE IS A STRONG POSSIBILITY TEETH ON THE CAM SPOCKET DUE TO THE USAGE OF AN INFERIOR PRODUCT. HE EXPLAINED IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $4,000.00 TO REPAIR, HE WAS REPAIRING A VEHICLE WITH THE SAME PROBLEM AND SHOWED ME THE WEAR ON THE TEETH WHICH CAUSE THE INBALANCE OF THE SHAFT AND THE CAMS COME OFF LINE. IN MY MECHANICS OPINION, MERCEDES BENZ KNOWS ABOUT THEIR DEFECTIVE PART BYT THEY DO NOT WANT TO HAVE A "CAMPAIGN" TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE AND MY TYPE/YEAR ENGINE WAS MADE WITH THIS INFERIOR PART. I TRAVEL 80 MILES TO AND FROM WORK AND CANNOT AFFORD TO SPEND THIS MONEY FOR A REPAIR ON A VEHICLE THAT IS SUPPOSE TO LAST ME FOREVER. *TT

NHTSA ODI #10427695

Mileage unknown · Sep 26, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel System, GasolinePower Train

BOUGHT THIS CAR WITH 38000 ON IT. THE GET UP AND GO SEEMED SLUGGISH BUT MECHANIC SAID IT CHECKED OUT. HAD SOME MAJOR ISSUES. CAR WOULD BARELY GO, WENT DIRECTLY TO MERCEDES DEALERSHIP. DEALER SAID FUEL PUMP WAS OUT $793. ALSO SAID I NEEDED TO SERVICE THE TRANSMISSION, $350. THEY ALSO SAID I HAD A MUCH GREATER PROBLEM. A BALANCE S…

Read full complaint

BOUGHT THIS CAR WITH 38000 ON IT. THE GET UP AND GO SEEMED SLUGGISH BUT MECHANIC SAID IT CHECKED OUT. HAD SOME MAJOR ISSUES. CAR WOULD BARELY GO, WENT DIRECTLY TO MERCEDES DEALERSHIP. DEALER SAID FUEL PUMP WAS OUT $793. ALSO SAID I NEEDED TO SERVICE THE TRANSMISSION, $350. THEY ALSO SAID I HAD A MUCH GREATER PROBLEM. A BALANCE SHAFT INSIDE THE MOTOR AND QUOTED ME $4600. THE CAR NOW HAS 55,000 MILES ON IT. THE WARRANTY WAS FOR 4 YEARS OR 50,000. THE CAR IS ONE YEAR OR 5,000 MILES OUT OF WARRANTY. IT IS HARD UNDERSTAND WHY THIS TYPE OF CATASTROPHIC FAILURE IS OCCURRING SO SOON AFTER THE WARRANTY IS UP. I CHECKED THIS OUT ONLINE AND IT SEEMS LIKE I'M FAR FROM THE FIRST OWNER TO HAVE THIS PROBLEM. I SAW A LAWSUIT, TOO BAD I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PARTICIPATE. I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT MERCEDES ISN'T DOING THE RIGHT THING ON ITS OWN. PLEASE HELP! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10427522

77,015 miles · Aug 23, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED: TWO DIAGNOSTICS SUGGESTED TWO SEPARATE PROBLEMS, WORN OUT BALANCE SHAFT AND ISSUES WITH THE INTAKE AND EXHAUST CAMSHAFT. CAR IS SLUGGISH ON ACCELERATION AND OCCASIONALLY WILL NOT SHIFT OUT OF FIRST GEAR. CAR MUST BE PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF, AND THEN THE COMPUTER RESETS. THIS IS A PERIODIC PROBLEM AND…

Read full complaint

ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED: TWO DIAGNOSTICS SUGGESTED TWO SEPARATE PROBLEMS, WORN OUT BALANCE SHAFT AND ISSUES WITH THE INTAKE AND EXHAUST CAMSHAFT. CAR IS SLUGGISH ON ACCELERATION AND OCCASIONALLY WILL NOT SHIFT OUT OF FIRST GEAR. CAR MUST BE PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF, AND THEN THE COMPUTER RESETS. THIS IS A PERIODIC PROBLEM AND IS A PARTICULAR HAZARDOUS PROBLEM ENTERING HIGH SPEED HIGHWAYS, WHICH I MUST DO ON A DAILY BASIS.

NHTSA ODI #10422033

82,000 miles · Aug 23, 2011
Service Brakes, HydraulicSteering

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE POWER STEERING AND POWER BRAKES WERE INOPERABLE. THE DEALER REPAIRED THE VEHICLE BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE BUT DENIED ANY ASSISTANCE WITH REPAIRS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 82,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 86,00…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE POWER STEERING AND POWER BRAKES WERE INOPERABLE. THE DEALER REPAIRED THE VEHICLE BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE BUT DENIED ANY ASSISTANCE WITH REPAIRS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 82,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 86,000. UPDATED 09/27/11 *BF UPDATED 2/23/12 *CN

NHTSA ODI #10421167

29,000 miles · Aug 15, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE MISFIRED AND THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER WHO REPLACED THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND CAM SENSOR, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE CONTACT WAS WAITING FOR A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE MISFIRED AND THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER WHO REPLACED THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND CAM SENSOR, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE CONTACT WAS WAITING FOR A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE MANUFACTURER TO PROCESS A COMPLAINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 92,000.

NHTSA ODI #10419440

85,000 miles · Aug 11, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

RECEIVED A CHECK ENGINE LIGHT NOTICE. TOOK C-230 (2006) TO DEALER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE CODE INDICATED A WORN TIMING GEAR PROBLEM AND WOULD REQUIRE MAJOR ENGINE REPAIR. THE COST ESTIMATE WAS $4000 TO $5000 TO TAKE THE ENGINE APART AND DETERMINE IF THE GEAR WAS WORN AND NEEDED REPLACEMENT. PERFORMED A INTERNET SEARCH AND FOUND…

Read full complaint

RECEIVED A CHECK ENGINE LIGHT NOTICE. TOOK C-230 (2006) TO DEALER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE CODE INDICATED A WORN TIMING GEAR PROBLEM AND WOULD REQUIRE MAJOR ENGINE REPAIR. THE COST ESTIMATE WAS $4000 TO $5000 TO TAKE THE ENGINE APART AND DETERMINE IF THE GEAR WAS WORN AND NEEDED REPLACEMENT. PERFORMED A INTERNET SEARCH AND FOUND THAT THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THESE ENGINES. CAR HAS 85,000 MILES AND WAS PURCHASED IN 2008 WITH 40,000. HAVE NOT HAD THE REPAIR PERFORMED YET. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10418558

47,000 miles · Aug 2, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingCrash

I WAS INVOLVED IN AN AUTO ACCIDENT (REAR-ENDED) ON DEC 21ST 2010. THE COLLISION RESULTED IN MY VEHICLE BEING PUSHED IN TO ANOTHER VEHICLE (TRUCK) IN FONT OF ME. THE RESULTING CRASH PRODUCED DAMAGES TO THE FRONT AND REAR OF THE CAR TOTALING 15K. I NOTICED THAT MY DASHBOARD WAS LIT UP WITH WARNING SIGNALS AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT A…

Read full complaint

I WAS INVOLVED IN AN AUTO ACCIDENT (REAR-ENDED) ON DEC 21ST 2010. THE COLLISION RESULTED IN MY VEHICLE BEING PUSHED IN TO ANOTHER VEHICLE (TRUCK) IN FONT OF ME. THE RESULTING CRASH PRODUCED DAMAGES TO THE FRONT AND REAR OF THE CAR TOTALING 15K. I NOTICED THAT MY DASHBOARD WAS LIT UP WITH WARNING SIGNALS AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AT THE SEEN OF THE COLLISION. THE REAR LIGHT WAS EXPLAINABLE AS THE LIGHT WAS KNOCKED OUT IN THE CRASH. THE ENGINE LIGHT HOWEVER WAS A BIT OF A MYSTERY. I TOOK THE CAR IN FOR REPAIRS THREE DAYS LATER AFTER CONSULTING WITH THE DRIVER AT FAULTS' INSURANCE COMPANY. THE REPAIR COMPANY NOTED THE LIGHT ALSO. I COULD ARRIVE AT NO OTHER CONCLUSION BUT THAT THE COLLISION WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY ENGINE LIGHT SUDDENLY COMING ON. THE INSURANCE COMPANY ARGUES THAT THE COLLISION HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT PARTICULAR LIGHT COMING ON. THE MATTER IS BEING DEALT WITH IN COURT. IN THE MEANTIME, I DID SOME RESEARCH AND RAN ACROSS HUNDREDS OF COMPLAINTS ON LINE, BY MERCEDES BENZ DRIVERS, COMPLAINING OF A CAM SHAFT PROBLEM THAT IS IDENTIFIED BY AN ENGINE LIGHT INITIALLY. IT APPEARS THAT A PART WAS DEFECTIVE YET NO RECALL HAS BEEN ISSUED BY MERCEDES. I'VE REACHED OUT TO MERCEDES BENZ OF AMERICA. AFTER SEVERAL CALLS RESPONDING TO MY INQUIRY, THEY STOPPED INFORMING ME OF ANY FURTHER FINDINGS. THIS AFTER PROMISING TO APPRISE ME OF THE STATUS OF MY COMPLAINT. MY ISSUE IS TWO FOLD. HOW MUCH EVIDENCE IS NECESSARY BEFORE IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS PRODUCT AND THE SERIES OF CARS THAT ARE IMPACTED BY IT, WARRANTS A RECALL? SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS WIDE-SPREAD ISSUE? I MUST TELL YOU THAT AS A CONSUMER, IT IS NO MYSTERY WHAT MOST HAVE LOST TRUST IN GOVERNMENTS ABILITY TO SERVE AND PROTECT IT'S CITIZENS IN THESE MATTERS. I FOR ONE AM DISAPPOINTED IN THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROCESS. I INITIALLY CONTACTED THIS OFFICE EIGHT MONTHS AGO AND HAVE HEARD NOTHING. REGARDS,[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) *KB

NHTSA ODI #10416667

60,000 miles · Jun 15, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD STALL WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS. AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AND CONTINUE DRIVING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE BALANCE SHAFT NEEDED TO B…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES BENZ C230. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD STALL WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS. AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AND CONTINUE DRIVING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE BALANCE SHAFT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 64,037.

NHTSA ODI #10406942

Official recalls

5

24V874000 · Visibility:sun/moon Roof Assembly

Nov 19, 2024

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 C-Class, CLK, E-Class, and CLS vehicles. Please see the recall report for a complete list of models and model years. The glass sunroof panel may not be properly secured and can detach.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A detached sunroof panel can become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the sunroof panel as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed January 10, 2025. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall is an expansion of previous NHTSA recall number 22V-954. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2024120001/2/3.

22V954000 · Visibility:sun/moon Roof Assembly

Dec 23, 2022

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 C-Class, CLK, E-Class, and CLS vehicles. Please refer to MBUSA's recall report for specific vehicle model details. The glass sunroof panel may not be properly secured and may detach.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A detached sunroof panel may become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the sunroof panel as necessary free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed February 3, 2023. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall expands NHTSA recall number 19V-918. MBUSA's numbers for this recall are 2023010004, 2023010005, and 2023010006.

21V196000 · Visibility:sun/moon Roof Assembly

Mar 19, 2021

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2006-2007 C350, C230, C280, CLK350, E320CDI, E350 Wagon, E350, 2006 C55 AMG, CLK500, CLS500, CLS55 AMG, E500 Wagon, E500, E55 AMG, 2007 CLK550, CLS550, CLS63 AMG, E550, E63 AMG, and E63 Wagon AMG vehicles. The bonding between the glass panel and the sliding roof frame may deteriorate, possibly causing the glass panel to detach from the vehicle.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A detached glass panel can separate from the vehicle and become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: MBUSA will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the glass panel bonding and replace the sliding roof, as necessary, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed May 7, 2021. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall is an expansion of recall number 19V-918. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2021040012.

19V918000 · Visibility:sun/moon Roof Assembly

Dec 20, 2019

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 vehicles. The bonding between the glass panel and the sliding roof frame may deteriorate, possibly resulting in the glass panel detaching from the vehicle. For a full list of the affected models visit: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2019/RMISC-19V918-4126.pdf

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A detached glass panel can separate from the vehicle and become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: MBUSA will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the glass panel bonding and replace the sliding roof, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began July 10, 2020. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2020040011.

16V081000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Feb 11, 2016

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (MBUSA) is recalling certain model year 2009-2010 ML320 BlueTec 4Matic, GL320 BlueTec 4Matic and R320 CDI 4Matic, 2011 E350 Cabriolet and E550 Cabriolet, 2009-2011 ML350, ML350 4Matic, ML550 4Matic, ML63 AMG, and C63 AMG, 2010-2011 ML450 4Matic Hybrid, E350 Coupe, E350 4Matic, E550 Coupe, E550 4Matic, and E63 AMG, 2011-2012 GL350 BlueTec 4Matic and R350 BlueTec 4Matic, 2009-2012 GL450 4Matic, GL550 4Matic and R350 4Matic, 2007-2008 SLK280, SLK350, and SLK55 AMG, 2011-2014 SLS AMG Coupe, 2012 SLS AMG Cabriolet, 2013-2014 SLS AMG GT and SLS AMG GT Cabriolet, 2005 C230 Kompressor and C320, 2006-2007 C230, 2006-2011 C350, 2008-2011 C300 and C300 4Matic, 2010-2012 GLK350 and GLK350 4Matic and 2007-2008 Chrysler Crossfire vehicles. Upon deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, excessive internal pressure may cause the inflator to rupture.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: MBUSA will their notify owners, and Fiat Chrysler will notify the affected Chrysler owners. Dealers for the respective brands will replace the driver's frontal air bag module, free of charge. This recall began November 2016. Mercedes-Benz owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372 and Chrysler owners may contact Fiat Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

1

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

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.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

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.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

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.