← New search

1999 Mercedes Benz E320

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 1999 Mercedes Benz E320 do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 42.5.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all E320 years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

51 reports with mileage · 32 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 And Engine Cooling. Review the 18 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 17 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 11 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

12 crash reports6 fire reports6 injury reports

Latches/locks/linkages complaints

1 reports
Clear category filter
71,250 miles · Dec 17, 2003
Latches/locks/linkages

THE RIGHT REAR DOOR ON MY MERCEDES BENZ 1999 E320 DID NOT LATCH COMPLETELY AND OPENED WHILE DRIVING WITH MY DAUGHTER IN THE BACK SEAT NEXT TO IT. THE DOOR APPEARED CLOSED WHEN WE STARTED BECUASE I ALWAYS CHECK THAT THE KIDS HAVE SHUT THE DOOR COMPLETELY BECUASE THEY ARE HARD TO CLOSE. I STOPPED THE VEHICLE AND JIGGLED THE HAND…

Read full complaint

THE RIGHT REAR DOOR ON MY MERCEDES BENZ 1999 E320 DID NOT LATCH COMPLETELY AND OPENED WHILE DRIVING WITH MY DAUGHTER IN THE BACK SEAT NEXT TO IT. THE DOOR APPEARED CLOSED WHEN WE STARTED BECUASE I ALWAYS CHECK THAT THE KIDS HAVE SHUT THE DOOR COMPLETELY BECUASE THEY ARE HARD TO CLOSE. I STOPPED THE VEHICLE AND JIGGLED THE HANDLE UNTIL THE LATCH WOULD WORK AGAIN. A FEW DAYS LATER THE DOOR WOULD NOT OPEN FROM THE INSIDE. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD IT WAS NOT A SAFETY ISSUE. THE DEALER FIXED THE VEHICLE AND INDICATED THAT THE LATCH WAS JAMMED. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN IN SERVICE SINCE JUL 25, 1999 AND HAS 71,785 MILES ON IT BUT I DON'T THINK THE DOORS SHOULD OPEN WHILE DRIVING. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE OTHER DOORS NOT BEING INSPECTED. I WOULD COST ME 1.5 HOURS OF LABOR FOR EACH DOOR PANEL TO BE REMOVED AT $98/HR. I SENT AN EMAIL TO MBNA INQUIRING ABOUT SERVICE BULLETINS OR RECALLS BUT HAVE NOT RECIEVED A RESPONSE. THIS TYPE OF POOR DESIGN OR QUALITY CAN LEAD TO SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES OF AN INJURY OR FATALITY IF SOMEONE FELL OUT. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10050682

Official recalls

0

No recalls in this snapshot.

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

2

PE07021 · Front Suspension Coil Spring Ejection

Opened Apr 19, 2007 · Closed Aug 9, 2007

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:springs:coil Springs

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

PE03058 · Engine Crankshaft Pulley Failure

Opened Dec 17, 2003 · Closed Apr 22, 2004

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline:belts And Associated Pulleys

THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY HARMONIC BALANCER FAILURE THAT COULD RESULT IN LOSS OF POWER-STEERING ASSIST.ODI HAS RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 546 NON-DUPLICATIVE REPORTS THAT ALLEGE ENGINE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY HARMONIC BALANCER FAILURE ON ALL MERCEDES-BENZ VEHICLES USING THE SUBJECT COMPONENT.THE SUBJECT COMPONENT FAILURES ARE PROGRESSIVE IN NATURE AND ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINTS AND WARRANT CLAIMS INVOLVED A FAILURE THAT HAD PROGRESSED FAR ENOUGH TO EFFECT POWER STEERING PERFORMANCE (6 OF 55 ODI COMPLAINTS REFERENCE INCREASED STEERING EFFORT).THERE HAVE BEEN NO CRASHES OR INJURIES RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE SUMMARY REPORT ATTACHED FOR FURTHER DETAIL.