Are these the Mercedes dreaful years/cars?

[MM85]

So are these the cars considered lower quality and not up to the Mercedes standards last seen in the W124 and W140?

C208
C209

W202
W203
W204(?)

C215
C216 (at least some years?)

W219

W210
W211

W220
W221 (?)

R170
R171

R230

W163
W164
X164

W251 (R-Class)

Did I leave anything out?

I have purposely left out models such as the Vaneo, A or B class and CLA C-Class since I don't really much care for them. If I buy a Mercedes-Benz I want space, unless a sports-car and I definitely want RWD.

I'm asking because once I find my C124 daily driver I would like to buy a modern Merc for the wife. So I want to know what to avoid. Thanks for the input.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

That's much of Mercedes model line up over a 20 year period! Those cars probably represent a big proportion of those owned by members of this forum, so they'll certainly tell you whether you're right, and they are dreadful cars.

There are some great cars caught up in that list.

Which kind of car is your wife looking for?

 

[Lotiman]

I owned a C209 CLK for a few years and that was a lovely car. Mind you, the W210 I owned before that was a real problem car. I only had to turn my back and another rust bubble would appear - or so it seemed!

 

[MM85]

Most likely something 4-doors. I have the feeling it will be a W212. But when buying used you never know what kind of deals you may find. I would not mind a W204, if the quality had already gone up again by that generation.

I know my list above encompasses a long time period. This is why I have question marks in some. But it's very talked about that Mercs from the late 90's and 2000's are bad. More specifically the general consensus seems to be that Mercs from 1996 to 2005 or so are bad. Rust a lot, trim and body panel quality are low, interiors are cheaply made and break down more often. Where it gets blurry is in cases like the W204 which was introduced in mid 2000's and still being made till today. So maybe in these case only the early cars should be avoided?

I kind of hesitated posting this question because I thought maybe would rough some people's feathers. As you said there are probably a lot of people who own one of these here and people get attached to their cars. Which is why I'm hoping more for former owners' opinions than current owners. I think people who have already moved on can be more objective about the real problems.

But if those models years were not truly bad they would not have the bad reputation they have. Look at the great reputation the W124 has. When it's really good people will acknowledge.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Of that list, cars I've owned and since sold include both W163 and W203. Both were superb cars, incredibly reliable and not expensive to maintain.

Unfortunately both models have a questionable reputation, although from my own experience it wasn't justified. Maybe I got lucky with mine, or maybe because I owned them from almost new and for a long period of time they had always been well maintained.

Both models are known to suffer from corrosion, which is more down to luck than careful ownership, and it's a shame.

 

[grober]

IMHO the W204 AND W212 were the first recent models which signaled a part return to MB core values. They are in the main fairly bullet proof having been subjected to extensive testing pre-release as MB began realise money needed to spent to regain a crumbling reputation and loss of market share to AUDI [ He whispered ] and BMW . There are always weak spots in any model with the V6 petrol engine problems and diesel injectors but these were addressed.They also benefited from a FACELIFT/ revamped interior half way through their production run.
The period to avoid in general is the Jürgen Erich Schrempp era mid 90s to 2006 which adopted a "never mind the quality feel the width" approach together with an ill fated alliance with Chrysler and Mitsubishi . Mercedes took some time to recover from that. There are good MB vehicles to be had from that era but they need more careful assessment. Cars with problems from that era tend to present with multiple problems rather a than single issues.

 

[Mike Walker]

Agreed^^ My W210, first registered in 2000, had rust popping up everywhere. My W203 C class - 51 plate - went back 3 times for repairs to rusty rear wheel arches.

Tempting fate but my W124 - J plate - has rust around one drain hole and nothing else. That has already been addressed.

 

[BTB 500]

I bought a late (2007) S203 for my wife and touch wood that's been fine so far (just over 2 years). As a general rule I would avoid early versions of any model (the later the better), and any 'modern' but un-galvanised M-B.

PS if you want space and RWD then you missed out the W639 Viano I'm kidding as I'm sure you don't want a 'van' but we've had our 639 for 8 years now and that's been pretty good. I still enjoy driving it.

 

[190]

W204's have aluminium front wings so at least they won't rust. Not entirely sure if this is a good thing but on the blue efficiency W204's virtually the whole underside of the car is clad in plastic which should stop stonechips initiating rust.

 

[GP801]

We had an early W203 which was a total disaster. Electronics were a nightmare. Cost MB thousands in warranty work. Then a W209 which has been brilliant and we still have it 12 years later. Interesting as underneath they are pretty much the same.

 

[markjay]

My 2006 W203 has so far been both trouble free and rust free, and it is still going strong. I should probably add that it is very well maintained.... Based on my experience, I would recommend a late (2004 onwards) W203 to anyone.

 

[j.schmeltzer]

I have a 2000 W208 CLK320 that I bought 18 months ago, It has full history from build sheet to present. Original owner had all 4 wings repaired at MB expense several years ago . It has had every service to date at 110,000 miles. It is an absolute gem and I am happy to keep it indefinitely. As has been said on this forum, service history and overall appearance are more important than mileage, generally speaking.

 

[Nasco12]

I've had a '99 and a '96 W202. The '99 had a rust problem but otherwise was very good. The '96's has the merest amount of rust coming through which I think is acceptable in a car that age. Otherwise, I think it's pretty reliable even if it has been off the road 4 times in a year.

 

[MM85]

Thanks for all the input guys.

Based on the reputation and most reports here I guess I would not take any Mercedes built between 1997 and 2006 not even if it was given to me for free. Just what I would spend on repairs would make it not worth it even if the car was free. Sure there might be one here and there which is not bad. But this seems to be the exception rather than the rule and with Mercedes it should be the other way around. They should be all great and the exception should be the bad ones.

 

[MWCLS]

My wife's 2nd owner S203 2004 hasn't missed at beat on 48k now, no rust just a solid car.

My W219 2006 hasn't missed a beat on 60k now, no rust or problems I'm the 2nd owner had it nearly 4 years apart from general maintenance just a Auxiliary batt needed after 8 years.

Both cars have full MB history.

I have had many different 'prestige' cars over the years and have even low with owners and miles have had some horrors.

 

[MM85]

I bought a late (2007) S203 for my wife and touch wood that's been fine so far (just over 2 years). As a general rule I would avoid early versions of any model (the later the better), and any 'modern' but un-galvanised M-B.

That's very interesting and somehow good to hear.

Because although I'm leaning towards a W212, if we would end up getting a estate, an E-Class estate is just too large. It's bigger than the world. So it would have to be a C-Class estate.

And besides the poor quality, I find most Mercedes from the late 90's and 2000's very ugly. This was a time Audi and BMW totally beat Mercedes in design. Specially the estates. Wow, were they ugly!

The exception is the S203. I think it still one of the best looking Merc estates. The S204 and S205 are also nice but not necessarily better looking. Actually, with the exception of some of the sports cars the S203 is probably the best looking Merc from 1997 to the post round headlights versions.

So it's good to hear a late S203 may not be bad. Although I'm not sure I could dive into it worry free. Might still end up going with a S204. But I definitely like the look of the S203 a lot.

PS if you want space and RWD then you missed out the W639 Viano I'm kidding as I'm sure you don't want a 'van' but we've had our 639 for 8 years now and that's been pretty good. I still enjoy driving it.

. Yes, no van for me.

But RWD is definitely a must.

Yesterday the wife and I went to a couple of dealers and while I was pulling over I showed her one of them new A-Class cars. She asked if it was really a Mercedes. Then she saw the logo at the back and said "But it looks like a Golf". And I told her, she was not too far off. It's a FWD hatchback made in Germany.

We were then discussing what type of public buys it instead of a Golf or something else of the like because it would be cheaper and as a hatchback offer you basically the same. We concluded that the buying public is probably somebody who cares more about the badge than anything. You can still say you drive a Mercedes.

I showed her the car because at least here you see mostly women driving the A-Class and B-class. Probably because they are smaller and "cute". But her words were "No way. I want a real Mercedes-Benz, like that one" pointing to W212.

 

[Red C220]

We owned a 2009 W204 c180K pre facelift which didn't miss a beat.

Then a 2010 W164 ML300 CDI sport - owned 4 months (7000 miles) but the gearbox jerked terribly.

2011 W204 C220 CDI Sport Estate (facelift) didn't miss a beat for 3 years.

Now on a 2014 W212 E220 CDI Sport Estate, also perfect bar a bad DAB aerial, ride and comfort simply a different league to the C Class.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

Based on the reputation and most reports here I guess I would not take any Mercedes built between 1997 and 2006 not even if it was given to me for free. Just what I would spend on repairs would make it not worth it even if the car was free. Sure there might be one here and there which is not bad.

You're being a little bit dramatic with that.

The knack with Mercedes is to buy the facelift model; as an example the pre-facelift W204 had a few creaks and the interior feels quite cheap compared to the facelift W204 which is leagues ahead in quality and feel.


Oh, and the last proper Mercedes was the W123.

 

[flango]

Thanks for all the input guys.

Based on the reputation and most reports here I guess I would not take any Mercedes built between 1997 and 2006 not even if it was given to me for free. Just what I would spend on repairs would make it not worth it even if the car was free. Sure there might be one here and there which is not bad. But this seems to be the exception rather than the rule and with Mercedes it should be the other way around. They should be all great and the exception should be the bad ones.

I have a mint 1997 c208 with not one spot of rust on it, coming up 19 years old never missed a beat never had paint a perfect example of whst a Mercedes should be. Prefacelifts were better than facelifts on the 208 which was down to the different primer and paint used on the pre facelift cars

 

[BTB 500]

That's very interesting and somehow good to hear.

Because although I'm leaning towards a W212, if we would end up getting a estate, an E-Class estate is just too large. It's bigger than the world. So it would have to be a C-Class estate.

And besides the poor quality, I find most Mercedes from the late 90's and 2000's very ugly. This was a time Audi and BMW totally beat Mercedes in design. Specially the estates. Wow, were they ugly!

The exception is the S203. I think it still one of the best looking Merc estates. The S204 and S205 are also nice but not necessarily better looking. Actually, with the exception of some of the sports cars the S203 is probably the best looking Merc from 1997 to the post round headlights versions.

So it's good to hear a late S203 may not be bad. Although I'm not sure I could dive into it worry free. Might still end up going with a S204. But I definitely like the look of the S203 a lot.

Same here, gratuitous pic of ours



Whilst it's no Volvo the boot is surprisingly practical despite the sloping roofline. It takes five of us plus a dog or two in the back without any problem, but it's still a handy size for parking etc.