E Class Estate - Newbie Buying Advice

[DavidL]

It needs to be hooked up to STAR to count the actuations.
For any purchase it would be sensible to get the codes read before you buy it anyway. Most independent MB garages will have it.
Its more accurate than a generic OBDII reader.

 

[efunc1]

Thanks, that sounds ideal. Unfortunately I won't have access to STAR while I'm bidding on cars at the other side of the country. I need to sort the dodgy cars from the decent contenders by asking a handful of pointed questions, and then go and look at a couple in person.

 

[merc85]

They will all be timing chains, Sbc the higher the mileage the more chance of it being closer to the threshold, Keeping that in mind best bet is to stick to ones with lower mileages.

If the car has been used on local trips ie round towns and cities again the more chance its going to have had more presses on the brake pedol.

 

[E55BOF]

Unless you find something with really low mileage (and I doubt you will for £3k, if at all) SBC is a lottery; simple as that.

My '03 55K has 142K on the clock, and an SBC unit manufactured in '08, so it was replaced at some time after the car had done about 75k miles. My '04 55K's SBC unit was made in '04; the car has 136k miles on it, so either it's very likely the counter has been reset, or the unit on it has been fitted after reconditioning at some later date.

Unless the service history shows an SBC unit replacement, there's no way of telling; you take a chance, and hope it doesn't go wrong. The only way to be certain is not to buy a car with SBC.

 

[efunc1]

The only way to be certain is not to buy a car with SBC.

OK, thanks. So am I correct in thinking all E Class estates 2003 - 2005 had SBC? What models could I look at that don't?

 

[E55BOF]

Yes, you are. I think it was dropped with the facelift in 2006, but whether that was only for the 2007 model year I don't know. There are people on here who will know, though; with any luck one of them will read this thread and give a definitive answer.

 

[AMGeed]

Don't rule this one out.

Mercedes 2005 E280 CDI Estate For Sale - Mercedes-Benz Owners' Forums

The mileage is irrelevant. Buy on condition, and this one has been well looked after and wanted for nothing during it's last 5 years.

 

[merc85]

Funny you posted that AMGeed, i was thinking the same

 

[efunc1]

Yes, you are. I think it was dropped with the facelift in 2006, but whether that was only for the 2007 model year I don't know. There are people on here who will know, though; with any luck one of them will read this thread and give a definitive answer.

fair enough. In any case, out of my price range. Those cars tend to start around £7k, so for the sake of a possible £1000 SBC failure a 2005 is still going to be more cost effective. Thank for your help. I'll be more cautious going forward.

 

[merc85]

Unless you find something with really low mileage (and I doubt you will for £3k, if at all) SBC is a lottery; simple as that.

My '03 55K has 142K on the clock, and an SBC unit manufactured in '08, so it was replaced at some time after the car had done about 75k miles. My '04 55K's SBC unit was made in '04; the car has 136k miles on it, so either it's very likely the counter has been reset, or the unit on it has been fitted after reconditioning at some later date.

Unless the service history shows an SBC unit replacement, there's no way of telling; you take a chance, and hope it doesn't go wrong. The only way to be certain is not to buy a car with SBC.

Theres a date stamp on the yellow label on the pump,i dont think its that much of a lottery really.

 

[efunc1]

Don't rule this one out.

Mercedes 2005 E280 CDI Estate For Sale - Mercedes-Benz Owners' Forums

The mileage is irrelevant. Buy on condition, and this one has been well looked after and wanted for nothing during it's last 5 years.

Yes! I'd almost forgotten about that, but you're right, it is stunning, and it's more or less what I'm now looking for. HOWEVER, that mileage does freak me out! Can it really be a trouble-free car for my brother for the next 5 years? Lovely as it looks it does make me nervous.

I've seen low-ish mileage cars like this 2005 E320

And this more basic petrol E240 at 138k

or this E320 with more (153k)

 

[efunc1]

Yes! I'd almost forgotten about that, but you're right, it is stunning, and it's more or less what I'm now looking for. HOWEVER, that mileage does freak me out! Can it really be a trouble-free car for my brother for the next 5 years? Lovely as it looks it does make me nervous.

Hi all, I could really do with your thoughts on this final dilemma. I've pretty much settled on two cars now and would like to hear some of you weigh in, pros and cons. I'm going to have to get something in the next couple of days.

Firstly there's this 2005 E320 with 124k on the clock. Lot's of bells and whistles.

I was the high bidder in this auction but it didn't meet reserve. The seller tells me he wants at least £4k, which I think is a bit high, at least for me. However it's in good condition, loads of service history, for example:

2012 SBC replaced by MB @ £560
Both rear shocks replaced
2008 £3.5k on new transmission (?)
etc
no outstanding issues.

Or this 2003 E320 with 153k on the clock.

Again, more bells and whistles, but higher mileage and and 2 years older with a bit more wear and tear. However I know the seller who is a mechanic and did an engine replacement on my VW Golf GT TDI earlier this year. There is no record of the SBC pump ever being replaced, or the radiator as has been mentioned on this thread. However the rear air suspension and front springs have been done as well as ball joints and various other bits and pieces. The seller has done a lot himself over the past 2 years as he's a VAG engine specialist, but it's undocumented. Only MB history up to about 68k.

So... what would be the wise thing to do? £4k for the 2005 model, or £3k for the 2003? Or even £2.5 for the one with 320k on the clock?

They are all similarly matched, but very different animals. I need some objectivity and perspective. Over to you..!

Thanks

 

[PXW]

Being objective, and given that the price is similar, I would go for the first one. Key factors - lots of service history, relatively low mileage for the year/car, rock solid engine (in 2005 that must have been one of the very last straight sixes), newer. The SBC pump having been replaced is quite a big plus point - they do wear out (loads about this on this forum), and can be reset, but relatively recently replaced must be better. I would also add that the first car at 2003 is quite early in the production run for 211s - what I'm sure it will all have shaken down by now, I personally tend to steer clear of a car until they've put a couple of years worth on the roads.

 

[brucemillar]

^+1

 

[brucemillar]

May I add. When I bought my C5 Estate. I looked at a younger car with a similar type scenario to you. I chose the older cheaper car. I was swayed partly by the colour (Tanzanite Blue) and the thought that my £1.5k saving could be put to fixing any niggles. WRONG. £3k later!!! and I was still spending out on those little niggles that included an entire new rear sub-frame and suspension set up where the previous owner apparently forgot to mention a rear end shunt.

The car I should have bought turned out to be relatively fault free and inexpensive to maintain.

Not a guarantee I know but a good insight into Murphy's law.

 

[E55BOF]

I'd go for the first one too.

 

[efunc1]

Thank you all, thats very interesting! I didn't expect a unanimous verdict.

For me there appear to be pros and cons both ways. The 2003 car has everything the other one has as well as the addition of heated seats, which I think are really welcome in the winter. But I think it might have a few more scuffs as well as miles. But it's not without history. The owner does everything whether he needs to or not, e.g. he recently changed all the bakes all round even though they were still good for a bit, and changed front and back suspension, new vacuum hose for the engine, etc. Just no info on the SBC. Plus the garage is close to me and I've dealt with them before and they are honest.

The 2005 car has fewer miles and has both front ball joints done, as well as the service history stated above including new SBC in 2012. But beyond that I don't really know if it's going to be trouble-free or not. Plus it don't have the heated seats and is a private sale far out of town. Here's the MOT History if it makes a difference. Neither have been without their issues:

Registration number: OY05PXP

Vehicle make MERCEDES
Vehicle model E 320
Date first used 23 March 2005
Fuel type Diesel
Colour Silver
*

MOT history of this vehicle

Test date 1 April 2015
Expiry date 31 March 2016
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 115,459 miles
MOT test number 2064 3199 5016

Test date 26 March 2015
Test Result Fail
Odometer reading 115,459 miles
MOT test number 1278 6528 5442
Reason(s) for failure

Exhaust system not adequately supported (7.1.1)
Offside Front suspension has excessive play in a lower suspension ball joint (2.5.B.1a)
Nearside Front suspension has excessive play in a lower suspension ball joint (2.5.B.1a)

Test date 19 March 2014
Expiry date 28 March 2015
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 102,238 miles
MOT test number 2253 0897 4060
Advisory notice item(s)

Offside Track rod end ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Rear exhaust bracketts corroded not supporting exhaust
near side rear sub frame bush,(front) starting to seep oil


Test date 28 March 2013
Expiry date 28 March 2014
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 93,784 miles
MOT test number 6375 1778 3041
Advisory notice item(s)

Offside Front Suspension arm has slight play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
rear exhaust box reinforcement corroded, offside centre exhaust bracket corroded


Test date 28 March 2012
Expiry date 28 March 2013
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 81,429 miles
MOT test number 7564 3828 2063
Advisory notice item(s)

Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
rear exhaust sections corroded
wiper blades smear
front registration plate damaged
Engine malfunction warning light is on


Test date 29 March 2011
Expiry date 28 March 2012
Test Result Pass
MOT test number 1471 3838 1417
Advisory notice item(s)

Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 40mm circle outside zone 'A' (8.3.1d)
Nearside Side repeater damaged, but still visible from a reasonable distance (1.4.A.2e)
Offside Rear position lamp(s) damaged, but still visible from a reasonable distance (1.1.A.3d)
Front registration plate slight damage
Slight play nearside inner rack ball joint


Test date 29 March 2011
Test Result Fail
MOT test number 5276 6828 1050
Reason(s) for failure

Offside Headlamp aim too high (1.8)



Advisory notice item(s)

Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 40mm circle outside zone 'A' (8.3.1d)
Nearside Side repeater damaged, but still visible from a reasonable distance (1.4.A.2e)
Offside Rear position lamp(s) damaged, but still visible from a reasonable distance (1.1.A.3d)
Front registration plate slight damage
Slight play nearside inner rack ball joint


Test date 25 March 2010
Expiry date 26 March 2011
Test Result Pass
MOT test number 5112 3408 0068
Advisory notice item(s)

Front Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 40mm circle outside zone 'A' (8.3.1d)
Protective boot for nearside rear air suspension unit adrift.


Test date 25 March 2010
Test Result Fail
MOT test number 1044 0458 0073
Reason(s) for failure

Offside Front position lamp(s) not working (1.1.A.3b)
Nearside Front Brake pad(s) less than 1.5 mm thick (3.5.1g)

Advisory notice item(s)

Front Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 40mm circle outside zone 'A' (8.3.1d)
Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
Protective boot for nearside rear air suspension unit adrift.


Test date 27 March 2009
Expiry date 26 March 2010
Test Result Pass
MOT test number 1322 7648 9411

Advisory notice item(s)

Front Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 40mm circle outside zone 'A' (8.3.1d)
Cover for nearside rear air suspension unit adrift.


Test date 28 July 2008
Expiry date 27 July 2009
Test Result Pass
MOT test number 5941 9041 8216
Advisory notice item(s)

Nearside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)

Test date 25 July 2008
Test Result Fail
MOT test number 6144 2700 8244
Reason(s) for failure

Offside Rear Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)
Front registration plate character(s) laid out in an incorrect format (6.3.4f)
Rear registration plate character(s) laid out in an incorrect format (6.3.4f)



Advisory notice item(s)

Nearside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)


-----

And the 2003 car:

Registration number: OJZ6954
*
Vehicle make MERCEDES
Vehicle model E 320
Date first used 31 December 2003
Fuel type Diesel
Colour Silver
*
MOT history of this vehicle

Test date 17 January 2015
Expiry date 13 February 2016
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 148,248 miles
MOT test number 3099 6711 5032
Advisory notice item(s)

Under-trays fitted obscuring some underside components
Engine covers fitted obscuring some components in the engine bay
Child seat fitted


Test date 28 January 2014
Expiry date 13 February 2015
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 225,312 miles
MOT test number 3573 1842 4045
Advisory notice item(s)

Front Front suspension has slight play in a lower suspension ball joint (2.5.B.1a)
Rear Subframe mounting prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive (2.4.A.3)
Rear Brake hose slightly deteriorated (3.6.B.4d)


Test date 29 January 2013
Expiry date 13 February 2014
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 129,841 miles
MOT test number 6784 7902 3024
Advisory notice item(s)

Offside Obligatory mirror deteriorated, but not seriously affecting the rear view (8.1.2a)


Test date 14 February 2012
Expiry date 13 February 2013
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 117,190 miles
MOT test number 8496 8584 2011

Test date 14 February 2012
Test Result Fail
Odometer reading 117,190 miles
MOT test number 3895 1524 2005
Reason(s) for failure

Offside Front Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Lower Ball joint has excessive play (2.2.B.1f)


Test date 26 January 2011
Expiry date 25 January 2012
Test Result Pass
MOT test number 5856 2612 1002
Advisory notice item(s)

Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Upper Ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f)


Test date 25 January 2011
Test Result Fail
MOT test number 5899 5592 1001
Reason(s) for failure

Nearside Track rod end ball joint has excessive play (2.2.B.1f)
Front Brake pad(s) less than 1.5 mm thick (3.5.1g)

Advisory notice item(s)

Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Upper Ball joint has slight play (2.2.B.1f)


Test date 15 August 2009
Expiry date 14 August 2010
Test Result Pass
MOT test number 6909 5722 9265

Test date 14 August 2009
Test Result Fail
MOT test number 9341 0612 9234
Reason(s) for failure

Front registration plate background overprinted or shadowed with text (6.3.1e)
Rear registration plate background overprinted or shadowed with text (6.3.1e)
Offside Front Upper Suspension arm has excessive play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)



Advisory notice item(s)

Windscreen has damage to an area less than a 40mm circle outside zone 'A' (8.3.1d)


 

[efunc1]

Hi folks, just to bring this thread bang up to date, I went ahead a purchased a car yesterday. It's a 2006 E220 Facelift Estate. Seemed a good price, but no sooner had I bought it home I discovered a host of issues that need fixing, none of which was disclosed at the time.

1 - It's blowing a lot of black smoke. I was sitting at traffic light in the morning and saw plumes of smoke blowing forward over the roof and along the sides to the extent that I though the rear had caught fire. It didn't do it whilst idling normally, but perhaps when coming to a rest after a run, and perhaps during too. I've just had it scanned and been told an injector is gone and I should replace them all. Been quoted around £1500 or more.

2 - SRS Malfunction, visit workshop has come on on the dash. According to receipts the NSF lateral acceleration sensor was changed 3 months ago to address it, but it clearly hasn't worked. I suspect the fault was just cleared when I went to view the car and has naturally returned the following day. Star scan just says lateral acceleration sensors are mismatched.

3 - on board Command Sat Nav does not read the DVD. The boot DVD player has been cleaned but it's duff and needs to be replaced.

4 - The driver's folding door mirror is broken. It naturally folds right out at an obtuse angle, say about 120 degrees. You can physically rotate it to a correct viewing angle, but after a few minutes or driving it flips back out, making it useless. When folding it in it folds up to the door but the motor tried to keep going further until it clonks internally and stops. The motor seems to be travelling along an arc much larger than the physical range of the door mirror. The garage said it can't be reprogrammed or dismantled, it just needs to be replaced. Correct??

Other than that, it's a lovely car, but feels a but underpowered, and revs quite high. Not sure if this is related to the injectors. Quite a ToDo list for the first day of ownership! Any help or advice with the above issues would be very appreciated.

 

[PXW]

Did you buy it privately or from a dealer? If the latter I'd take it straight back for a refund!

If the former - I guess you are plugged into a decent local Indy but if not, you need to be. It will save you a fortune. Re the Comand unit - worth talking to Alfie on here, who know everything there is to know about Comand. it could also be that it is a duff cloned disc rather than an original and that can make a difference.

Good luck!

 

[efunc1]

Thanks for the reply. The car was bought from a 'dealer', however I only have a mobile number for him and email, none which he responds to anymore. I'll have to track him down through law enforcement if necessary and throw the book at him. the warranty and refund guarantee he supplied aren't worth the paper they're written on.

The Sat Nav disc I have is the original Mercedes one, but it just doesn't read. However I'm more concerned about the engine. I just took it for a test drive around the block - plumes of black smoke emerge when sitting at the lights, but otherwise not noticeable whilst driving I think. And very laboured. I was only doing about 20mph but it was revving 2.5 - 3k rpm. Would this be explained by the injector issue?