W211 Facelift Reliability..?

[Robbo Cop]

Hi all,

Can anyone give a reasonably definitive answer as to the reliability of the facelifted W211..? I am in the market for a late '06 early '07 E220 CDI but am very wary due to the amount of issues posted here. Granted with the 2000+ component changes from late '06, they are supposedly good cars now, but is this really true? I still hear of ball joints air con fans etc. I understand you can't predict the future of a car, but are they a safe bet? They're too expensive to be taking a chance on. I'm a high milage user and need reliability.

Thanks in advance,

Rob

 

[grober]

quoting Honest John

Excellent range of refined engines, incredibly comfortable long distance car, superb ride quality, models from 2006 are much improved and more reliable.

Mercedes E Class W211 2006 Facelift | Road Tests | Honest John

As a general rule the later any model is in its production run the more chance any design/component weakness will have of been "engineered out" during the cars life cycle. This doesn't make it bullet proof- just better than the early ones-sometimes noticeably better- which seems to be the case with second incarnation of the W211?

 

[Robbo Cop]

Thanks Graham. You know, it just feels like I'm considering an Alfa 159 rather than an MB. You don't really expect an Alfa to be very good for very long but MB's are supposed to out live tortoises..! So much damage has been done by the bean counters. And yes, I have read that Honest John review (and many others) so thanks for that. I also spoke to my buddy who is an MB specialist and he says with regard to the facelift model "you should be alright". I have to say it still doesn't fill me with confidence. Ask any mech. about the Accord diesel for example (yes I know it not an MB) and they'll give them a thumbs up all week long, and perhaps the fact it's not an MB is seen as a good thing these days? Anyway, enough philosophy. Thanks for the reply.

Rob

 

[blue gnome123]

Hi RoboCop

I've had two Accord 0cdti diesels and although generally very relaible they can have turbo problems! That was the reason why I traded in my second one. No car is absolutely perfect and even with a reliable model you can get a pup. However when moving on to a S211 I looked at all the reliability data and the facelift model does seem to be very reliable. I have an '08.

 

[crockers]

Gondar have a great rep for petrol engines. Practically a 100% record for none failures. As for diesels don't think they are as reliable. But they do have great dealers.

 

[christopherwk]

Bought my 2007 E320 CDi at 95,000 miles. Now at 109,000 miles. No problems at all so far.

 

[kwakdonut]

I have a pre-facelift and, reliability wise, has been flawless. Starts first time, hasn't broken down etc etc. Due to its mileage, I have had to change a few bits, rear springs, both track rod ends and it's also had a turbo change (@160k).

Along with the occasional electrical gremlin (mostly shot of in the post-facelift), its been pretty good

 

[Robbo Cop]

Thanks lads, firstly sorry for spelling you're name wrong Graeme..! Christopher it nearly sounds like you're expecting something to go wrong. I dont want to sound pedantic and I hope all will be well with you're car.. and Kwakdonut, I think electrical gremlins and a turbo change at 160K if unforgivable in a car that should run for 400 - 500k with proper servicing. I dunno lads, I dont want to be coming down hard on MB but jesus, bad dealers and MB themselves ignoring customers who have had major let downs? I really want one of these but I cant see myself sleeping too well knowing something could well be lurking around the corner...Very much the same story with Audi and VW (A6 TDI and Passat CC TDI)... The only other car I'd go for is that new Accord i-DTEC.No problems, peaceful sleep...!! At the moment I have a 2005 Volvo S60 D5 Sport and it's been 100% reliable in almost 100,000 miles. Yeah I know it's a bit of a boat etc etc but it's been great...As an aside, I spoke to a Bosch engineer recently who told me German engineers are way ahead, cutting edge wise, of the Japs, with NEW technology etc whereas the Japs build on proven engineering.. There really seems to be an argument for the way they do things. Honda, Lexus, Mazda always in the top of all JD power surveys etc, not that I'd put much stock in those surveys but it's a pointer. Also my neighbour has a 2003 E220 CDI (Taxi) and it has been off the road a lot. Pre facelift granted, but I could'nt afford time off the road or the costs. Perhaps the new models (C Class and W212 E Class) will be back to MB's old form of building bombproof motors. I'd better start saving...!!

Again thanks to all of you for the replies and if there are any more facelift E' owners out there, let me know you're thoughts.

Thanks a mill,

Rob

 

[st13phil]

I think electrical gremlins and a turbo change at 160K if unforgivable in a car that should run for 400 - 500k with proper servicing.

Electrical gremlins aside, I think you have unrealistic expectations to think that nothing other than routine service items will ever need replacing on a car that runs for 400 - 500k miles. While there may be one or two examples that are better than the rest it's actually very rare for a car to run that sort of mileage with no requirement to change something that fails. For example, turbo's are one of those items whose life expectancy is susceptible to usage patterns, not just maintenance regime and so one example requiring replacement at 160k miles isn't something to baulk at. If many required replacement at 60k miles it would be a different matter though.

Something else to bear in mind is that the injection system on the current generation of diesel engines are running absolutely at the edge of design and manufacturing technology in order to meet emissions reg's. If you're looking for guaranteed longevity then being on the bleeding edge is never a good idea, and all the manufacturers are suffering from injector system reliability on the very latest EU5-spec engines. I can say this with a degree of certainty because they are all using the same system components from a limited range of suppliers and no-one has cracked all the issues yet.

What many non-manufacturing people don't realise is that reliability actually starts at the design stage and while the W211 certainly improved during it's lifetime, many of the design-time decisions that influence longevity still exists in the last one to roll off the line just as they did in the first example. I'm in no way saying that the W211 is a bad car because it patently isn't, but if your primary requirement is for a car that's as close to bomb-proof as possible then the W204 is, imo, a better bet because it was designed to address potential reliability issues at the start. As such, it's not really a surprise that with the exception of the BlueEfficiency injector issues that have been discussed ad nauseum here and elsewhere, the platform has proven to be one of the most reliable cars that MB have produced in recent years.

 

[camerafodder]

Phil is right on the mark as far as I'm concerned.

 

[st4]

The C class 204 has proven mechanically to be a great car.

The 220cdi engine is tough, the gearbox proven and the car seems absent from the type of thread starting: Help I have a problem.

The 220cdi engine is a industry proven engine, and there seems to be few threads on here about them being unreliable.

The facelifted 211 E220cdi which you are considering has the same mechanicals as the C220cdi 204 (that Phil has). The only difference are electricals, suspensions etc.

The question is, do you want the bigger more comfortable slower 211 E220cdi, or the sportier more agile C220cdi 204.

You mention you do a lot of miles: if mainly motorway you will put precious little wear on the suspension, steering, engine so I'd expect the E220cdi to last a long time before any major work is needed.

And don't service it at the dealer: the mileage you intend on doing will depreciate the car a lot more than the lack of MB stamps. You'll find a decent Mercedes specialist will give you a better quality of customer service, and will be more experienced than the apprentice's MB use for techies so will do a better job.

I had an E220cdi and loved it. I now have an E320cdi, and its fab, but a more problematic engine methinks.

 

[Robbo Cop]

Thanks Phil,

I wasn't suggesting that NOTHING would go wrong in 400 - 500k, but turbo failure at 160k is not acceptable in my view. Also electrical gremlins cant be put aside either, they should not be happening in one of the worlds so called top marques. Mercedes rode out the storm of unreliability to a large degree, on the strengths of their past engineering greatness, and peoples badge aspirations. I'm not suggesting for a minute the all MB's are bad car's, clearly they're not but, with all the constraints of EU emission laws etc, how come other manufacturers seem to be able to get it right more often?

***, thanks for the info. For me the bigger more comfortable E would be my choice (45-50k a year), and I never visit main stealers. I do all my own oil changes etc and only visit my local guy for anything I cant handle myself.

Thanks to all,

Rob

 

[st4]

Robbo Cop: sadly not all manufacturers get it right, specifically with modern diesels. VW/Audi, Jag, MB and BMW all have their foibles.

The E220cdi is one of the best cars for big mileages on sale and a remarkably trouble free engine. 50k/yr it will lap up with ease. Taxi drivers love them and some are known to do 500k no bother.

I have had 2 E classes and had no electical troubles (bar one with the engine in my E320 and also gearbox electrics on my 320) with them.

Whatcar gave it a 4/5 reliable rating which means good, very few cars get the 5/5.

I'd wager you'd not be let down by a facelifted E220cdi. Its a great car.

 

[Robbo Cop]

Thanks ***,

I have a friend who has a 1993 300E TD estate with over 200k on it and he drives like he stole it..! Big miles too like myself, and his car just keeps on going, even though the sun wheels in the auto box are well worn and it sticks in third a lot. It's a tough old bird. Personally I cant imagine myself happier than doing many miles in an E220, and I know it would laugh at 350k plus. Lets say I take the plunge and go for the 220 CDI, and I know you cant predict the future, but what do you think I could expect in the way of electrical niggles (if any) etc with a facelift model? I'm looking at a manual, and there are lots of nicely specced ones in the UK. I'll never buy an Irish car again (basement spec and worse condition), my last three cars have been UK and great. I know you'll probably say go for an auto E220 but I need to keep an eye on fuel costs. As you can probably gather, I really want an MB, but I'm very nervous about the horror stories..

Thanks a mill for the help,

Rob

 

[st4]

I cannot actually think of any electrical gremlins to go wrong, the radio occasionally cuts out but then you turn it off and on again and it works. It should start on the key and keep on going, they do not give much trouble. The facelifted car is the one to get, no SBC brakes or anything like that.

They really dont go wrong. The engine is tough, run it on decent fuel and the injectors will last well beyond 100k miles. An addative like millers diesel eco works a treat for economy, refinement and injector cleaning.

Fair do wanting a manual, marginally better on fuel, but there aint a heap in it, but if you'd rather have a manual go for it and cheaper to buy. Worry about the resale later, you will pile on the miles so its an irrelevance when it has 200k on it. Dont even think the 220cdi lump needs oil top ups. Service her every 10k miles and they keep on running, brilliant cars.

I find them brilliant mile eaters the E class, love driving and 10hour tours in Scotland are no sweat, I go down south in the car from Scotland and its a pleasure and privilege to drive such a car on these trips. So much so I went blasting around Europe in an E class, 4500 miles in 2 weeks. No sweat.

BTW, you want an Avantgarde model, better suspension, standard xenon lights, half leather standard, everything you want. Check my albums out, the black one was the 220cdi AG.

 

[kwakdonut]

Robbo, can I just add that the turbo was replaced as part of fault diagnosis - it didn't actually fail although I feel that it was worn. This was not mine, nor I think, the car's fault. Probably previous owner(s) not letting the engine cool after long/high speed runs etc

As for the electrical gremlins - they are well know on the pre-facelift but much less common on the post.

Overall, I am happy with the car - it's lovely to drive and a superb mile muncher. It's quiet, comfortable and looks the business especially with the panoramic glass roof.

IMHO NO car is 100% reliable. They are mechanical and mass-produced and there is dogs in every make and model, some more than others.

Hopefully, MB are finally back on the road to producing some great cars with the current 204 and 212's but don't poo-poo the 211 or 203 as they themselves (certainly in facelift form) fine cars.

 

[kwakdonut]

Oh and regardless of residuals, go for an AUTO - much more pleasurable to drive and fuel economy difference is negligible.

 

[Robbo Cop]

***,

So no worries with the manual box? Heard a few years ago they weren't so good, but in recent years they're fine. And you're absolutely right, it is an AG I'm after I might even put 18" alloys on it to complete the picture..... Thankfully (or rather incredibly), the utterly hopeless government here have been throwing a few quid into the roads over the last few years, so they are much much better (on a monthly basis) so 18's should last.

Had a look at you're pics of the 220. Great looking car. Did you say earlier you had a few issues with it? Cant remember..

I notice the picture with the white ribbon on the bonnet...Was that the day you and the car were married...? I thought that type of thing only happens in America...? )

Rob

 

[Robbo Cop]

Thanks Kwakdonut, (great name by the way)..

When you say MPG is around the same, do you have any figures? Also, importing a car to Ireland the duty paid is on emissions and the 220 Auto with 177 CO2 is in the 28% bracket and the manual is 24%. I know it sounds like penny pinching, but that equates to a 1,500 euro price difference. Having said that, an auto would be very nice. I did have a BMW 525d auto and it was really thirsty. Well it was till the turbo ate itself..!! It was very economical after that, used no diesel at all actually. Ever...

Rob

 

[st4]

***,

So no worries with the manual box? Heard a few years ago they weren't so good, but in recent years they're fine. And you're absolutely right, it is an AG I'm after I might even put 18" alloys on it to complete the picture..... Thankfully (or rather incredibly), the utterly hopeless government here have been throwing a few quid into the roads over the last few years, so they are much much better (on a monthly basis) so 18's should last.

Had a look at you're pics of the 220. Great looking car. Did you say earlier you had a few issues with it? Cant remember..

I notice the picture with the white ribbon on the bonnet...Was that the day you and the car were married...? I thought that type of thing only happens in America...? )

Rob

Never driven one with a manual but reckon they are okay to drive. Certainly not an unreliable gearbox...

I'd keep it with 16s or 17's, cheaper tyres and on big miles that will make a difference. No issues with the 220cdi.

That was for my mates wedding, drove the bride etc.

Would have prefered a car full of horny gagging for it bridesmaids, but drew the short straw!!!