Loss of power & woooo

Jchirchirillo

JChirchirillo
2013 - 144" 6yl . 65k on OD.While Driving on the highway suddenly when on throttle there's a wooooo. Then 60% loss of power. At this point I'm hopeing to make it to work then to dealer... Turbo blown? Flat bed in or keep driving?
 

Cheyenne

UK 2004 T1N 313CDi
Hi,

As you say a sudden loss of power then my money would be on a turbo hose having blown off. Lift the hood and look carefully for any hose not connected between the turbo, intercooler and/or intake manifold. If you do find one then wipe away any oil and crud as well as you can and refit it. If it happens again then it may be worth investing in a new hose.

Keith.
 

sailquik

Well-known member
Jchirchirillo,
What is the "wooooo" you are referring too?
Is this a noise?
Does it sound like air escaping?
Or is it a more mechanical sound.
Is it at a very high frequency like a shriek?
Got to agree with Cheyenne here....sounds like you have a turbo hose that's somehow leaking.
Or possibly the turbocharger resonator on the LH side of your engine (over the LH valve cover) has
blown somehow.
Not a common issue, but it has been known to occur on the OM-642 V6 occasionally.
Do you have any sort of gauge package so you can see if your turbo boost (MAP Pressure or BST) is popping
off at a very high value, or perhaps whatever is leaking allows your turbo to reach a certain boost level and
then it starts to leak, putting you in a low boost Limp Home Mode.
Hope this helps,
Roger
 

Jchirchirillo

JChirchirillo
Mb- turbo is blown
Cause - rubber boot on turbo was not changed when fuel filter was replaced . Therefore boot folded over and was sucked into turbo causing failure . They also said there's tons of bulletins about this. So Mb will not cover parts or labor under Ext mb 125k warrantee . Turbo is $2300 plus misc parts and labor. You can pretty much wipe your ass with mb Ext warrantee ..Really bs ...
 

220629

Well-known member
Jchirchirillo,
What is the "wooooo" you are referring too?
Is this a noise?
Does it sound like air escaping?
...
Roger
As it turns out, maybe it should have been "Loss of power & woe".

Am I up to speed?

The fuel filter was changed and part of the process requires R&R remove and re-install of the hose from the air filter box to the turbo inlet?

Why would a new turbo hose part make a difference?

Was the seal design changed? If yes, then why is there just a Tech Notice and not a full recall? This sounds like a pretty serious flaw to me.

If the new part isn't re-designed then can't the new part be improperly installed the same as a used one?

I'd be over the top pissed off at this situation. With an extended warranty maybe contacting MB customer service will get some results.

:2cents: vic
 

showkey

Well-known member
Agree......a manufacturer not covering a repair while any warranty is in force is a very tricky. It would appear the power train and extended coverage are in being breached.
I think.an attorney would have a field day with the facts we know so far. Known part failure, no product updates, no notice to customers.
 
Turbo failures due to the intake seal failure is well documented in the June Shop Foreman's notes on CV Tekinfo. Mercedes is denying any warranty claims unless there is proof the turbo intake seal was replaced at the fuel filter change as per the factory workshop instructions (WIS). I completely agree that Mercedes should be covering the turbo but their point is that not replacing the seal or over tightening the clamp is an error on the Technician since it is clearly described in the WIS instructions.

The devil is in the details. This has always been a challenge with working on Mercedes. There are obscure but extremely important details in the WIS documents. You can have a stack of pages on even a simple job if you print out every operation. I understand buying yearly access to CV Tekinfo is probably not feasible for most DIY'er but it is becoming more and more necessary to read the WIS instructions before starting a job for the first time. I don't like writing the check for both Startekinfo and CV tekinfo but it is necessary if you want to be a truly professional shop. Not a bad idea to ask the shop that is servicing your van if they have access to the site. Many shops can talk a good game but not many spend the money to really educate themselves in order to protect their clients.

As for the idea of suing Mercedes, I am not an attorney but I would doubt any lawsuit would get very far. The Mercedes legal department in Montvale, NJ has used the fine print in WIS to defend their position many times in the past and they are very good at it. I was "on the other side of the desk" and had to work with the legal department many times when I managed the local dealerships. Mercedes only hires the best attorneys and I have seen clients spend huge amounts of money without getting very far.

The only legal recourse I see is to go after the shop that replaced the fuel filter last. Hopefully Jchirchirillo has the receipt from the last filter replacement and the shop has insurance or deep pockets to cover the mistake.

Mike
 

Jchirchirillo

JChirchirillo
Turbo failures due to the intake seal failure is well documented in the June Shop Foreman's notes on CV Tekinfo. Mercedes is denying any warranty claims unless there is proof the turbo intake seal was replaced at the fuel filter change as per the factory workshop instructions (WIS). I completely agree that Mercedes should be covering the turbo but their point is that not replacing the seal or over tightening the clamp is an error on the Technician since it is clearly described in the WIS instructions.

The devil is in the details. This has always been a challenge with working on Mercedes. There are obscure but extremely important details in the WIS documents. You can have a stack of pages on even a simple job if you print out every operation. I understand buying yearly access to CV Tekinfo is probably not feasible for most DIY'er but it is becoming more and more necessary to read the WIS instructions before starting a job for the first time. I don't like writing the check for both Startekinfo and CV tekinfo but it is necessary if you want to be a truly professional shop. Not a bad idea to ask the shop that is servicing your van if they have access to the site. Many shops can talk a good game but not many spend the money to really educate themselves in order to protect their clients.

As for the idea of suing Mercedes, I am not an attorney but I would doubt any lawsuit would get very far. The Mercedes legal department in Montvale, NJ has used the fine print in WIS to defend their position many times in the past and they are very good at it. I was "on the other side of the desk" and had to work with the legal department many times when I managed the local dealerships. Mercedes only hires the best attorneys and I have seen clients spend huge amounts of money without getting very far.

The only legal recourse I see is to go after the shop that replaced the fuel filter last. Hopefully Jchirchirillo has the receipt from the last filter replacement and the shop has insurance or deep pockets to cover the mistake.

Mike
Mike the filter was replaced by myself using a Mann filter. And this was the 4x it was replaced. Was also driven at least 15k miles with that filter before this issue. I found rubber boot to be partially melted and cracked when I saw it last and before giving sprinter to mb service . The service manager said nothing about over tightening. Is there a torque spec? IMO the clamp would have failed if over tightened. The service manager commented that an after market fuel filter and clamp were used . Also the boot could have failed from not being changed or boot getting smashed and folded over during install. At this point mb service seems to pissed that I do my own service and is looking to make a point.
 
Mike the filter was replaced by myself using a Mann filter. And this was the 4x it was replaced. Was also driven at least 15k miles with that filter before this issue. I found rubber boot to be partially melted and cracked when I saw it last and before giving sprinter to mb service . The service manager said nothing about over tightening. Is there a torque spec? IMO the clamp would have failed if over tightened. The service manager commented that an after market fuel filter and clamp were used . Also the boot could have failed from not being changed or boot getting smashed and folded over during install. At this point mb service seems to pissed that I do my own service and is looking to make a point.
Sorry to say it but you are in a spot. You are probably going to have to chalk this one up to a really expensive experience. The Service Manager has no say if this is covered by warranty since Mercedes is denying all turbo claims from the seal not being replaced as per the factory workshop instructions. I am fairly sure Service Manager is not pissed but is most likely just frustrated with the whole situation. You are not happy, he is not happy and the situation could have been avoided. I spent almost a decade managing the two local Mercedes dealerships and have seen similar situations. Dealerships and repair shops have a legal exposure for every job we perform for our clients. That is a real expense to professional shops. Bond, insurance, education and installing the best quality parts available. Unfortunately, when you DIY it, you assume the same exposure.

The only advice I can give you is not to double down on your bad luck. Spend the money and fix your van right. Trying to find a cheap shop to replace your turbocharger will most likely make the whole situation worse.

Sorry for your troubles,
Mike
 

Jchirchirillo

JChirchirillo
Sorry to say it but you are in a spot. You are probably going to have to chalk this one up to a really expensive experience. The Service Manager has no say if this is covered by warranty since Mercedes is denying all turbo claims from the seal not being replaced as per the factory workshop instructions. I am fairly sure Service Manager is not pissed but is most likely just frustrated with the whole situation. You are not happy, he is not happy and the situation could have been avoided. I spent almost a decade managing the two local Mercedes dealerships and have seen similar situations. Dealerships and repair shops have a legal exposure for every job we perform for our clients. That is a real expense to professional shops. Bond, insurance, education and installing the best quality parts available. Unfortunately, when you DIY it, you assume the same exposure.

The only advice I can give you is not to double down on your bad luck. Spend the money and fix your van right. Trying to find a cheap shop to replace your turbocharger will most likely make the whole situation worse.

Sorry for your troubles,
Mike
mb Dealer is handling this.. however I need to get to the bottom of this. I took a ride down there and spoke with the mechanic working on it also reinspected the turbo ( Fins are partially bent & bearing is partially seized.
As it turns out the rubber boot ( which supposedly caused this) is dryed up & hard / I compared this to a brand new mb part down there. Imo the rubber has just overheated and failed over the course of 65k. Now , IMO me as the consumer should be made aware of this maintenance as per the standard A service or B service that MB makes the owners aware of in there standard breakdown. OR along with dealer I should have been notified as to such bulletins or amendments ..:thumbdown: . After all I PAID FOR THIS RIG!
 

Jchirchirillo

JChirchirillo
I'm into this 2013 van with 65,000 miles for over $10,000 in maintenance in three years. And I bought the extended warranty.
 
I am guessing the dealer installed a factory exchange turbocharger instead of a new one in order to save you some money. The core charge is only $226 for the turbo. I suggest paying the charge core, look all you want at the bad turbo, reassemble it to it's original condition and return it to the dealer within 30 day so they can refund you the $226. I would do it soon before they send the core back to Mercedes.

Problem solved.

Mike
 

lindenengineering

Well-known member
mb Dealer is handling this.. however I need to get to the bottom of this. I took a ride down there and spoke with the mechanic working on it also reinspected the turbo ( Fins are partially bent & bearing is partially seized.
As it turns out the rubber boot ( which supposedly caused this) is dryed up & hard / I compared this to a brand new mb part down there. Imo the rubber has just overheated and failed over the course of 65k. Now , IMO me as the consumer should be made aware of this maintenance as per the standard A service or B service that MB makes the owners aware of in there standard breakdown. OR along with dealer I should have been notified as to such bulletins or amendments ..:thumbdown: . After all I PAID FOR THIS RIG!
Having been on vacation I have not read any posts for two weeks but this is worthy of comments reading this thread.

First no manufacturer is obliged to notify the customer of service bulletin and advanced service information (ASI's) the factory issues to legitimate dealers. A recall is about the only time the public gets to no know of a problem.

I have reported a few times (as a warning for DIY'rs) that the rubber sleeve should be checked at every service to avoid what you have unfortunately experienced.
I have also noted on forums submission that the "top hat styled sleeve" found on post 2010 CD 16 engines has a tendency of splitting through heat degradation and contingent failure ingestion into the turbo which causes expensive remediation. That's not to state that the earlier orange colored sleeve found on CD14 engines wasn't prone to failure because it is, but much less so!

For info the sleeve on CD14 engines is made of silicon polymer rubber which has a higher heat tolerance whereas the later sleeve is made of BUNA or neoprene material which has a lower heat resistance.
Why the manufacturer resorted to this move is open to conjecture but you may also note the the center heat shield was deleted on CD16 engines.

In fact I have to question the whole intake system from fresh clean air induction to post turbo manifold entry.
For me the whole system is a bloody mess and akin to a pre-production model where the installation has been approved by Engineering and now must be perfected to give reasonable failure free service. The last bit was overlooked from my perspective and the thing hurriedly rushed into production. To reinforce this viewpoint many of the problems you as DIY'rs face is leakage of induced or compressed air from the many points in the flow path to the EKAS manifolding.
For that very reason alone careful attention has to be conducted to the entire induction system at service intervals to ensure service reliability.

Now contributor NobleMercedes has raised a few pertinent points on repairs/service.

When you repair a vehicle (any vehicle ) for profit you are accepting a risk of being blamed for any subsequent failure whether justified or not!
That is why reputable Independents have garage keepers insurance and liability coverage.
In the case of a claim the owner of the shop merely passes the claim to the indemnify who settle the claim one way or other. This is reflected in the shop rate tariff!
Obviously there is a co-pay like any insurance which the shop has to pay if relief is granted. This causes the shop to be diligent on who repairs the vehicle in the shop and quality of service work provided.
Sometimes it better to simply repair the rig on the shop's dime if a mistake has been made.
its that simple!
Cheaper shops which have lower coverage or none at all, most likely have lower skilled techs and less equipment and you run the very real risk of getting a poor or terrible job done which costs more in the long run to put right!
Often at the owners dime!

The same applies to you the DIYr!
A simple mistake can lead to very expensive results these days .

A case study
Not dwelling on the issue here but let's focus in on the simple job of changing the air filter cartridge.
For those that have done it, this often means disconnecting the air intake tube and the atmospheric sensor connector.
Upon refit you pat yourself on the back for a simple job done!
But was it?

Did the air intake at the turbo get dislodged a bit and did that puny looking three pin connector at the atmospheric sensor get connected properly? Furthermore were the very fine wires connected within it get compromised or damaged?

Do you run it up the street with a scanner reading the activity live data and know what to look for?

Now after a few start cycles you get a CEL on and wonder what the issue is as the vehicle slowly starts to lose power!
Lack of boost maybe, but unseen black smoke is causing heavy contamination within the exhaust system which leads in turn to further more complicated issues as it goes down rapidly.
Or
Maybe you are a putzer style driver that doesn't notice the lower power output until you need it and then you have been driving it for while with the CEL on and wondering what is the problem? In fact its like some reoccurring issue like herpes to some !

A trip to The Zone for a free scan doesn't reveal much and in the end its a detailed scan for $130 that shows a string of codes/faults. OMG!:frown:
After much remediation and wallet draining the final issue is there P2623-001 turbo drift at idle!
The root cause of the problem and a hidden overlooked bad connection at the atmospheric sensor (sensors can't jive together) causing the PCM to be unable to compute a boost pressure setting.
Now a pro-shop missed this and changed the exhaust filter after they couldn't get a
satisfactory re-gen.

This whole repair business from simple service activities are fraught with potential problems and its not Granddads Olds anymore.
Take care & be careful
Dennis
Mechanic
 
Dennis,

By the length of your post, I see you are well rested from your vacation. :laughing:

I am encouraging the moderators to possibly create a "read only section" where only official factory bulletins, WIS instruction and Shop Foreman notes could be posted. I spend a lot of coin to get all the factory information and I don't mind sharing some of the important information. I just get frustrated when it gets buried and then rehashed again a few weeks later. Usually after a member makes a costly mistake. In the last week, I have posted the three documents from Mercedes. Clean air tube seal, 906 ball joint inspection process and 906 front swaybar bushing update. I am happy one got a sticky but all of the information is commonly discussed and I wish there was a place for unskewed information from the factory.

Your thoughts? Maybe you can help encourage if you agree.

Mike
 

lindenengineering

Well-known member
Mike
Yes and yes!
I too feel a bit frustrated having posted a service technique warning only to find another member has posted a "help me" on the very same topic a few says later .

What you are posting is important for everyone and I find it through tech support submission by various entities which I often share on the this forum.

Best regards
Dennis
 

Top Bottom