2015 Mercedes-Benz C220
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Mercedes-Benz › C220 › 2015
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2015 Mercedes-Benz C220. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
Driver rear side rusted and cracked subframe.
The rear subframe on the car is rusting badly and the Mercedes certified mechanic states that the entire frame needs replacement. With braking, the car could fishtail and be in a serious crash. The two model years prior to mine have had similar problems and a recall has been established for those years. I am asking the NHTSA to work with Mercedes-Benz to establish a recall for the 2015 C class before someone is injured as a result of this defect.
The vehicle’s rear subframe has become severely rusted and structurally compromised. This failure has caused the vehicle to pull sharply to the right when the brakes are applied. The rear subframe and affected components are still on the vehicle and are available for inspection upon request. This condition creates a serious safety risk because the vehicle can suddenly pull hard to one side during braking, making it extremely difficult to maintain control. At highway speeds or during emergency braking, this could cause the driver to lose control of the vehicle, leave the roadway, collide with another vehicle or object, or potentially result in a rollover. The failure is especially concerning because it directly affects the stability and braking behavior of the vehicle. The problem was inspected and confirmed by Mercedes-Benz of Durham. The dealer determined that the rear subframe was severely rusted and that this condition was responsible for the vehicle pulling strongly to the right during braking. The vehicle has therefore been inspected by an authorized Mercedes-Benz dealership. The condition has not, to my knowledge, been inspected by police or insurance representatives. There were no warning lights, dashboard messages, or noticeable symptoms indicating that the rear subframe was deteriorating before the problem became apparent. There was no advance warning that the subframe had become severely rusted. The issue only became evident when the vehicle began pulling sharply to the right under braking. Because there were no warning signs before the failure, I believe this condition presents a significant safety hazard. A driver may continue operating the vehicle without knowing that the rear subframe has deteriorated to the point that vehicle stability and braking control are affected.
I noticed some unstable braking at higher speeds. I took the vehicle to a mechanic and he discovered severe rust with perforation of the rear subframe "very near to where some of the suspension connects to it and is allowing a lot of extra movement, especially under braking." He told me that the vehicle was unsafe to drive on the highway or at speeds over 40 mph and should be repaired, preferably through Mercedes as soon as possible. I've reached out to Mercedes Benz USA. They told me that this has been a common problem and some vehicles have had the warranty extended because of it. My vehicle is not included in the warranty extention but they suggested that it may be eligible for a "goodwill" repair. I've reach out to my local Mercedes dealership to further investigate the problem and are awaiting a return call.
The rear structural subframe on my vehicle has experienced severe, premature corrosion perforation (rotting from the inside out), resulting in a major compromise of the vehicle’s structural integrity. This subframe is a critical safety component that supports the entire rear suspension, differential, and braking components. The subframe has rusted to the point of developing holes and structural cracks under normal operating conditions. This severe deterioration creates an immediate safety hazard, as a total failure or snapping of the subframe while driving can cause a sudden loss of vehicle control, unpredictable suspension geometry changes, and a severe risk of a high-speed crash.Mercedes-Benz has previously acknowledged an identical, widespread manufacturing defect and issued an extended 20-year warranty (NHTSA ID NCU-2023020004) for older model lines (such as the W204 and W212). However, my specific vehicle is currently excluded from that extension, despite suffering from the exact same premature metallurgical failure and safety risk. The deterioration is identical to the covered models, where road debris and water get trapped inside the hollow subframe unit, causing it to oxidize and disintegrate undetected from the interior until structural failure occurs.This constitutes a severe safety hazard. Driving with a compromised rear subframe risks a catastrophic detachment of the rear axle, control arms, and braking lines while at highway speeds. A sudden failure will lead to immediate loss of steering control and an incredibly high probability of a severe motor vehicle accident, endangering lives. I am filing this complaint to urge the NHTSA to investigate Mercedes-Benz and mandate an extension of the existing warranty framework to cover newer model years that exhibit the exact same premature corrosion failure. Dealers are denying coverage based on arbitrary VIN cutoffs, forcing owners to drive unsafe vehicles or pay out of pocket for a known structural defect.
The sunroof panel being cracked on this car is a well known and documented issue. There have been several recalls for it just not on my specific model. Yet I’m just like them, stuck with a broken in half sunroof panel that let water seep in and ruin my sunroof twice now, and the only fix is to pay $4500. This is insanely high for the small panel I’m talking about.
Sunroof Glass failure vin:55SWF4KB1FU039607 2015 Mercedes C300 2PM July 16 2026, Tampa highway near college park east coordinates28.06840 N.82.35292W TEMPERATURE 91F
Rear subframe has rust and holes. Dealer is saying not covered under warranty and asking for $8000
I am reporting a structural failure of the rear subframe due to corrosion on my 2015 Mercedes-Benz C300 4MATIC. The failure was diagnosed by an authorized Mercedes-Benz dealer, who confirmed that the rear subframe has corroded and broken, compromising the structural integrity of the vehicle. This is not cosmetic rust. The subframe is a load-bearing structural component, and its failure creates a serious safety risk, including potential loss of vehicle control. I have been advised that the vehicle may be unsafe to operate in its current condition. The vehicle has approximately 143,000 miles and has been registered and operated in Connecticut, a salt-use state. However, this level of corrosion leading to structural failure of a major suspension component is premature and not consistent with normal wear and tear, even in such environments. I contacted Mercedes-Benz USA and escalated the matter to an Executive Referral Manager. Mercedes-Benz acknowledged the seriousness of the issue but declined to provide any repair assistance, stating that my vehicle falls outside of warranty extension and goodwill parameters. Mercedes-Benz did not dispute the nature of the failure or its safety implications, but refused to address the issue based solely on internal policy criteria such as age and mileage. A rear subframe supports critical suspension components. Corrosion leading to structural breakage can result in instability, misalignment, or failure of suspension components while driving, increasing the risk of a crash. This issue appears to be consistent with known reports of rear subframe corrosion in similar Mercedes-Benz vehicles, raising concern about a broader safety defect. The failure was identified during inspection, and repair costs are estimated at approximately $5,000–$6,000. I am submitting this complaint due to the safety risk posed by structural failure and the manufacturer’s refusal to address the issue.
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Technical service bulletins and other communications the manufacturer sent dealers about this vehicle. Ask a dealer for the full document by its number.
Bars are owner complaints, dots mark years with recalls. Select a year to open its report.