As much as I like the YT review PRN did of my car, this recently posted one is probably the best video on YT on the .036, in part because its filmed in 4K HD.
-
Hi Guest !
Welcome to the 500Eboard forum.
Since its founding in late 2008, 500Eboard has become the leading resource on the Internet for all things related to the Mercedes-Benz 500E and E500. In recent years, we have also expanded to include the 400E and E420 models, which are directly related to the 500E/E500.
We invite you to browse and take advantage of the information and resources here on the site. If you find helpful information, please register for full membership, and you'll find even more resources available. Feel free to ask questions, and make liberal use of the "Search" function to find answers.
We hope you will become an active contributor to the community!
Sincerely,
500Eboard Management
Why The Mercedes W124 500E Is a Modern Classic (4K)
- Thread starter Dunnik
- Start date
Nice video, really good on content and not fluff like some others.
Some minor thoughts/input:
at 13:39 it says "by 1993 Mercedes had secured a controlling interest in AMG".
I believe what happened is:
- in 1993 MB & AMG signed a cooperation agreement (not a controlling interest - which would require 51%)
- in 1999 MB secured a controlling interest
- in 2005 MB became the full owner of AMG
Regarding the "AMG fitted better flowing exhaust systems", I have heard conflicting stories on this, so I am not sure, but you may know i.e. I have heard the standard E500E exhaust was used and I have heard that it was a different exhaust.
See post #26 from @gsxr here:
....where he said pipes & cat were the same as E500E...although I could be misinterpreting that comment wrong as the comment was referring to pipe & cats specifically. I don't know if E60 had different exhaust.
Also when the video says AMG's were now built to spec where before they could be individually ordered ..... even in '93 & '94 you could individually order/spec out things a AMG W124, although motor, transmission & suspension were "standardized" for E60 by then, so perhaps that is the real point being made in the video - so feel free to ignore.
Although there was a speed limiter - you could have still AMG remove it even on 1994 body type (it was on my car).
There is definitely a misperception in the marketplace that, as it says in the video, "all E60's as sold by MB must include 957 code on their MB VIN data card, if it does not have this it indicates it likely was modified by AMG after it was initially purchased as a regular E500".
Some cars (mine is an example) were ordered new as E500 & E60's (at the same time) and without 957 code and converted as new (before delivery to customer), even when 957 code had become an available option. While I believe that is very rare/uncommon, I know that is the case.
The engine/VIN # comment is a good one that some people didn't understand, good to see that mentioned.
All the info about wiring harness, throttle body, oiler tubes etc are good for prospective buyers of E500E's
Good video with a lot of clear good content.
Some minor thoughts/input:
at 13:39 it says "by 1993 Mercedes had secured a controlling interest in AMG".
I believe what happened is:
- in 1993 MB & AMG signed a cooperation agreement (not a controlling interest - which would require 51%)
- in 1999 MB secured a controlling interest
- in 2005 MB became the full owner of AMG
Regarding the "AMG fitted better flowing exhaust systems", I have heard conflicting stories on this, so I am not sure, but you may know i.e. I have heard the standard E500E exhaust was used and I have heard that it was a different exhaust.
See post #26 from @gsxr here:
Bolt on performance exhaust for the 500e (testing waters) | High-Performance Modifications
*** ADMIN EDIT *** Quick links to pricing as of early 2015: See post #272 for cat-back pricing info & photos, Dec-2014. See post #430 for full system pricing info (does not include catalysts). See post #499 for info on catalysts & test pipes: New thread with new pricing as of 2017...
www.500eboard.co
....where he said pipes & cat were the same as E500E...although I could be misinterpreting that comment wrong as the comment was referring to pipe & cats specifically. I don't know if E60 had different exhaust.
Also when the video says AMG's were now built to spec where before they could be individually ordered ..... even in '93 & '94 you could individually order/spec out things a AMG W124, although motor, transmission & suspension were "standardized" for E60 by then, so perhaps that is the real point being made in the video - so feel free to ignore.
Although there was a speed limiter - you could have still AMG remove it even on 1994 body type (it was on my car).
There is definitely a misperception in the marketplace that, as it says in the video, "all E60's as sold by MB must include 957 code on their MB VIN data card, if it does not have this it indicates it likely was modified by AMG after it was initially purchased as a regular E500".
Some cars (mine is an example) were ordered new as E500 & E60's (at the same time) and without 957 code and converted as new (before delivery to customer), even when 957 code had become an available option. While I believe that is very rare/uncommon, I know that is the case.
The engine/VIN # comment is a good one that some people didn't understand, good to see that mentioned.
All the info about wiring harness, throttle body, oiler tubes etc are good for prospective buyers of E500E's
Good video with a lot of clear good content.
Last edited:
For some reason, both Mercedes and AMG seem to tell the public misleading information about the two companies, their merger and collaborations. Even when asked directly about certain past events, representatives either regurgitate the same rederick or when confronted with alternative facts, they clam up and crawl back into their holes.
All of the 500e's and E60's had the same exhaust, except for some JDM E60's which on the surface appeared to have a AMG type exhaust, but when you dig into you find that the rear muffler is just a OEM unit with AMG tips added. Special thanks to AMG of Japan for that one.
The built to spec comment is referencing the fact you could order a fully pre-built AMG car and AMG had full product line literature to go along with it. So a buyer in Europe could walk into a Mercedes dealer and find a fully AMG built vehicle sitting in the showroom. But again, this information isn't 100% correct as this "built to spec" program started in 1992 with the introduction of the 190E 3.2l and 300E 3.4l. Which FWIW is the FIRST collaboration between Mercedes and AMG to bring fully spec'd and fully built AMG vehicles into the showroom (complete with glossy lit as handouts.)
During this time you could still order ala-carte and/or send your vehicle to AMG to have it converted.
AMG options added to your vehicle (if ordered new) would also be encoded into the VIN, this started in 1992 along with the "built to spec" program.
The statement about the 957 code being present is correct, hard to say why your vehicle did not include the code, so consider yours an exception. 957 codes won't be found on all 6.0l converted cars as the nomenclature of E60 was a facelift addition.
Given the prices some people are willing to pay for obvious "fake" AMG cars without 6.0l motors, a missing 957 code is just going to be a footnote in future sales/purchases, especially if there is enough evidence to show the presence of the AMG conversion.
Good info, thanks.
I suspected that on the muffler but was not 100% sure. That is helpful.
Yes, the a la carte vs. spec is "messy" i.e. both going on at same time, so not black & white.
I think the "collaboration" vs. "MB had controlling interest" however is pretty straight fwd as any legal documents/filings/securities law, rule the day vs. what some AMG rep or MB rep says - that stuff is black & white.
I've been through or done 8 of these in my career including ones that started as partnerships then formal legal collaborations on product development, then controlling interest and outright buyout 100% and its funny later to hear employees describe them vs. what entitle really/legally owned/controlled the entity. What reps or spokespeople say is almost useless. e.g. Did one a little while ago and the CEO of the "acquirer" supplied WSJ info and WSJ printed a headline that was 100% wrong, not by a little. The way to confirm the years on "collaboration" vs. "controlling interest" is simply security filings and legal filings. MB did not have 51%/controlling interest in AMG in '93, but they did have a collaboration agreement.
Also I don't think my car is the only one out there like that vis a vis the 957 code (and mine is '94 model) - but to your main point, it is a rare occurrence. I've narrowed it down to two reasons this could happen to someone or why someone would do it:
- you wanted a new E60 new but wanted something different than what std 957 code would give you (e.g. one example on my car - the original owner of mine wanted the monoblocks that were just coming into play on the C36 vs. what 957 would have given you....and he paid about $20 -$25k MORE than 957 code, not just for the wheels - there was other stuff he ordered that were not part of 957).
- I suspect (but can't confirm this part for sure) during the time 957 code was just coming into play and was in play before '94 - it depended on what MB dealer you went to i.e. (even though 957 was available in Europe and obviously not US) in Europe some people were told to order E500 and "AMG options/upgrade"....almost like some did not know about 957 code at its inception. This statement is speculation by me, but I have gone through every data card of the "140 something cars" and some stuff does not seem logical why it was done the way it was (although I also know data cards aren't 100% accurate)
The collaboration goes beyond a rep or spokesperson, all of the official press releases, magazine articles etc. specifically state that the FIRST Mercedes/AMG collaboration vehicle was the C36. Now if the lead in to this was something like "The first Mercedes/AMG collaboration vehicle in NORTH AMERICA was the C36", then it would be an accurate statement. Regardless of what country these press releases were in, they are all the same.
To date, I have only found one article that refutes their official collaboration statement.
I don't know when their first collaboration agreement was implemented but it does go back to at least 1992 and I suspect earlier than that, as there are reports of individuals around the 1990 time frame ordering ala-carte AMG vehicles through Mercedes dealerships, as in you had a list of AMG options the dealer was offering and you could go full crazy (everything plus motor) or you could just order a bodykit and wheels. Its hard to narrow down, but it has been said that these options were installed by AMG and sometimes the parts showed up at the dealer and they did the installation. It also been said that if a UK dealer ordered these parts, one of the four AMG dealers in the UK handled the modifications and/or supplied the parts to the Mercedes dealer, not AMG of Germany
These early cars did not have the options encoded into the VIN, so if you did not have the bill of sale, it is hard to determine if AMG installed the options or the dealer or some other 3rd party AMG reseller.
There was a formal/legal collaboration agreement done between MB/AMG in 1993, so no disagreement there.
My point is simple, the video specifically says
"by 1993 Mercedes had secured a controlling interest in AMG", and that is simply not accurate. The sequence is as follows:
- in 1993 MB & AMG sign a collaboration agreement (which things like the C36 stemmed from, but I suspect they were working on C36 together before that, preceding the 1993 agreement), MB did NOT take a controlling interest of 51% or more of AMG in 1993
- 1999 MB secured a controlling interest of 51% or greater (at this point you control a company)
- 2005 MB became the full owner of AMG
p.p.s a '95 C36 or '98 C43 that you could order from any MB dealer (US included) did not require that MB had a controlling interest in AMG. All of that could happened under the collaboration agreement.
My point is simple, the video specifically says
"by 1993 Mercedes had secured a controlling interest in AMG", and that is simply not accurate. The sequence is as follows:
- in 1993 MB & AMG sign a collaboration agreement (which things like the C36 stemmed from, but I suspect they were working on C36 together before that, preceding the 1993 agreement), MB did NOT take a controlling interest of 51% or more of AMG in 1993
- 1999 MB secured a controlling interest of 51% or greater (at this point you control a company)
- 2005 MB became the full owner of AMG
p.p.s a '95 C36 or '98 C43 that you could order from any MB dealer (US included) did not require that MB had a controlling interest in AMG. All of that could happened under the collaboration agreement.
Last edited:
You guys bring up some good points. I was somewhat following the Mercedes-Benz W124 Book by James Taylor.
"Autumn 1993 also marked another major milestone in the development of the W124 saloons, as the range was swelled by ‘official’ AMG derivatives – the first ones developed since Daimler-Benz had taken a controlling interest in AMG, and the first to be available through ordinary Mercedes showrooms. There were two models, the E36 AMG with 6-cylinder engine and the E60 AMG with V8 engine that was based on the E500."
It may just be vague language that is more about controlling the direction of AMG rather than describing control in a purely legal sense of 51%+.
"Autumn 1993 also marked another major milestone in the development of the W124 saloons, as the range was swelled by ‘official’ AMG derivatives – the first ones developed since Daimler-Benz had taken a controlling interest in AMG, and the first to be available through ordinary Mercedes showrooms. There were two models, the E36 AMG with 6-cylinder engine and the E60 AMG with V8 engine that was based on the E500."
It may just be vague language that is more about controlling the direction of AMG rather than describing control in a purely legal sense of 51%+.
Another example of a collaboration story. Now its the E36, which is indeed a collaboration that started in 1992 as the 300E 3.4l and was updated in 1994 as the E36 (using the same motor configuration as the C36) but its not the first, nor was the E60. Both were collaborations and were available in the showrooms, just not the first by several years. This also goes against the official MB/AMG collaboration story
I have spoke to some enthusiasts who do believe the 300E 3.4l was the first but after speaking to several Mercedes employees that were selling cars at that time, the first to arrive in showrooms was the 190e 3.2l and several months later, the 3.4 300E. Product lit for the dealers arrived for both cars at the same time though.
They took a controlling interest in 1999, NOT 1993.
So yes the took a controlling interest, but that was '99 and yes they ended up with outright ownership but that was 2005.
1993 was the "collaboration"/"contract of cooperation" between AMG & MB and MB did not end up owning 51% of more of AMG in 1993 as a result of the '93 agreement.
The statement in the video is inaccurate as its say MB took controlling interest in '93 - that simply was not the case.
Robert is exactly right. Intro of C36 was done under the "collaboration"/"contract of cooperation" as was the C43.
In 1999, (2nd to last year of the C43) MB took a controlling interest in AMG (i.e. took ownership stake of more than 50% of AMG).
In 2005 MB took complete control/ownership.
Net - the video is wrong when it says "by 1993 Mercedes had secured a controlling interest in AMG" - that is simply not the case, it was '99 when this happened.
Lastly because a "collaboration agreement"/"contract of cooperation" was signed in '93 does NOT mean that MB and AMG did not cooperate and work together before that, it just means they formalized things and created legal agreements spelling out a formal collaboration and each others duties and responsibilities as part of this. There are plenty of companies that have informal collaboration/cooperation that later lead to formal collaboration/partnerships that later transition to controlling interest that later transition to outright ownership agreements. This is not an unusual sequence of how a full acquisition eventually happens.
p.p.s. the >50% interest is an important milestone since as those of you have been through these kind of "taking controlling interest" partnerships, know that this is when the "new owner" can call any/all the shots if/when/how they want. Not always fun.
Last edited:
Totally agree with you on timing. The collaboration on sp0ecific models happened well before MB took any kind of equity stake in AMG (and eventually a full takeover).
Don't forget about the G36 AMG models from that time frame, as well !!! It wasn't just the C and E classes.
Don't forget about the G36 AMG models from that time frame, as well !!! It wasn't just the C and E classes.
In any case I thought the video was really good and had a lot of good content. Also, for people looking to the the E500E gives a good background and things to look for.
Not looking to be that guy that finds the one or two things that are wrong in a really good video (both content and production) and focus on that.
I've heard so many people - and really knowledgable ones regarding MB/AMG - have the perception that "pre-merger" was before '93 and in reality "pre-merger" was well after '93. However car's before '93 were "pre-formal collaboration", and that '93 agreement was in fact a really important milestone.
Short version = Really good video (and I was simply trying to clarify a point in there - that's all)
Not looking to be that guy that finds the one or two things that are wrong in a really good video (both content and production) and focus on that.
I've heard so many people - and really knowledgable ones regarding MB/AMG - have the perception that "pre-merger" was before '93 and in reality "pre-merger" was well after '93. However car's before '93 were "pre-formal collaboration", and that '93 agreement was in fact a really important milestone.
Short version = Really good video (and I was simply trying to clarify a point in there - that's all)
Similar threads
Who has viewed this thread (Total: 3) View details
Who has watched this thread (Total: 2) View details
Similar threads
