Author Topic: Mercedes Advisory Letter re Model Year of New Car (Read 4544 times)

ejboyd5 · « **on:** February 22, 2021, 12:24:34 »

Within the past month I read a post that contained an early 1960s Mercedes advisory letter to its dealers regarding the upgrading of a car's model year for vehicles that had not been immediately sold and stating that it was permissible (suggested) to title the vehicle as of the year it was first sold. I've searched and researched for this post and the letter on this site and on Benzworld to no avail. Does anyone remember this letter who can point me in the right direction so that I may retrieve a copy. Thanks to all.

MikeSimon · « **Reply #1 on:** February 22, 2021, 12:47:04 »

This may have been specific to one country. The official regulations vary and it is unlikely that this was possible everywhere.

ejboyd5 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 22, 2021, 19:00:22 »

Since Mercedes revamped its numbering system in the late 1950s to eliminate the build year coding from its chassis numbers, e.g., "65" for 1956, "75" for 1957, etc., it became common practice to upgrade the year of previously unsold vehicles to the delivery year of the vehicle to the customer. This was entirely possible as Mercedes employed a system of sequential or "rolling" improvements to its vehicles rather than the "model year" system that was so common among American manufacturers.
The official advisory to which I referred was not limited to any one country and was intended to validate the practice that had been in place for some years. I am looking for a copy of that advisory letter.
BTW, it is exactly this confusion over the "year" of a particular vehicle that makes finding appropriate parts so challenging. You may think you are looking for a part for a 1962 vehicle by its title date when, in fact, it is a 1960 that never had the improvements that didn't appear until 1962, but had had its title year upgraded thanks to a delayed sale.

Garry · « **Reply #3 on:** February 22, 2021, 20:35:23 »

In Australia, all vehicles were and are still required to be sold by manufacturing year date. So any vehicle for sale will quote MY date. If i import a car whether new or old, i must have proof of MY date and that is the date that will appear on any registration. When i brought my E Type Jag in from the USA they were not interested in what the Georgia title showed as the model year date shown, they needed the MY date for me to register together with its VIN.

I think the model year as presented in the USA is not used that much elsewhere in the world.

MikeSimon · « **Reply #4 on:** February 22, 2021, 22:08:01 »

I was born and grew up in Germany. Have always been involved in motor vehicles both for my job and as a hobby. I never heard that you were able to title and register a car for a different year than the date it rolled off the production line. If a car was produced in 1959 and sat at a dealership for two years, it would still have been a 1959 when sold in 1961. And it would have been titled as such.
Therefore my previous comment.

etlans · « **Reply #5 on:** March 29, 2021, 19:35:45 »

I think that it's not a big deal. If I would buy such a car with a "remodeled" year I won't be disappointed. Recently, I got a 1995 W124 E-Class. I won it at an auction. It was my dream since I was 18 years old. So I got in very good condition. The only problem I had, was regarding transporting it from Alabama to Washington. It was hard for me to find a trusty company with a good price. In the end, I found the guys from Guardian. They offered me a very good price and I was very pleased with their service. The car was delivered to me in a very short period.

Benz Dr. · « **Reply #6 on:** March 29, 2021, 21:38:00 »

The first MB car I ever owned was a 1956 190SL. When I found the car it was titled 1958 and it was quite a while before I learned the numbering sequence system employed by MB.
So it was happening here in Canada as well.

ejboyd5 · « **Reply #7 on:** March 30, 2021, 11:03:41 »

All nice thoughts, but I am still looking for a copy of the M-B advisory letter that was posted within the past three months. Please read Post #1.

Metrinity · « **Reply #8 on:** April 05, 2021, 13:20:30 »

Quote from: etlans on March 29, 2021, 19:35:45

I think that it's not a big deal. If I would buy such a car with a "remodeled" year I won't be disappointed. Recently, I got a 1995 W124 E-Class. I won it at an auction. It was my dream since I was 18 years old. So I got in very good condition. The only problem I had, was regarding transporting it from Alabama to Washington. It was hard for me to find a trusty company with a good price. In the end, I found the guys from Guardian. They offered me a very good price and I was very pleased with their service. The car was delivered to me in a very short period.

Very glad to see that people are realizing their dreams!

mdsalemi · « **Reply #9 on:** April 05, 2021, 14:56:41 »

Quote from: ejboyd5 on March 30, 2021, 11:03:41

All nice thoughts, but I am still looking for a copy of the M-B advisory letter that was posted within the past three months. Please read Post #1.

Are you sure you read it here, on this forum? The only references to "Advisory Letter" are the ones you posted in this thread, if you use our search function.

As Mike Simon pointed out, there are different rules in different "AHJ" (authorities having jurisdiction) and in the USA, that's more than 50 sets of rules. While some may be similar or identical there are plenty of differences. New York State for example, didn't start issuing titles until after the W113 has ceased production, and today doesn't title vehicles with a model year earlier than 1973. My car is titled in Michigan, and this was its first title 20 years ago. It had to be inspected with proof of ownership (bill of sale or transfer and past registration information) and the VIN must match on all documents and the vehicle. Thankfully one of my neighbors was a policeman and did the inspection for me.

We all can tell when our car was manufactured by the VIN we all have with a code system we all understand. Not certain why any other information is needed other than curiousity.

ejboyd5 · « **Reply #10 on:** April 05, 2021, 22:40:50 »

No, I do not remember which site I saw it on. It was here, the 190 site, Benzworld or the M-B Shop Forum. I'm not interested in speculation or rehashing of motor vehicle laws in the several states, territories or countries. I simply want to recover a copy of the bulletin from M-B to its dealers, which bulletin was republished sometime after 01/01/21 on one of the above cited sites and which I was too stupid to save to my own files. Tom Hanson remembers seeing it as well, but he doesn't remember where either. I'm still looking for the copy.

66andBlue · « **Reply #11 on:** April 05, 2021, 23:32:46 »

Quote from: ejboyd5 on April 05, 2021, 22:40:50

... I simply want to recover a copy of the bulletin from M-B to its dealers, which bulletin was republished sometime after 01/01/21 on one of the above cited sites and which I was too stupid to save to my own files. Tom Hanson remembers seeing it as well, but he doesn't remember where either. I'm still looking for the copy.

To search for this "unicorn" it would help to know whether the text was in German or English.
Furthermore, do you recall whether it was issued by "Mercedes-Benz" or by "Daimler Benz AG"? I am asking because until 1965 Mercedes cars were sold in the USA first by Max Hoffman, an independent car dealer in NYC, and later through Studebaker's Mercedes-Benz Sales, Inc. In 1965 Mercedes Benz of North America (MBNA) was registered and started to build up its own dealership network. Thus, if this bulletin was addressed to Mercedes dealers "in the early 60s" as you wrote it was most likely from DBAG to dealerships in Europe.

ejboyd5 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 06, 2021, 11:32:04 »

Text was in English and was printed on colored paper. I don't remember the exact date, but from what I remember of the content it was in the early '60s when the practice was not unusual. Thanks for the thoughts.

ejboyd5 · « **Reply #13 on:** April 06, 2021, 14:17:42 »

Thanks to a member of the Gull Wing Group who keeps meticulous records, the letter has been found. Indeed, it was not a one-time thing, but was issued first in 1959 and continued several years thereafter until 1963 (and perhaps later).

mdsalemi · « **Reply #14 on:** April 06, 2021, 14:58:19 »

So....

This particular letter shown, is ONLY applicable for that 1960/1961 time period. It certainly matches what was done, sort of, at domestic dealers. Model changeover was in the summer during shutdown, and cars with the following year's model started becoming available in September. Guess this particular note (perhaps there were updates as noted into W113 production) doesn't have anything to do with Pagodas.

My friend owns an MB dealership. He has perhaps the only 300SL that was never sold; that's right--it was dealer inventory at one MB dealer, and when his family's car dealership received an MB franchise, his father got that 300SL from another dealer. Thus, SINCE NEW, this 300SL has always been in "dealer inventory"; has never been sold at retail, never been titled or registered; yes for like 60 years! Just uses dealer plates!

Though unlikely to be sold anytime soon, I can only imagine some bizarre update or interpretation of this letter, where perhaps if this car were ever sold at retail, someone might try and make a case for my "2021 300SL" that was made in 1959...

Of course those who work at the Department of Motor Vehicles have no sense of humor.

ejboyd5 · « **Reply #15 on:** April 06, 2021, 17:57:42 »

Michael: As I stated, it was not a one-time thing, the letter was issued first in 1959 and continued several years thereafter until 1963 (and perhaps later). I have copies of the letter from 1959, 1960, 1961 and 1963, but since the text did not change except for the dates, I saw no point in burdening this site with multiple attachments.

66andBlue · « **Reply #16 on:** April 06, 2021, 18:18:43 »

What is the importance of this letter to you now? I guess I am missing something.
The Studebaker subsidiary was not Daimler Benz AG and all its missives lost meaning in 1965 and when it ceased to exist.

ejboyd5 · « **Reply #17 on:** April 07, 2021, 11:50:56 »

Quote from: 66andBlue on April 06, 2021, 18:18:43

What is the importance of this letter to you now? I guess I am missing something.

The importance to me, and what should be its importance to others, is to correct all the misinformation and uninformed supposition that has been offered through numerous posts on this site and elsewhere about M-B's year of registration policy during the late '50s and early '60s. It is important to document historical facts before they become "rewritten" through the repetition of misinformation which, when told often enough, becomes accepted as the "truth."

mdsalemi · « **Reply #18 on:** April 07, 2021, 16:15:19 »

Quote from: 66andBlue on April 06, 2021, 18:18:43

What is the importance of this letter to you now? I guess I am missing something.

I don't get it either, Alfred. I don't have any idea of what misinformation may be floating around being accepted as truth.

My car was never originally titled. We know when it was manufactured; January of 1969. Whatever any DMV decided back in 1969 as to the "year" on the registration is really irrelevant. Had it been made in October of 1968, and not landed in the USA until November and sold in January it would probably still have a 1969 on the registration. Who cares? We know when the car was made.

Apparently there must be some misinformation out there that I don't get and neither do you...

66andBlue · « **Reply #19 on:** April 07, 2021, 17:34:48 »

Quote from: ejboyd5 on April 07, 2021, 11:50:56

The importance to me, and what should be its importance to others, is to correct all the misinformation and uninformed supposition that has been offered through numerous posts on this site and elsewhere about M-B's year of registration policy during the late '50s and early '60s. It is important to document historical facts before they become "rewritten" through the repetition of misinformation which, when told often enough, becomes accepted as the "truth."

But aren't you contributing to misinformation by conflating a Studebaker subsidiary with the Mercedes-Benz company, that is the Daimler-Benz AG?
They were NOT the same.
If you are interested in M-B history in the 50s and 60s you should read this book by a former Board Member of DBAG:
https://www.amazon.com/Serving-Around-World-Hoppe-Heinz/dp/3517013609
You can also download it for from the Daimler Media web site, but it is in German:
https://media.daimler.com/marsMediaSite/en/instance/ko/eBook-Ein-Stern-fuer-die-Welt-A-star-for-the-world---in-German-only.xhtml?oid=9914542

Brian in NL · « **Reply #20 on:** April 16, 2021, 21:57:47 »

Alfred,

Just curious, is that a photo from the NY Auto Show in '63? Any date on it? Cool shot.

Brian

66andBlue · « **Reply #21 on:** April 16, 2021, 23:30:00 »

Hello Brian,
when I collected information and photos for my article "Early Pagoda Tracks in North America" for Pagoda World 14 about the first USA Pagoda (VIN 0003) I came across a low resolution photo of the car at the April 1963 NYC show (attached below) and asked the Daimler Media people for a better copy. Surprisingly they didn't have the original and instead provided this one.
Do you have PW #14? There is more detailed info about the show and the car.

Brian in NL · « **Reply #22 on:** April 17, 2021, 10:07:47 »

Alfred,

Thanks so much for the information. I actually do have Issue 14. My collection is a bit inconsistent, so I was happy to see I still had it. I'm not sure I ever read the article, so I'm looking forward to doing so. In 2012 my kids were stilll quite young and sometimes I would get magazines and put them aside to read later and never get around to it. That issue also has a nice article from Michael Salemi on Paul Bracq as well.

Great photos in that issue.

Thanks again.

Brian

News:

Author Topic: Mercedes Advisory Letter re Model Year of New Car (Read 4544 times)

etlans

Metrinity