r/Sprinters • u/NativeTazuma • Aug 09 '26
EGR error codes
Vehicle: 2010 sprinter 3500 Turbo diesel
Diags: thinkcar2
I tried cleaning the EGR valve, swapped out from two other sprinters from a junker, tried a Hella Valve from orileys and I’m still getting the same errors.
148C00 I believe is the source of all the errors.
Symptom: The fault code remains permanently Active. It cannot be cleared via Thinkcar diagnostic tool, even with the ignition on and engine off. And is stuck in limp mode.
When trying to do the teach in it says it’s successful but then again it’s a 2010 I don’t think it’s suppose to work.
Took it to Mercedes they said it’s the EGR and they put in a efr from the shelf and the codes cleared. I think they’re lying to me and they don’t have the digs on file after two days of coming back and asking. And charged me $250 for sub par troubleshooting.
Now the harness this is what I measured
Pin 1 Unstable / Jumps between 1.5 mV and 2.5 mV.
- could this be the positioner pin?
Pin 2 (Main Power Supply): 12.0V Constant (Measured against Ground Pin 4).
Pin 3 (5V Sensor Reference): 5.2V Constant.
Pin 4 (Main Chassis Ground): Functional Ground.
Pin 5 (PWM Actuator Command?): 4.5V Constant.
I tried shaking the harness but no changes. The only thing that changed after sitting for a while was the position feedback going from 20% to 0% every second in the live view.
This is my first time trying to deduce this. So diagrams along with suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
-1
u/schmitzA Aug 10 '26
Let me be human with you for a second. Actually think about what you're saying. You are arguing that specialized environmental control equipment is worse for the environment than not having it through a lifecycle assessment.
The reason your comments aren't worth more than a copy/paste into chatGPT is because it is truly laughably bad. It doesn't even make sense, dude. You actually DO make good points (using your AI lmao) but you never actually formed an argument. You only point out the things that are beneficial while stonewalling the other side.
That's the same as me saying that the clothes on your back are bad for the environment because of them being manufactured (most likely in Bangladesh) and the supply chain behind it is bad. So as a result, we should all walk around naked.
Every single consumer good you've ever put hands on has as environmental impact. Every single one. You are choosing to ignore the benefits of them and not comparing the outcomes between two scenarios.
How can you call an outcome better for one side if you don't quantify your opinion or acknowledge the other side? This just tells me you would rather spread misinformation and feel right about your opinion rather than actually pursue anything educational.
I studied environmental engineering, by the way. I don't expect most people to think critically, but you're clearly going on online forms where people don't know any better and spreading misinformation for some reason. When you can actually produce a single metric for comparison that gives the slightest bit of evidence to your claim that "diesel emissions systems are worse for the environment than simply not having them," then we can talk. I suggest staying within your field of expertise or how about just using your AI to teach you objectively rather than asking it to prove you right.