Engine oil recommendations

[Ascension]

The oil I was referring to I first used was the old Pennzoil GT racing synthetic. It was originally formulated for Top Alcohol and top Fuel drag cars in a straight 50W, I got wind of it from a buddy who ran a Top Alcohol rail. When they released the 20/50 version I had access through him and started using it in all my round port Pontiac powered cars.
You could feel the difference hear the difference and saw a 10th drop in ET from just an oil change. Tear downs showed the real story no bearing or bore wear to be found anywhere and absolutely clean after 35K of HARD street miles the motors all looked like they were just put together! Sadly that stuff went away in the mid/late 80's.
A new synthetic from Pennzoil got my attention simply because of what I saw in real world performance with that old GT racing oil.
Now the question here is do we have real viscosity and other performance data on this new Penzoil stuff?

 

[Ascension]

I thought all oil from pennsylvania has a parifin content that is undesirably high?

I'm not knowledgable enough about oil. Please don't misinterpret my post. I'm just genuinely curious about this stuff.

You are thinking about the old Quaker State ND stuff and yes it was NASTY on a tear down!!!

 

[400Eric]

Actually, I was referring to ANY dino oil that comes from Pennsylvania oil fields.

 

[Alec]

Any info on the newer Castrol 0W-40 European formula, in a black 5-quart jug? Says "Made in Germany" on the bottle, I'm guessing it's their replacement for the tried-and-true "German Castrol" 0W-30. I'm guessing it's pretty comparable to M1 0W-40.

If that's the case, seems like it'd be pretty hard to beat for the money. Walmart has 5-quart jugs for only $22.

 

[gsxr]

5 quarts of synthetic for $22 is definitely a Group III base stock, i.e. "fake synthetic", like almost all Mobil-1 in USA, and most other cheaper brands. There's nothing wrong with it, just DO NOT attempt extended drain intervals. Change by the factory interval of ~7kmi for normal service, preferably more like 5kmi. Also remember you don't need zero-W-anything unless you live near the Canadian border, eh.

 

[Alec]

How about Amsoil EFM?

 

[gsxr]

How about Amsoil EFM?

Also a Group III oil. Same thing applies, it's fine for standard drain intervals.

Amsoil AMO, AFL, or AME is what I'd recommend from Amsoil. Those are Group IV/V oils, with the price to match ($10-$11 per quart).

 

[Ascension]

My E-420 seems to really like the 5-40 Rotella T-6 I'm running right now. Pressures are solid and the slight cam weeping has slowed down noticeably + it seemed to pick up a little power and fuel mileage. Have not seen the level budge so far in the 1000 since the change.
My son runs a hot 6.0 Ford diesel ( Try 500 + HP and 700 + Ft lbs hot in the current "street tune"!) and is the one that got me hooked on the stuff. The HP diesel crowd swears by the stuff!

 

[gsxr]

Rotella T-6 is another Group III oil. Same conditions apply. Consumption will start to skyrocket if you leave it in more than 5-7kmi, same as all Group III oils...

 

[Legionere]

I recently found a very interesting webpage by 540Rat if I remember correctly. Do a search for independent oil test on Google and it will pop up.This guy has independently tested many of the oils here and he is unbiased. He discusses ZDDP, using diesel oil, temps, really everything that is discussed here.

I gurantee your going to be surprised.

 

[Ascension]

The 540 rat link and VERY interesting stuff here. If you guys remember I was talking about the positive experience we had with the early Pennzoil synthetics in my round port 455 SD and HO Pontiac engines. Take a look at what was the # 1 rated oil in hat 540 Rat test with no additive in wear performance before they changed the formula!
http://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/

 

[Ascension]

Rotella T-6 is another Group III oil. Same conditions apply. Consumption will start to skyrocket if you leave it in more than 5-7kmi, same as all Group III oils...

Normally change at around 5K. After looking over the 540 Rat wear charts I will go back to Penzoil synthetic next round.

 

[Legionere]

I am really surprised by the chevron 5w30, how low shell t6 ranked, and how much better the 5w30s appear to be than the 5w20s. I currently have the t6 in three of my cars. Going to costco to pick up more chevron 5w30. Or possibly mobile 5w30. Discussion about flow vs viscosity was also interesting.

 

[samiam44]

I don't think the 5W30 T6 meets MB 229.5? I love COSTCO, but even when away from Delo with the reformulation. I get the one which is Cummins recommended for my big truck.

All the diesel oils got knocked down in desireability when they reformulated for modern emission systems. Ascension, if you think your 420e likes the T6- try a group IV synthetic like redline or Motul. You can offset the cost a bit by extending the drain interval. I've been doing 1 year or 7500 miles.



Michael

 

[gsxr]

Oy. That whole thing reeks of a Pennzoil and Prolong advertisement. Some of the claims are correct and make sense. For example, he confirmed that the oil companies are correct about NOT putting extra stuff in their oils. And, he is correct that you should not select an oil based solely on levels of zinc and/or phosphorus (aka, ZDDP). I did find it interesting the Motul 300V was at the top of his list for non-modified oils. Vookster is vindicated!! (Steve runs the 300V in his car. )

However, I take issue with his blanket claims that low-viscosity oils are the Holy Grail. This one guy on the internet somewhere is smarter than teams of German engineers at Mercedes, who have explicit viscosity recommendations that are in direct opposition to his claims. Hmmm... Internet Guy, or Mercedes Engineers? I'll go with the MB boffins myself. YMMV, etc.

He also does not mention base stocks, only non-synthetic, semi-, and full-. How do the oils tested stand up to the equivalent of thousands of miles in a real engine, not a test apparatus? We've already proven that Group III fake-synthetics shear down and start to experience increased consumption beyond 5-7kmi. Interesting there was no mention of this.

For the record, I get oil analysis on all my engines including TBN, at every oil change. I've not experienced a single issue with wear metals, over nearly 15 years of using xW-40 and xW-50 synthetics in my engines... despite the hand-wringing in that article about these being "too thick".


UPDATE MAY 2018: Apparently, the Ratblog has been revised multiple times since 2014. It now does reference base stock groups, but summarily dismisses them in favor of his personal test results:

"People on Internet discussions argue endlessly over the merits or lack thereof, of these oil Groups, to try and determine which oil type is best to use. But, with my Engineering tests, you can bypass all that debate, and go directly to the results of how oils you find on Auto Parts Store shelves, actually perform when put to the test. My testing is a dynamic friction test under load, similar to how an engine dyno test is a dynamic HP/Torque test under load. Both tests show how their subjects truly perform in the real world, no matter what Brand names are involved, no matter what outrageous claims may have been made, and no matter what their spec sheets say."​

This is, IMNSHO, weapons-grade baloneyum. He did not test each oil in a reference engine over an extended period of time (say, 7-10kmi). As noted above, oil groups can and do make a difference as the drain interval gets longer, which is critical on many newer cars that specify higher-than-typical OCI's. All he is doing is a friction load test!

I also found it interesting that he claims the optimal sump temerature is 100C-120C. Oddly, the newer AMG engines show oil temp flashing until it reaches operating temp... at 80C. Again, direct conflict between Random Internet "Engineer", and AMG / Mercedes. Personally, I trust the people who designed and built the engine, not RIE.

Sure would be nice if the S/N ratio was better on that blog. And if it wasn't locked into a narrow column that requires endless scrolling even on a large computer screen (FHD / QHD).

 

[gerryvz]

I skimmed that RAT post. There is a lot of hype out there, and there are a lot of so-called "experts" out there. The BITOG forum is full of them.

All I know is that on my 560SEC, I had been using a reformulated "dino" oil and I had valvetrain lubrication problems that resulted in two or three flattened cam lobes.

I changed over to an oil with better friction-related additives (ZDDP) that is an old-school, tried and true oil that was formulated "back in the day," and with 39,500 miles on that valvetrain I have not had a single problem.

On the M104 engines I've owned over the past 10 years, diesel-rated oils with good friction additives and detergent packages have kept my engines spotlessly clean on the inside.

On my M119 engine, I've used full synthetics for the past 11+ years with the past 2-3 years using RedLine, with good results.

I have no complaints, happy with where I'm at, and have no impetus or desire to change motor oils.

When it comes to oil, you can't over-think things. Consult an expert in the particular engine you have, and go with what they say. It's about as simple as that.

For my SEC, I consider Jono to be an expert, and I use the oil he recommends. Which is Brad Penn.
For my E500, I consider GSXR to be an expert, and I use the oil he recommends. Which is RedLine.

Case closed

 

[Trae]

And for my M104s. . . I use what Gerry recommends (Delo 15-40) dino oil every 3000mi.

 

[gsxr]

Counter-point is at this link... note that it reads much less like an advertisement, IMO:
http://www.w124performance.com/docs/general/RedLine/Why_Red_Line_10W-40_thread_notes.txt

(Original source, if you have LOTS of time to read, is here.)

 

[clarkz71]

I don't care what his credentials are, he has an agenda.
Like Gerry said, who do you believe. MB engineers, or some idiot on the net.

MB and Mobil 1 recommend 0W40 synthetic. Even the high HP AMG engines.

Almost all 5W40 oils have a MB approval, either 229.3 or 229.5

Look at the 229.5 MB approved list, 5W40 has 70% of the approved oils

Compare the XW30 oils, and even 0W40. Not even close. 229.3 is even more 5W40 biased


http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten/229.5_en.html

http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten/229.3_en.html

 

[Klink]

Oy. That whole thing reeks of a Pennzoil and Prolong advertisement. Some of the claims are correct and make sense. For example, he confirmed that the oil companies are correct about NOT putting extra stuff in their oils. And, he is correct that you should not select an oil based solely on levels of zinc and/or phosphorus (aka, ZDDP). I did find it interesting the Motul 300V was at the top of his list for non-modified oils. Vookster is vindicated!! (Steve runs the 300V in his car. )

However, I take issue with his blanket claims that low-viscosity oils are the Holy Grail. This one guy on the internet somewhere is smarter than teams of German engineers at Mercedes, who have explicit viscosity recommendations that are in direct opposition to his claims. Hmmm... Internet Guy, or Mercedes Engineers? I'll go with the MB boffins myself. YMMV, etc.

He also does not mention base stocks, only non-synthetic, semi-, and full-. How do the oils tested stand up to the equivalent of thousands of miles in a real engine, not a test apparatus? We've already proven that Group III fake-synthetics shear down and start to experience increased consumption beyond 5-7kmi. Interesting there was no mention of this.

For the record, I get oil analysis on all my engines including TBN, at every oil change. I've not experienced a single issue with wear metals, over nearly 15 years of using xW-40 and xW-50 synthetics in my engines... despite the hand-wringing in that article about these being "too thick".

Everything you said. Only adding in that since it has no recommendation for street use whatsoever, I would not run 300 V in any engine with a "post combustion" (cat, trap, filter, etc.) emission control system for an extended period of time. And regardless of the engine oil I choose, I would never scramble it's precise chemistry with any kind of dump in additive. Not ever...

 

[samiam44]

"I had been using a reformulated "dino" oil and I had valve train lubrication problems that resulted in two or three flattened cam lobes"

I thought that was fairly common on M117's where the oil tube plastic ends had failed. M104/M120/M119 I believe use a phosphate coating on the cam lobes which help with lubrication. Old day all engine designs were done around 10W30. I think if the oil was "too thick", you run into accelerating top ring wear. Too thin, guides/seals tend to drink oil. But with the synthetics, I believe you get the best. I would say, it depends on how much pressure you assume the lubricant will provide to support the bearing or contact area. Some designs were more conservative- an oil would probably work. I think the BMW's are probably the most picky- requiring special viscosities which to me is to make up for design short comings.


Michael

 

[clarkz71]

While failed oil tube fitting can cause an issue that was not the problem.

The R/S cam is the last component in the oil system to get oil. Failure of the lobes and or the followers
was common starting 1981 with the M116.

So common in fact, we would goodwill warranty the R/S cams and followers long after the warranty had expired regardless of mileage as long as oil changes were done at the specified 7500 mile intervals.

I'll see if I can find the Service Bulletin.

 

[Klink]

I skimmed that RAT post. There is a lot of hype out there, and there are a lot of so-called "experts" out there. The BITOG forum is full of them.

All I know is that on my 560SEC, I had been using a reformulated "dino" oil and I had valvetrain lubrication problems that resulted in two or three flattened cam lobes.

I changed over to an oil with better friction-related additives (ZDDP) that is an old-school, tried and true oil that was formulated "back in the day," and with 39,500 miles on that valvetrain I have not had a single problem.

On the M104 engines I've owned over the past 10 years, diesel-rated oils with good friction additives and detergent packages have kept my engines spotlessly clean on the inside.

On my M119 engine, I've used full synthetics for the past 11+ years with the past 2-3 years using RedLine, with good results.

I have no complaints, happy with where I'm at, and have no impetus or desire to change motor oils.

When it comes to oil, you can't over-think things. Consult an expert in the particular engine you have, and go with what they say. It's about as simple as that.

For my SEC, I consider Jono to be an expert, and I use the oil he recommends. Which is Brad Penn.
For my E500, I consider GSXR to be an expert, and I use the oil he recommends. Which is RedLine.

Case closed

"I had been using a reformulated "dino" oil and I had valve train lubrication problems that resulted in two or three flattened cam lobes"

I thought that was fairly common on M117's where the oil tube plastic ends had failed. M104/M120/M119 I believe use a phosphate coating on the cam lobes which help with lubrication. Old day all engine designs were done around 10W30. I think if the oil was "too thick", you run into accelerating top ring wear. Too thin, guides/seals tend to drink oil. But with the synthetics, I believe you get the best. I would say, it depends on how much pressure you assume the lubricant will provide to support the bearing or contact area. Some designs were more conservative- an oil would probably work. I think the BMW's are probably the most picky- requiring special viscosities which to me is to make up for design short comings.


Michael

Actually, the M116 and M117 of any and all vintages will often lose a right side camshaft, and in rare instances a left side shaft, that failure usually ocurring many thousands of miles after the right side shaft failed. They have done this since their inception, and in almost any case where I have seen it there wasn't the slightest problem with the oiling apparatus. It was a much more common failure in engines that were serviced at some shops compared to others, and I think there may well have been a connection to what brand or type of oil the comparative shops were using, but that is observational and anecdotal on my part and I don't see any reason to elaborate on it, other than to point out that by Mercedes-Benz standards, the M116/117 camshaft/rocker interface always was, and probably still is failure prone.

I am not an expert on them, but what little I've seen regarding the BMWs seems to suggest that almost all of their engine oil recommendations are very close to the MB recommendations. The glaring exception seems to be the last six-cylinder M3 engine (not the new one that is just being introduced!), which interestingly enough to consider for you "thinner is better" people out there, runs a specially commissioned Castrol synthetic 10W-60. Also to Michael's comment, I was told by a BMW technician that this oil was introduced when this particular engine was found to experience occasional oil starvation related failures shortly after it was introduced to the public. Don't take me to task on this last part if it's wrong. It is pure hear-say from me, but I do vaguely remember that there was some kind of dustup about that engine, and this particular "Koala Claw" oil was part of, if not all of the cure...

 

[Ascension]

Oy. That whole thing reeks of a Pennzoil and Prolong advertisement. Some of the claims are correct and make sense. For example, he confirmed that the oil companies are correct about NOT putting extra stuff in their oils. And, he is correct that you should not select an oil based solely on levels of zinc and/or phosphorus (aka, ZDDP). I did find it interesting the Motul 300V was at the top of his list for non-modified oils. Vookster is vindicated!! (Steve runs the 300V in his car. )

However, I take issue with his blanket claims that low-viscosity oils are the Holy Grail. This one guy on the internet somewhere is smarter than teams of German engineers at Mercedes, who have explicit viscosity recommendations that are in direct opposition to his claims. Hmmm... Internet Guy, or Mercedes Engineers? I'll go with the MB boffins myself. YMMV, etc.

He also does not mention base stocks, only non-synthetic, semi-, and full-. How do the oils tested stand up to the equivalent of thousands of miles in a real engine, not a test apparatus? We've already proven that Group III fake-synthetics shear down and start to experience increased consumption beyond 5-7kmi. Interesting there was no mention of this.

For the record, I get oil analysis on all my engines including TBN, at every oil change. I've not experienced a single issue with wear metals, over nearly 15 years of using xW-40 and xW-50 synthetics in my engines... despite the hand-wringing in that article about these being "too thick".

From personal experience running an early in a couple of really hot round port Pontiac engines back in the early 1980's that Penzoil data may not be just hype.
Haven't run their synthetics in many years after the original oil I was using ( A 20/50 Synthetic racing oil that was originally was formulated in a 50 weight only for Top fuel use) was discontinued. The fact was when we pulled those engines down we found no trace of any deposits and absolutely no bearing or bore wear and both looked like the day they were built inside.
Seeing this test makes me look hard at the new Penzoil Synthetics as we saw such good results in the real world running the older stuff.

 

[clarkz71]

After some research, there is 1 (one) Pennzoil that has MB approval. A 5W40
Platinum ultra Euro formula
I believe their 0W40 is also, but they don't list the approval.

http://www.specialtylubes.com/pennzoil-ultra-euro-5w-40-6-quarts.html

The same oil, Pennzoil ultra Euro formula in 5W30 is NOT MB approved.

http://www.specialtylubes.com/pennzoil-ultra-euro-5w-40-6-quarts.html


There are other Pennzoil ultra oils that are approved, but not sold in the US

Just the 5W40 listed below is sold here and has MB approval

Pennzoil Euro, 0W40		x
	x	x	x
			x
	x		x

[TD="width: 300"]Pennzoil Platinum Euro, 0W40, 5W30, 5W40
[/TD] [TD="width: 400"][/TD] [TD="width: 300"]Pennzoil Platinum European Formula, 5W40
[/TD] [TD="width: 400"][/TD] [TD="width: 300"]Pennzoil Ultra Euro, 0W40, 5W40
[/TD] [TD="width: 400"][/TD] [TD="width: 300"] Pennzoil Ultra Euro 5W-40 Full Synthetic
[/TD]

.

 

[Legionere]

Guys, use the info as you see fit. Im not trying to convince anyone to use anything. I have years of experience using certain oils also, ive been a shade-tree mechanic my entire life. As the saying goes, opinions are like a**holes-everyone has one. This is what appears to be actual testing of many common oils that we can buy, and I find it useful. From what I can tell, there's no hidden agenda, but actual experimentation. I try to keep an open mind.

 

[clarkz71]

I don't care what anyone uses, but as a MB technician I can tell you
most if not all current 229.5 approved oils sold in the US are a XW40 weight oil.

The SLR calls for a 5W50

This guy is endorsing lower viscosity oils, 5W20 and 5W30 and while his
testing may be valid, this is a MB specific forum, most like a MB approved oil

.

 

[gerryvz]

I am familiar with RHS cams on M116/M117 generation engines going. I can tell you that my engine (from the 145K mark when I bought the car to the 183K mark when I redid the top end) had oil changes every 2,000-2,500 miles, with Chevron Supreme motor oil, which is a very high quality dino. That oil's formulation did change over the years to one with less zinc and phosphorus so as not to poison catalytic converters. I believe in significant part (coupled with the inherent friction issue and geometry issue with the M117 valvetrain/valve guides) that this change in formulation led to the lubrication issue that I had.

My LHS cam is still original and is going strong. With the Brad Penn oil I've been using, all I know is that I have had no problems. Honestly since the top-end job, other than having to tighten up the valve cover bolts two times in the past couple of years, I have literally had NO problem whatsoever with that engine other than changing oil, oil filters and air filter. It's been completely reliable, no fluid leaks, NOTHING. I just clean it once a month to keep it looking nice underhood.

Cheers,
Gerry

 

[clarkz71]

That oil's formulation did change over the years to one with less zinc and phosphorus so as not to poison catalytic converters. I believe in significant part (coupled with the inherent friction issue and geometry issue with the M117 valvetrain/valve guides) that this change in formulation led to the lubrication issue that I had.

Cheers,
Gerry

Good point Gerry, phosphorus is the half of the anti wear package.
I saw zinc mentioned a lot, phosphorus not so much

 

[gerryvz]

I haven't spent the same amount of time chasing my tail on oil like a lot of folks do/have, but as far as I can remember, I have YET to see a truly un-biased piece of "research" on motor oil whereby the author didn't have some sort of agenda, or was plugging some type of product, or the study/research was backed by one or more oil companies, or whatnot.

NOBODY has the means and the time to do unbiased research on motor oil. It would be a full time job and the only way this type of stuff happens is when SOMEONE pays for it.

 

[Legionere]

Not trying to get you to drink from the trough Gerry, you already have your mind made up obviously. For me, results matter, and I found it interesting, after reading it.

 

[gerryvz]

There are a lot of oil related threads on this forum.

Perhaps its about time to start another ATF thread, too.

'.14, anyone ?!?

 

[clarkz71]

"Heavy thick oils such as 5W50 and 20W50, that are of course 50 weight oils at normal operating temperature, are slower to release and eliminate air bubbles/foam, than thinner oils such as 5W30 and 10W30 that are 30 weight oils at normal operating temperature.

BOTTOM LINE: Thinner oils are better for most engine lubrication needs"


Toyota, Ford are designed to run these low viscosity oils.

But this is a Mercedes Benz forum, for engines designed in 1990
and designed for a XW40 oil

He mentions 5W50, that again is the only oil recommended for the SLS/SLR
Isn't the AMG M159 engine cutting edge technology?

Why would MB engineers specify an oil that is "slower to release and eliminate air bubbles/foam, than thinner oils such as 5W30 and 10W30 that are 30 weight"

This guy may be what he says, but he uses an anonymous screen name
540Rat and claims he's an engineer. Hard to take his data seriously on a blog.

Now if Jack Rauch or Chad Knaus posted something like this, I may
believe it's legitimacy. You know, on a Hendrick Motorsports website

 

[clarkz71]

There are a lot of oil related threads on this forum.

Perhaps its about time to start another ATF thread, too.

'.14, anyone ?!?

Marc at Sun Valley settled that one.

He uses 236.14 ATF in ALL his MB transmissions.

I have it in writing.
.

 

[Klink]

I am familiar with RHS cams on M116/M117 generation engines going. I can tell you that my engine (from the 145K mark when I bought the car to the 183K mark when I redid the top end) had oil changes every 2,000-2,500 miles, with Chevron Supreme motor oil, which is a very high quality dino. That oil's formulation did change over the years to one with less zinc and phosphorus so as not to poison catalytic converters. I believe in significant part (coupled with the inherent friction issue and geometry issue with the M117 valvetrain/valve guides) that this change in formulation led to the lubrication issue that I had.

My LHS cam is still original and is going strong. With the Brad Penn oil I've been using, all I know is that I have had no problems. Honestly since the top-end job, other than having to tighten up the valve cover bolts two times in the past couple of years, I have literally had NO problem whatsoever with that engine other than changing oil, oil filters and air filter. It's been completely reliable, no fluid leaks, NOTHING. I just clean it once a month to keep it looking nice underhood.

Cheers,
Gerry

Indeed, Honch. I knew you would be familiar with all that. My comments were just some FYI, more for people who were not familiar with the single cam V-8's. I was essentially agreeing with you that they are oil sensitive in that regard, contrary to the false "common knowledge" that it was always related to the oil tube retainers cracking apart. I do think that the Brad Penn you are using is a failsafe choice for that engine.


Actually, my theory has always been that people inadvertently dislodge the aged oil tube retainers as they remove the valve cover and then mistakenly assumed that the cam lobe damage was caused by the dislodged tube. Generally speaking, damage due to operation with a dislodged tube almost always occurs immediately after an engine assembly job of some kind, and the resulting damage was mostly seizure of the camshaft in the bearings, and not the lobe damage that most of us are familiar with.

 

[clarkz71]

Just when I thought Pennzoil had a winner, found out it's a group III oil..........

Scroll down to #27

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/pennzoil-q-a/

 

[Klink]

Guys, use the info as you see fit. Im not trying to convince anyone to use anything. I have years of experience using certain oils also, ive been a shade-tree mechanic my entire life. As the saying goes, opinions are like a**holes-everyone has one. This is what appears to be actual testing of many common oils that we can buy, and I find it useful. From what I can tell, there's no hidden agenda, but actual experimentation. I try to keep an open mind.

Not trying to get you to drink from the trough Gerry, you already have your mind made up obviously. For me, results matter, and I found it interesting, after reading it.

And indeed it is interesting. Thanks for posting it.

Please don't be surprised or upset with some of our reactions. Lubricants and fluids are exactly like politics and religion. They have approximately zero true net effect on our individual lives as long as a couple of simple basic commonsense rules are followed, yet we will kill and die over the split of the split of the split of the split of the hair of difference. It is utterly bizarre, but it's what we do...

 

[Klink]

There are a lot of oil related threads on this forum.

Perhaps its about time to start another ATF thread, too.

'.14, anyone ?!?

That's just how we troll...

 

[gsxr]

NOBODY has the means and the time to do unbiased research on motor oil. It would be a full time job and the only way this type of stuff happens is when SOMEONE pays for it.

The thread I linked to back in post #318 is one of the least-biased discussions I've seen on this volatile topic. I also appreciate the primary author in that thread makes it clear that his "recommended" oils are based on the needs of his particular engine, not necessarily ideal for every vehicle on the road. Similarly, on this forum we are PRIMARILY discussing appropriate oil for the M119 engine found in the W124/E500E.

Price no object, I would probably be using Motul 300V 10W-40 "Chrono"... but at ~$18/liter delivered, I still can't quite justify the 50% price differential compared to Red Line at $11.50/qt (via Amazon Prime). I can barely stomach the Red Line price, for many years (late 1990's, early 2000's) I was spoiled with quality Group IV/V Mobil-1 products available at ~$5/qt in either gallon jugs or 5-qt jugs. Those days are gone for now.

 

[clarkz71]

.


Actually, my theory has always been that people inadvertently dislodge the aged oil tube retainers as they remove the valve cover and then mistakenly assumed that the cam lobe damage was caused by the dislodged tube. Generally speaking, damage due to operation with a dislodged tube almost always occurs immediately after an engine assembly job of some kind, and the resulting damage was mostly seizure of the camshaft in the bearings, and not the lobe damage that most of us are familiar with.

Yep, it's like the PCV hoses or plastic vacuum lines. Don't touch them and your GTG.

When we replaced the valve cover gaskets we always removed the tubes,
cleaned them in the safety kleen machine to make sure all the holes were clear.
Then installed new plastic fittings.

No extra charge, just how we worked back then. Customer only paid for the parts.

 

[Klink]

I am familiar with RHS cams on M116/M117 generation engines going. I can tell you that my engine (from the 145K mark when I bought the car to the 183K mark when I redid the top end) had oil changes every 2,000-2,500 miles, with Chevron Supreme motor oil, which is a very high quality dino. That oil's formulation did change over the years to one with less zinc and phosphorus so as not to poison catalytic converters. I believe in significant part (coupled with the inherent friction issue and geometry issue with the M117 valvetrain/valve guides) that this change in formulation led to the lubrication issue that I had.

My LHS cam is still original and is going strong. With the Brad Penn oil I've been using, all I know is that I have had no problems. Honestly since the top-end job, other than having to tighten up the valve cover bolts two times in the past couple of years, I have literally had NO problem whatsoever with that engine other than changing oil, oil filters and air filter. It's been completely reliable, no fluid leaks, NOTHING. I just clean it once a month to keep it looking nice underhood.

Cheers,
Gerry

Good point Gerry, phosphorus is the half of the anti wear package.
I saw zinc mentioned a lot, phosphorus not so much

The apparent zinc/phosphorus dichotomy occurs for this reason. In almost all cases, we are talking about the same family of anti-wear chemicals, those being Zinc dialkyldithiophosphates (say that four times fast!). Most companies simply state it's concentration as a "zinc" content. Some companies, most notably, Mobil, are adamant that the phosphorus is really the major chemically active agent in the formation of the wear resistant coating, so they insist on stating a "phosphorous" content. Same chemistry, same chemicals, just emphasizing a different part of the molecule...

 

[Klink]

Yep, it's like the PCV hoses or plastic vacuum lines. Don't touch them and your GTG.

When we replaced the valve cover gaskets we always removed the tubes, cleaned them in the safety kleen machine
to make sure all the holes were clear. Then installed new plastic fittings.

No extra charge, just how we worked back then. Customer only paid for the parts.

Absolutely! We always had a policy that when the valve covers came off, it got cleaned tubes and new retainers. Talk about the cheapest insurance ever...

 

[gerryvz]

I actually have a spare set of M117 aluminum tubes (along with a spare set of plastic fittings for them). For the next time my engine goes bad. I figure I've got another 140-150K until the next top-end job, or perhaps 15-20 years' driving at the current amount I drive the car. In 12 years of ownership, I've put about 80K miles on the car.

I have to say, despite its bullet-proofness ... the M117 is REALLY starting to show its age. It's becoming like a Chevy pushrod small-block 350 in the "Benzworld" (pun not intended).

 

[clarkz71]

The thread I linked to back in post #318 is one of the least-biased discussions I've seen on this volatile topic.

Yes, great thread,


The second link is a Ferrari/Maybach guy, I love how the first
thing he covers, and correctly is the myth that 0W30 is to thin for an
engine spec'd for 10W30.

http://ferrarichat.com/forum/faq.php?faq=haas_articles#faq_motor_oil_basics

The second one will make your head hurt.........

 

[Odessit86]

Hey guys .. does products in the list 229.5 acceptable in M119 ?

https://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten/229.5_en.html

 

[Klink]

Hey guys .. does products in the list 229.5 acceptable in M119 ?

https://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten/229.5_en.html

Yes, 229.3 and 229.5 are perfect for a M119. Be careful to avoid confusion with oils having an extra suffix digit, like 229.51, .52, and .53, as these are biased for heavily emission controlled diesels with roller tappets.

 

[gsxr]

Hey guys .. does products in the list 229.5 acceptable in M119 ?

https://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten/229.5_en.html

I'd lean towards one of the 5W-40 or 10W-40 viscosities. You generally would not need anything thinner unless you frequently see penguins or polar bears in your back yard.

 

[Harv]

Our friends at MB of Naperville sells the OEM 229.5 for $5.70 a quart. Love it.

http://www.mboemparts.com/mercedes-...z-genuine-oil/000-989-83-01-usb6/?parent=1008

 

[bb1]

I use only in my cars LiquiMoly - Leichtlauf HighTech 5w40 - "Made in Germany"
You can get it in the States too!


"This is a earlier correspondence with LiquiMoly:

Dear Mr. X,

thank you very much for contacting us and your interest in our LIQUI MOLY products.

Our LIQUI MOLY LEICHTLAUF HIGH TECH 5W-40 is a group III based engine oil.
The european designation "synthetic technologie" is equal to the designation "fully synthetic" in the U.S.

The oem approvals on the product are the same worldwide. We produce our engine oils only in one plant here in Germany and ship worldwide. So the product quality is the same worldwide.


We hope we could help you with our informations. Should you have further questions regarding our products we would be very pleased to get contacted from you again.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

i. A. Steffen Niemietz
Anwendungstechniker
application engineer"

 

[maw1124]

+1

But as I'm looking at this, I'm not sure if I'm running the "Leichtlauf High Tech" (which is MB 229.5 spec) or the "Synthoil Premium" (which is MB 229.3 spec). Nor do I know the diffence between the specs. My guess is I'm running the "Synthoil Premium" in the 500E, the S55 and the Allroad, and the "Synthoil Race Tech 10W-60" in the M3.

My goal was to idiot-proof this for my mind, and the Synthoil Premium was their only oil that met both the MB and VW/Audi spec for those cars. The engines are similar enough that I wasn't surprised LiquiMoly made one oil to catch a broad swath of the German Performance market (with BMW M being the outlier).

http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1363&page=6&p=135595#post135595... see Page 7.

maw