When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Looking at the be o 229.5 list there isn't 10 times as many 5w40 vs 0w40?
I counted them
The only MB oil that meets 229.3 and 229.5 is a 0w40
At operating temperature there is NO difference
At cold temps the 0w40 will build up pressure and lubricate faster
This is where most engine wear occurs
The propensity for lifter bleed down and tick is the same with both
Perhaps a bit less with the 0w40 since cold it will pump up a bit faster and being thinner fill the lifter up faster
I would never use an oil not on the 229.5 list
Just saying
Originally Posted by Vash
Did you take a look at the list of approved oils on the A40 list? Over 90% of them are 5w40 (vs ~9% 0w40). Just saying.
The 5w40 isn't a bandaid on an old wound (older cars with worn lifters), as you're suggesting. I picked up my '12 coupe new (Euro Delivery). I had the oil changed early to get rid of any "sediment" that May have accumulated during break in. I forget if I had it done at the same time as the differential fluid (~2k miles) or later, around 3k. Anyways, directly after the oil change I was getting the lifter tick. I read on here about the change to 5w40 and how it resolves the "tick". Called the dealer, they used 0w40. I took it back and they put in 5w40 (and noted their techs error in using the 0w40). No tick with 5w40.
My lifters weren't "old and worn", the car only had a couple thousand miles on it, and the tick had never happened until the 0w40 oil change.
Even the guys at Weistec have acknowledged 5w40 as the fix.
Regarding Mobil 1 5w40 ESP M, Mobil's site says it's been discontinued and being replaced by a 0w30.
I'm running RP 5w40. Thinking of trying Redline 0w40 next go around. It's got higher viscosity at 40C than M1 0w (closer to M1 5w), higher at 100C, higher FP, greater VI, etc.
W204 C63 Coupe, W166 ML350 BlueTEC, 928GT, C5 Z06 & IS300 race cars, EQE 4Matic+ on order
Originally Posted by Vash
Did you take a look at the list of approved oils on the A40 list? Over 90% of them are 5w40 (vs ~9% 0w40). Just saying.
The 5w40 isn't a bandaid on an old wound (older cars with worn lifters), as you're suggesting. I picked up my '12 coupe new (Euro Delivery). I had the oil changed early to get rid of any "sediment" that May have accumulated during break in. I forget if I had it done at the same time as the differential fluid (~2k miles) or later, around 3k. Anyways, directly after the oil change I was getting the lifter tick. I read on here about the change to 5w40 and how it resolves the "tick". Called the dealer, they used 0w40. I took it back and they put in 5w40 (and noted their techs error in using the 0w40). No tick with 5w40.
My lifters weren't "old and worn", the car only had a couple thousand miles on it, and the tick had never happened until the 0w40 oil change.
Even the guys at Weistec have acknowledged 5w40 as the fix.
Regarding Mobil 1 5w40 ESP M, Mobil's site says it's been discontinued and being replaced by a 0w30.
I'm running RP 5w40. Thinking of trying Redline 0w40 next go around. It's got higher viscosity at 40C than M1 0w (closer to M1 5w), higher at 100C, higher FP, greater VI, etc.
The reason why 90% of the A40 oils are 5W40 has nothign to do with the A40 standard - it has everything to do with the fact that they must meet OTHER standards like the ACEA 2012 as well. And, every single Porsche that has come out of the factory in the last 10 years specifies Mobil 1 0W40.
The 5W40 is not a bandaid on an old wound - it is a result of stricter ACEA emissions and fuel efficiency requirements and profitability for the manufacturer. All other things being equal (i.e. without adding a ton of pour point depressant addivtives), it is a lot cheaper to produce a 5W40 oil than a 0W40 oil that is going to have the same the hot viscosity but a lower one at colder temperatures. In the 5W40, the base stock molecules have to be less evenly matched in terms of length than in the 0W40. And, if the dealership that put in the 0W40 told you told you that it is the wrong oil, they are full of 5h!t. It's either that, or the engineers in Germany who design and develop these engines are lying to everyone both in the user manuals and on BEVO. And, if you have valve lifter ticking noise on a newer (2012+) car that uses the updated M159 buckets which are not prone to bleed-down, there's a mechanincal problem with your car regardless of the mileage. Besides, the whole "oil drain from the tappets issue can be fixed by thicker oil" is actually quite sketchy, simply because the oil is a *lot* thinner when it is hot and 99% will thus drain in the first 15 minutes of you shutting off the engine, not over the next 24 hours after it has thickened up. A 5W40 oil may mask the problem by artificially increasing the oil pressure when the oil is cold, but that's about it. It certainly doesn't lubricate any better.
Oh - and what oil do you think was in your car when you bought it? Mobil 1 0W40. If the ticking didn't start until they changed it, maybe they didn't put in enough. The dealer story is bull.
P.S. Redline isn't even MB approved. Might as well use extra virgin olive oil. And, you want LOWER viscosity when cold, not higher.
W204 C63 Coupe, W166 ML350 BlueTEC, 928GT, C5 Z06 & IS300 race cars, EQE 4Matic+ on order
Originally Posted by CPD SLK
So back to amsoil. How do they say they are mb approved if they aren't on that bevo list?
They are NOT MB approved - MB has not tested their oils and confirmed it meets MB criteria. They (Amsoil) claim their oil meets the 229.5 spec. There is a huge difference between the two - it's like having a driver's licence vs. claiming that you can drive but you don't actually have one. The actual wording on their page says "Product Application Specs", NOT that the oil is approved by the manufacturers who actualy created the spec.
Most UOAs I have seen on Amsoil or Redline show that they're only good when fresh but then very quiclky disintegrate and protection rapidly drops off. I wouldn't put either in a daily driver.
P.S. As I added in the earlier post - Redline also isn't MB approved, just like Amsoil. Check BEVO.
Diabolis, you suggested that Porsches A40 has superior characteristics to MB's 229.51. Regardless of what other standards it has to satisfy, the oil list with superior characteristics is the one with a larger ratio of 5w40's to 0w40's. (The A40 list I looked at had 165 oils listed, of those 15 were 0w40). Based on the "A40 vs 229.51" graph and the composition of the two lists, it appears that 5w40's (in general) have a better profile.
If it's "all about" meeting the ACEA standards, why is Mobil 1 5w40 ESP M being discontinued? This is the "low ash" formula. So, MB is not using this in the M156 and will continue to use the regular Mobil 1 5w40, which is the one you can purchase at your local dealers parts dept. Again, if it is all about meeting emissions and rescuing cats, then why is the primary oil within your argument already discontinued (M1 5w40 ESP M)?
Factory fill is M1 5w40. The very first time I started the car after bringing it home from the 0w40 change generated the "tick". I checked the oil level after the 0w40 change to see if insufficient oil was the culprit. The oil level was good. It was then that I looked to MBW for a possible solution. 5w40 did the trick.
Diabolis, I think you're ignoring some of the facts and letting your opinion get the best of you.
Ingenieur- it is the A40 list that is composed of over 90% 5w40's.
I'm not trying to sway anyone towards "5w40 over 0w40" or argue which is better. Just sayin'.
Amsoil and Redline state that their specs meet 229.5, but that doesn't mean they have been approved on MB's end. I haven't even heard that Amsoil or RL break down. Diabolis, links or sources? (would change my mind about trying RL next change)
W204 C63 Coupe, W166 ML350 BlueTEC, 928GT, C5 Z06 & IS300 race cars, EQE 4Matic+ on order
Originally Posted by Vash
Diabolis, you suggested that Porsches A40 has superior characteristics to MB's 229.51. Regardless of what other standards it has to satisfy, the oil list with superior characteristics is the one with a larger ratio of 5w40's to 0w40's. (The A40 list I looked at had 165 oils listed, of those 15 were 0w40). Based on the "A40 vs 229.51" graph and the composition of the two lists, it appears that 5w40's (in general) have a better profile.
No. I suggested that the Posche A40 spec places a much higher importance on engine wear and protection whereas the MB 229.51 spec places less importance on those areas but more importance on emissions. The oil manufacturers then make oils (as profitably as they possibly can), test them and then submit them to approval to the varous car manufacturers. 5W40 oils are chaper to produce (more cheap hydrocracked base stock) than 0W40 oils (more PAO pure synthetic stock). They are cheaper to make, they all meet the minimums of the various specs imposed by the various car manufactures so of course there are more of them on the market. It is the same with tires or almost any other consumer item. The Concorde was a more comfortable and faster passenger jet than everythign else in the skies, yet everyone was buying Boeings and Airbuses because the vast majority of the public wanted cheaper airfare, not better performance. There are 100,000 iPods for evey single Wadia or Theta CD transport & DAC combination, but there is an objective and measurable difference in sound quality in favour of the much rarer and more expensive gear. It is the same with oils. You have to differentialte between perceived value for the dollar and thus quantity and profit versus performance.
Originally Posted by Vash
If it's "all about" meeting the ACEA standards, why is Mobil 1 5w40 ESP M being discontinued? This is the "low ash" formula. So, MB is not using this in the M156 and will continue to use the regular Mobil 1 5w40, which is the one you can purchase at your local dealers parts dept. Again, if it is all about meeting emissions and rescuing cats, then why is the primary oil within your argument already discontinued (M1 5w40 ESP M)?
That is complete news to me. Where exactly did you obtain that information? If I recall correctly, that is the very oil that MB is pushing across their entire range as it also has low SA (sulphated ash) so it can be used in their diesels with the fine particualte filters.
Originally Posted by Vash
Factory fill is M1 5w40. The very first time I started the car after bringing it home from the 0w40 change generated the "tick". I checked the oil level after the 0w40 change to see if insufficient oil was the culprit. The oil level was good. It was then that I looked to MBW for a possible solution. 5w40 did the trick.)
No. When the C63 cars are made in Germay AND DESTINED FOR THE NA MARKET, they are all filled with 229.5 spec oil - whcih is the Mobil 1 0W40.
Originally Posted by Vash
Diabolis, I think you're ignoring some of the facts and letting your opinion get the best of you.
I was just about to say the same thing about you. And, yes, I am simply expressing my opinion. We all are. None of us has any first-hand knowledge of what goes in both of those oils; we have not performed the various tets ourselves nor have we done a statistically significant number of UOAs ourselves. We are simply expressing our opinions based on information we have gathered from other sources over time and our understanding of the subject matter.
Originally Posted by Vash
Ingenieur- it is the A40 list that is composed of over 90% 5w40's.
I'm not trying to sway anyone towards "5w40 over 0w40" or argue which is better. Just sayin'.
Amsoil and Redline state that their specs meet 229.5, but that doesn't mean they have been approved on MB's end. I haven't even heard that Amsoil or RL break down. Diabolis, links or sources? (would change my mind about trying RL next change)
Various UOA analyses on track car motors that my own P-car mechanic and his peers that he is in touch with have performed, as well as UOAs posted on BITOG. Unfortunately I don't have the time to search for any on BITOG at this moment, but I will try to find some over the weekend and post the links. Last but certianly not least, a very good friend of mine (both mechanical and chemical engineering degrees, MIT scholarship, etc.) was working for Union Carbide in their lubricants division. I have also learned a thing or two directly from him.
Amsoil and Redline are small time, pyramid-scheme players at best. Their entire claim to fame is the fully sythetic base stock they use, but they otherwise know fairly little compared to the large players in the industry. Exxon's lubricant division R&D annual budget alone surpasses the gross annual sales of Amsoil and Redline combined. Neither has received official MB approval as presumably neither has even bothered to submit samples for testing - if thet have, they have obviously failed the tests as they are not on the approved lists. That right there ought to eliminate them as serious contenders. Just because a lot of people in NA have drank sufficient quantities of their marketing Kool-Aid, it doesn't make them good oils for THIS application.
D- check Mobil 1's site. M1 5w40 ESP M has already been discontied and replaced with a 0w30.
You're asserting that MB only made the change from 0w40 to 5w40 in the M156 to save the cats and satisfy the ACEA, buuuuuuut are still filling it with 0w40 at the factory. This makes absolutely no sense.
The M156 has been filled with 5w40 from the factory since that memo was sent out.
"Boutique" offerings shouldn't automatically be discounted/discredited. Analysis showing premature shearing would be interesting.
I know repetitive
10 qts
Thermostatically controlled cooler
Aux cooler
Full canister filtration
Light duty service avg load 20-40% for most of the time
It is an over-engineered system designed by engineers who have race engine experience
Any oil on the list is fine
The 10k interval is fine for most duty
I would do 7500-8000 mile changes if most of the service duty was short trips in traffic and the oil never got hot or ran for an extended time (1 hour or so) on regular basis
Hot oil will clean the oiling system and engine components, remove corrosion, burn off fuel and water
^It is odd. Even stranger is that it's being replaced by a 0w30 (ESP X1).
There is another M1 5w40, it isn't mentioned on their site, but you can get it at most dealers. It isn't the ESP M (low ash formula).
Conspiracy theory- In order to satisfy "rules and regulations" MB had to state that they were using an "environmentally friendly" low ash oil in the M156. When asked "what oil is this", MB answers "uh"... *quick call to Mobil*... "This one right here". MB doesn't carry it at the dealer and I've never seen it on the shelves of an auto parts store (though, it was available for order). Now that the M156 is retired, Mobil 1 5w40 ESP Formula M is as well... Things that make you go "hmm".
W204 C63 Coupe, W166 ML350 BlueTEC, 928GT, C5 Z06 & IS300 race cars, EQE 4Matic+ on order
Originally Posted by Vash
D- check Mobil 1's site. M1 5w40 ESP M has already been discontied and replaced with a 0w30.
Indeed - it appears that it has. Not sure what they're going to use in Canada instead as the 0W30 X1 doesn't exist here (but the normal ESP 0W30 does). However, now you should ask yourself this: what oil is MB going to put in your C63 when you take it in for an oil change (hint: the only viscosities allowed in the M156 motor are 0W40 and 5W40)?
And just for the record, there never has been a "regular" Mobil 1 5W40 oil (unless you're thinking about the DELVAC / Turbo Diesel Truck oil in the US). The only Mobil 1 in that viscosity was the Formula M (both in the original non-ESP and later in the ESP formulation).
Originally Posted by Vash
You're asserting that MB only made the change from 0w40 to 5w40 in the M156 to save the cats and satisfy the ACEA, buuuuuuut are still filling it with 0w40 at the factory. This makes absolutely no sense.
I am asserting that MB NEVER MADE ANY SUCH CHANGE. I am asserting that MB still fills the M156 (at least the ones destined for use outsie of Western Europe) with Mobil 1 0W40.
Originally Posted by Vash
The M156 has been filled with 5w40 from the factory since that memo was sent out.
What freakin' memo? And no, it hasn't - see comment above.
Originally Posted by Vash
"Boutique" offerings shouldn't automatically be discounted/discredited. Analysis showing premature shearing would be interesting.
I completely agree. They should only be discredited when they purposefully use misleading language like "Product Application Specs" which folks are going to misinterpret as actual approvals. When I was four, I made a slingshot from a Y-shaped twig and an elastic band. Two of my product application specs were for it to be used for launching rockets and satelittes into outer space at the speed of light, and to teach hedgehogs how to play the guitar as good as Eric Clapton in 20 minutes or less. Seriously - those were my product application specs...
The only Amsoil oil that I know of that has received MB certification is their European Car Formula 5W-40, which has MB 229.51 approval. That, however, excludes it from the list of oils approved for use in M156 engines outside of Western Europe, which last time I checked included North America.
And, IIRC the issue with the Amsoil was sludge build-up and that it would realtively quickly turn thick (it behaved almost like a straight 40-ish grade oil. Redline was even worse - the TBN rapidly dropped (like the Amsoil) and it turned corrosive (acidic) so it actually ate some of the softer metals. The shear strength was never an issue with either one though (again IIRC). Google "Amsoil sludge" and "Red line oil TBN" and see what comes up.
The UOAs were on BITOG - I'm sure you'll find a bunch if you do a search there.
This is the M1 MB service puts in the M156. Note, not the ESP. This pic was posted by a member here. It was put in his C63.
The "memo" is the bulletin sent out from MB to every MB SA stating that 5w40 should be used in the M156 in place of 0w40. This was back in January or February of 2012.
At the time, some suggested it was implemented to lower costs and help with ease of stock. This isn't a valid explanation as 0w40 is still the recommended oil for the M157. For that same reason "standards and cats" isn't a valid explanation for the switch to 5w40 either.
This is the M1 MB service puts in the M156. Note, not the ESP. This pic was posted by a member here. It was put in his C63.
The "memo" is the bulletin sent out from MB to every MB SA stating that 5w40 should be used in the M156 in place of 0w40. This was back in January or February of 2012.
At the time, some suggested it was implemented to lower costs and help with ease of stock. This isn't a valid explanation as 0w40 is still the recommended oil for the M157. For that same reason "standards and cats" isn't a valid explanation for the switch to 5w40 either.
AMG says 0w40 is approved
bevo, the dealer and AMG PL
My last 2 services since 2013 both at AMG centers used 0w40 (listed on invoice)
The first few 2009-2012 were 5w40
Last change (July 2014) I specifically asked about the oil, they looked it up and said the 0w40 is spec'ed for the m156
I then asked what they would sell me for top up and is off the shelf M1 0w40
Where is this 'memo'?
My advisor is cool, I'll ask him for a copy, he's already given me my vmi
That is how I know the service history
Here's the invoice
When they put the vin in and the service code it pulls ip the required materials automatically
The same dealer did the first 3 changes
First 2 were 5w40
Third was 0w40
Different dealers for fourth and fifth, both AMG centrrs both used 0w40
It was some internal dealership communication sent out by AMG.
Why would they keep such important information from the customer?
Why does bevo, the dealers, AMG itself (via PL) say either 0w40 or 5w40 is approved and acceptable?
imo the 0w40 is better
Similar chemistry
Same at operating temp
Better cold start performance, faster pressure rise, faster lifter filling, less chance of pump cavitation
In reality, no difference, hence both being approved
Why would they keep such important information from the customer?
Why does bevo, the dealers, AMG itself (via PL) say either 0w40 or 5w40 is approved and acceptable?
No clue. But we all know dealerships are sketchy...
I posed the same question in pl a few days ago and they said both weights are approved now
As does the sept/2014 bevo docs
That is why the dealers use M1 0w40
11-13-2014, 10:53 PM
And no, it hasn't - see comment above.
