Diabolis

The ESP formula is a worse oil in terms of lubrication and engine protection properties than either the 5W40 Formula M or the 0W40. It is however more environmentally friendly and works with their diesel engines, which is why MB is pushing it across their entire range.

The 0W40 has the best cold and hot viscosity, VI, TBN and anti-wear additive package from the three. However, it does break down faster than the other two so you have to change it more often.

I guess what it comes down to is whether you're willing to spend the extra $$ to have better engine protection at the expense of changing (and toping up) the oil more often. As for the AMG-recommended switch to the 5W40 from the 0W40 mentioned earlier, it has nothing to do with the oil draining from the tappets - it is because of the oil burn-off rate at engine startup when the engine is cold.

Jon2007E63P30

No, don't do that. Mobil specifically says not to. The wear inhibitors are far higher and will trash your catalytic converter. Which is why MB went from 0W-40 to 5W-40 ESP.

I personally stay with the 0W-40. It is what the AMG Academy uses.

Jon2007E63P30

But these do not tell the whole story.
As I mentioned in my previous post, don't use mobil1 racing oil because "Mobil 1 Racing oils offer boosted levels of anti-wear protection (nominal zinc level of 1850 ppm) for extra engine protection in highly loaded flat tappet engine designs." and "Mobil 1 Racing oils are not recommended for everyday general street use where vehicles use catalytic exhaust converters."

So lets look at the zinc levels which are good for flat tappet design, like the M156.
from this document http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/...duct_Guide.pdf

0W-40 European Car Formula has 1000 phosphorus and 1100 zinc
5W-40 ESP has 800 phosphorus and 900 zinc

And that lady and gents is why I and the ADA use 0W-40.

AMG893

I can say from personal experience, i use 5W-40 ESP in E63/ML63/C63 with no problems at all.

General street driving.

And this stuff cant be bought here in Australia, can only get from Dealer. (Rip off)
Its actually cheaper for me to bring it in from ECS Tuning + pay Fedex 2 day shipping.

I wouldnt use anything else.

Weird, when looking at the log books from previous owner of C63, Benz dealer used Shell 0-40. ?? Anyway, when i changed to Mobile ESP 5w40, engine sounded ALOT quieter.

Karl901

I have no Cats.

Diabolis

Exactly. Glad there's someone else that can differentiate science form marketing!

Jasonoff

Whenever read about this topic everyone seems to have their own opinion. High phosphorus/zinc requirements for old engines or for break in. Where "800/900" seems to be the average for "normal" use.

Isn't it a tradeoff? Increased phosphorus/zinc can result in higher consumption?

Diabolis

No. The oil consumption is a result of the viscosity, not of the additive package. When the oil is cold, 0W40 is thinner than 5W40, which is why the consumption is higher.


The 5W40 Formula M (both ESP and non-ESP) oils that MB is now using are more environmentally friendly than the 0W40, but do NOT provide better engine protection or lubrication than the 0W40.

Diabolis

Contrary to what a number of people here believe, the MB 229.51 is NOT an updated or newer-spec to the 229.5 oil specification. The 229.51 is an update over the older 229.31 specification. 229.5 is an update over the older 229.3 spec. Unlike software revisions, these are not incremental updates (as in 229.51 is an update over 229.5). They are completely different specifications.

229.5 is still the CURRENT SPEC for the M156 motor, although MB is now also starting to push the more environmentally-friendly 229.51 oils - which unfortunately don't protect the engine as well.

229.51 is a LOW-ASH spec that has to be used with the MB diesel engines with the fine particulate filters. Ash is an additive used to control the acidity of the oil. Oil becomes acidic over time, and the ash is used to neutralize it. Yes, it does result in more harmful emissions out of your tailpipe, but it does protect the engine better.

THE LATEST BEVO SHEET INDICATING WHICH ENGINE OIL IS TO BE USED IN WHAT ENGINE IS THE 223.2 (January 2014). IT STILL CLEARLY STATES THAT THE ONLY FACTORY APROVED OIL SPEC FOR THE M156 MOTORS WORLD-WIDE IS 229.5, NOT 229.51. It is available at the Bevo site at http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/downlo...Spec_223_2.pdf.

Although it is somewhat irrelevant for the purposes of this particular discussion, yes, the AMG Driving Academy only uses the Mobil1 0W40 oil in the cars that get beat up around various race tracks. So does Porsche in all of their current models.

Jasonoff

Which is only the first few min of operating the engine. I could see that being a huge factor if you never drive with the oil at operating temp.


I agree, in theory, the increased phosphorus/zinc does have more wear protection. But does it overcome the potential "dry" starts discovered by AMG? Who knows?

Goes back to my point about most people just having their own opinion without any solid proof.

I think the whole idea of the 5W-40 ESP version being better over the non ESP 5W-40 is because of its increased viscosity.

Also, a 5W-40 will take longer to break down than a 0W-40 when introduced to the extreme heat the M156 can generate.

Either way, there's better oils out there than the Mobil products which have been proven by many oil analysis done over on bitog.

Diabolis

Actually, it is the first 15-20 minutes or so until the oil reaches full operating temperature (100 C or above), and it happens every time you start the car - which is when 90% of engine wear occurs.

The "dry" starts have nothing to do with the additive package. It was due to the design of the valve buckets, which is why MB changed them in the M156 to the ones used in the M159 SLS motor (I don't exactly remember when). Moreover, both the 0W40 and 5W40 oils (I am talking about fully synthetic oils like Mobil1, not the Castrol Syntec crap) will have equal viscosity when hot (when you shut your engine off) and will thus drain equally quickly form the tappets. If you're hearing the lifter clacking/tapping, it is either because of wear or because oil is not getting to them, which - if there is sludge build-up in the small ports - you can alleviate by using thinner oil with better detergents (the 0W40). It's not a matter of opinion, although I completely agree with you that people do have their opinions without any solid proof.

Nope. The 5W40 oil is only thicker than the 0W40 oil at start-up, when you WANT the thinner oil. At the oil's operating temperature (100 deg C or higher), they are equally thick.

Not even close. How fast the oil breaks down depends on the additive package, not on the viscosity, and again, the 0W40 is considerably better in this regard as well.

This I do agree with. I am merely commenting on the differences between the Mobil1 0W40 / 5W40 M / 5W40 M ESP.

Ingenieur

when you look at M156 there are dots under 229.5, 229.51 and 229.52?
with the note 2) which says it must be 0W40 or 5W40

the one with a dot under 229.5 says EXCEPT M156

Diabolis

For WESTERN EUROPE ONLY. The WORLDWIDE EXCEPT WESTERN EUROPE chart is below and only shows 229.5.


P.S. Which, BTW, has to do with the composition of the gasoline, not the engines themselves. Western Europe has much cleaner gas than the crap that comes out of our pumps.

Jasonoff

Yeah, my bad, I ended up rewording it a few min after posting. I was referring to the 5W40 ESP vs 5W40 non ESP.

From what I have heard (from race engine builders / experienced tuners) and read. When oil breaks down in an engine the operating viscosity moves toward the "cold" viscosity rating.

If you have 2 engines side by side on a test dyno. One with 0W40 and the other with 5W40. The operating temp (100C) viscosity after x hours would be lower on the 0W40. I remember even seeing proof of this on bitog from a few different race teams.

Diabolis

That is the case only with CONVENTIONAL, dinosaur-juice based oils. With synthetics, both oils are engineered to consistently perform as a straight 40-grade at operating temperatures even after prolonged use. IIRC even the BITOG site states this somewhere.

As for the actual specs of the oils we're talking about, this is from their respective spec sheets:

Mobil1 0W40:

Viscosity, cSt (ASTM D445)
@ 40ºC 75
@ 100ºC 13.5
Viscosity Index 185
MRV at -40ºC, cP (ASTM D4684) 31,000
HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC, (ASTM D4683) 3.8
Total Base Number (ASTM D2896) 11.8
Sulfated Ash, wt% (ASTM D874) 1.3
Phosphorous, wt% (ASTM D4981) 0.1
Flash Point, ºC (ASTM D92) 230
Density @15.6 ºC, g/ml (ASTM D4052) 0.85

Mobil1 5W40 Formula M:

SAE Grade 5W-40
Viscosity (ASTM D445)
cSt @ 40ºC 81
cSt @ 100ºC 13.4
Viscosity Index 167
Sulphated Ash, wt% (ASTM D874) 0.6
HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC (ASTM D4683) 3.8
Pour Point, ºC (ASTM D97) -39
Flash Point, ºC (ASTM D92) 236
Density @15.6º C g/ml ASTM D4052) 0.85

At 100 deg C, the Mobil1 0W40 is actually thicker than the 5W40.

Diabolis

BITOG link about synthetics:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/motor-oil-103/

Jasonoff

I belive it applies to both dyno an synthetic although more apparent in dyno oil.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/effects-of-shearing/

I ran a full synthetic (GC 0W30) in my S2000 for years. Even when it became a dedicated track car. I eventually switched to the Mobil Delvac 1 0W40 (Esso XD Extra rebranded) for the added protection to handle the heat.

It wasn't until talking to my tuner (after going FI) I started looking into using a higher "cold" weight.

Ingenieur

Thanks
Got it

Diabolis

All good - but again, a synthetic doesn't have nearly as many (if any) viscosity improvers as dyno juice, so in synthetics the cold to hot difference in viscosity is not nearly as important as it relates to shear strength as the anti-wear additives, which is all you have left protecting the engine bits when you get film shear (it's under the "So what does protect your engine when the hydrodynamic film is sheared?" heading in the page you linked). Quote:

After the base oil has sheared or squeezed out, The last line of defense is an additive that puts down a barrier film. This additive usually has higher levels of strength against shearing so it helps keep the wear down. Alright, here’s the catch. In 96, the lubrication industry changed from the SH to SJ API rated oil by reducing the barrier lubricant additives to help preserve cat converters on cars. Why?, It appears that the manufactures / lubrication experts are concerned with contaminating the cat converters with the standard antiwear additives in the motor oils so they have reduced the levels of antiwear additives to preserve the cats. Hmmm, guess what, When they introduced the new SL GF-3 oils, They left it the same. Ok, not out of the woods yet… Now the new GF-4 oils are in the works in hopes to be introduced next year around April. Have a guess one of the things they are going to do?, YEP, reduce the current antiwear additives again.

... which is what I've been saying all along about the 5W40 Formula M and in particular about the ESP oils. Again, the anti-wear additives are higher in the Mobil1 0W40 than either one of the 5W40 formulations. Not as environment and emission friendly, but better protection for the motor.

Don't get me wrong - I am not preaching the gospel about Mobil1 0W40 or any Mobil1 oil for that matter. I also have a custom-built stroker engine in my 928, and I also use 15W50 in it instead of the factory recommended 5W30 (or for that matter 0W40). The only point I am trying to make is that both of the 5W40 oils and in particular the 229.51 ESP spec from MB are now "MB recommended" for emissions purposes, not because they are better for your engine.


P.S. The shear strength (HTHS) of all three Mobil1 oils discussed is the same at 3.8 mPas. Once the oil film shears, it's the anti-wear additives in the 0W40 that make it the best choice of the three.

Jasonoff

Good to know. Yet another metric to consider when deciding on an oil.

Been searching for a few min now without much luck. Trying to find the Phosphorus/Zinc PPM levels and HTHS Viscosity for Mobil Delvac 1 0W-40.

http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English-...-esp-0w40.aspx

Diabolis

Sorry - I don't have that information either. A partial list is at http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/...duct_Guide.pdf but I don't see the Delvac among them. I can probably get the info though if you're interested.


Are you thinking of using Delvac in a diesel car or something heavier-duty?

Jasonoff

It's what I used in my S2000 track car (would see a constant 7-9000 RPM), and currently what a friend uses in his (same car).

If you have access to the info it would be interesting to see the data. It used to be Esso XD-3 Extra that was recently rebranded to the Mobil Delvac 1 a couple years back.

Diabolis

All the different MB oil specs and how they compare to one another (shows actual permissible engine component wear, additives, etc.):

http://www.lubritecinc.com/PDF/MB_Sp...ils_2012.1.pdf


(copied form last post at an old thread at BITOG - http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums...p/topics/31947)

B Feelgood

I know that on the SL55 there are 2 oil drain plugs "front and rear on the pan." On the C63 there is 1 oil drain plug on the pan and 1 plug on the oil cooler located in front of the passenger side wheel.

How many oil drain plugs are there on a 2009 SL63? I have located 1 main drain plug on the actual oil pan facing the driver's side and that's it. I took off the extra panel in front of the passenger side wheel that exposes the oil cooler with the fan attached to it but can't find anything that resembles a drain plug on the oil cooler.

Any help would be greatly appreciated...

Mort

On the C63 the oil cooler drain plug is on the right side of the center cooler just before the line that leads to the auxiliary cooler in the wheel well. There are some rubber flaps that may conceal it a little bit so you have to look closely. Not sure if it is the same on your SL63 but worth a look.