CPD SLK

Just like Ingenieur said, I didn't see it on the list...just curious if it still meets specs?

bhamg

Here are two UOA's from Subi turbos, both at 5k miles. My only observation is that they both sheared down to 30 weight rather quickly. I wouldn't have expected that. You can be the judge on the rest. Different motor though...

Edit: Disregard the "Eneos" on the second UOA, the poster confirmed it was Amsoil Euro.

Karl901

On Amsoil web site they list their oil as meeting MB specs.

Jasonoff

I have first hand proof of this. Tried the Amsoil concoction in my track only S2000 once. It seemed to have sheered down to a 30 weight after one track day.

hyperion667

is it still oil if it's 'synthetic'?

glennhl

Pennzoil Ultra Euro 5W-40. You can get it for a good price on Amazon.

I had a 2006 Vette and there was a guy on Corvette Forum that alway had his used oil analyzed and he ran several different oils looking for the best. The Pennzoil Ultra did the best.

Diabolis

Read the whole thread at https://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w...rning-off.html - I went into some details about the oils there. FYI, Mobil 1 is a group IV, man-made synthetic base stoock. Castrol Syntec is group III, hydrocracked dino juice. As for the Motul - well, read the thread, but Mobil 1 0W40 still comes out on top.

Jasonoff

Thanks for the link. I am however looking at the 8100 X-Max 0W40 not the X-Cess 5W40.

Would you happen to have any links to back up the base stock claims on the Mobil 1 Euro Car Formula 0W40? Doesn't really specify in the datasheet below.

http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lub...l_1_0W-40.aspx

Diabolis

MOTUL 8100 X-max 0W-40 (from your spec sheet):


Viscosity grade SAE J 300 0W-40
Density at 20°C (68°F) ASTM D1298 0.841
Viscosity at 40°C (104°F) ASTM D445 76.2 mm²/s
Viscosity at 100°C (212°F) ASTM D445 13.5 mm²/s
HTHS viscosity at 150°C (302°F) ASTM D4741 3.6 mPa.s
Viscosity Index ASTM D2270 184
Pour point ASTM D97 -45°C / -49°F
Flash point ASTM D92 228°C / 442°F
Sulfated ash ASTM D874 1.1% weight
TBN ASTM D2896 10.1 mg KOH/g


Mobil 1 0W-40 (from http://www.mobil.ca/Canada-English-L...il-1_0w40.aspx#)

Viscosity, cSt (ASTM D445)
@ 40º C 75
@ 100º C 13.5
Viscosity Index 185
MRV at -40ºC, cP (ASTM D4684 apparent viscosity) 35000
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


So - the Mobil 1 is equal or better in all regards that the Motul. Thinner at cold temps, higher film shear strength, better VI, higher phosphorus content for neutralizing acids, higher flash point and a higher TBN.


As for the base stocks, what passes (i.e. can be legally classified) as "synthetic" in the USA is different from the rest of the world. In the US, almost everyone (including ExxonMobil and thus Mobil 1) is now using at least some Group III base stock as it is a lot chaper to manufacture than a fully synthesized PAO Group IV stock. In Canada and the rest of the world, PAO was still listed as the base stock for Mobil 1 0W40 last time I looked at the ingredients sheet, which is now suspiciously absent from their web site. But, unless the big oil companies have managed to sneak one past us they way they have in the States, they can't call it "fully synthetic" here unless it is PAO based. IIRC the Canadian Mobil 1 stock is the C10 based PAO from the Gravenchon France lab, not the Beaumont Texas refinery - again, unless things have changed in the last few years. Now, some of the additives (waxes, etc.) and the carrier stock for the additive packages are all derived from conventional oil, so even a fully synthetic group IV is going to have some percentage of conventional dino based oil in it. This thread is about 7 years old now, but you can have a look at http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums...topics/1029178 just to add to your confision.


At the end of the day though, it's not the base stock that you ought to be looking at but the whole package as a whole. There are Group III oils that are overall better for the engine than a Group IV or even a Group V based ester stock oil. And, the Mobil 1 0W40 in Canada still meets the old MB 229.3 spec (the predecessor to 229.5) - which had even HIGHER engine protection additives but was not as enery efficient or eco friendly. That right there ought to tilt the scales in its favor. All I am saying is - from the specs that are avialble to us at this time, the Mobil 1 0W40 appears to offer the best engine protection from all the 229.5 spec oils available here. Period.

Jasonoff

Humm no pour point figure for the M1 0W40. I agree it seems like a decent oil. The whole AMG switch with little to no reasoning is slightly concerning.

Now lets toss the Penzoil Ultra and Shell Helix Ultra in the mix for ****s and giggles.

http://www.pennzoil.ca/wp-content/up...ler-en-TDS.pdf

http://www.epc.shell.com/docs/GPCDOC...GE)_TDS_v2.pdf

bhamg

I currently use PU Euro 5W-40 in a BMW M S54 engine. The PU has all the important manufacturers approvals that I look for and is a BMW LL-01 oil. It's also MB 229.5 and 229.3 approved. The 229.3 approval was actually a consideration in this case and for the same reason that Diabolis indicates - for having an additive level formulation that meets "old time" standards yet incorporates the advances specified by the current standards and requirements for engine cleanliness, mileage improvements, resistance to shear over extended drain intervals etc. So in a sense that is the best of both worlds on paper.

Jasonoff

The problem is getting the PU Euro here in Canada

glennhl

Doesn't Amazon ship to Canada?

CPD SLK

Had no idea about the shearing issue...new to me...I use it in my Trans Am. Have done so for years now....argh! Anyone ask AMG in the PL? Might be worth a shot, although they seem too stuck up to answer simple questions on that forum at times...they couldn't even offer alignment specs (prolly b/c they want you to go to the dealer and get it done).

Jasonoff

They do, but we get bent over with taxes and brokerage.

bhamg

Too bad. The price of four 5L jugs of Motul X-cess via eBay went up from the $136 I paid a year ago to a now current price of $188. Good thing my total order was for 32L. I pay under $6.50/L delivered for PU Euro on Amazon subscription.

andya34

Wow is that right brooklands use 5 40 ?? interesting

glennhl

That sucks, but it's probably worth it to live in such a nice country.

Ingenieur

Who said AMG only recommends 5w40?
The m156 spec for RoW ( except eastern europe ) is 229.5 0w40 OR 5w40
The latest is current as of sept/2014
Which is what some of the PL mods have said?
My last change in July was at a AMG performance center the invoice indicated 0w40
Earlier changes per the vmi were 5w40 until 2012, then 0w40

Ingenieur

I would not use a suppliers participation in F1 as validation of the product
The teams will use whom ever they can make the best deal with
Elf, shell, total, castrol, mobil, etc
The oils are all of equal quality and only are run for 200 miles
As a side note the piston/cylinders, rings, cranks, bearings, etc are made by a few suppliers, sometimes only 1 like mahle

A good article on f1 oils
At the bottom is a list of years and number of races, petronus is a rookie compared to mobil, shells, and most others
http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/lubricants.html

bhamg

Just checked - the Subscribe 'n Save price on Amazon has dropped to $32.51 for six bottles.

Diabolis

Ingenieur is correct - oil for racing applications (and in particualar F1 where they use straight 60-grade that is pumped in hot) needs to have very different properties from oil that you use on the street, and just because Petronas is pouring a 5h!tl0ad of advertising money into the Mercedes AMG F1 team it doesn't make it a good oil for street applications even if it is half-decent for the F1 cars. For the best engine protection, you want the highest film shear strength, lowest visocisty when cold (and highest when hot), and an oil with full SAPS (sulfated ash, phosphorus and sulfur). Don't get too caught up on the base stock as it is a lot less important now that the big oil companies can "fine-tune" the group III stock and end up witn almost equal molecule lengths. Come to think of it, now that Ethanol has been mandated in US gasoline and all the gas refineries have retooled to produce the cheapest garbage (er, gasoline) possible and rely exclusively on the Ethannol to bring up the octane, the SAPS content becomes even more important to neutralize all the crap in the oil sump and provide continuous protection against wear (I gather most of us don't change the oil every 500 miles).


As I said, any 0W40 or 5W40 oil that meets the older MB 229.3 and current 229.5 spec would be an excellent choice. All other things being equal, your cats will only last 15 instead of 20 years but the critical engine bits will last 15 instead of 8.

Jasonoff

Mobil 1 0W-40 ... Exxon Mobil Corporation, FAIRFAX, Virginia/USA
http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten/229.3_en.html

Which one is this that's on the 229.3 list? There's no mention about it being the Euro Car Formula.
http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lub...l_1_0W-40.aspx

Diabolis

I don't understand what you're asking... it is listed on the 229.3 BEVO spec (first link) and also states that it has MB-Approval 229.3 and 229.5 on the product page (second link - although that is the US site but the Canadian one also says the same thing). There is only one Mobil 1 0W40 oil in Canada (and AFAIK in the US as well). The "Euro car formula" may or may not have been some USA marketing jargon at some point, but there is only one Mobil 1 0W40 oil.

Ingenieur

In the text it says euro car formula (NA only) protection rest of world
As was said euro formula is a NA marketing thing
It is the base mobil 1 0w40 and complies with 229.3 and .5
Imho hard to find better