Oil consumption way up with Mobil 1 0W-40
Motul - The last two fills I averaged 3/4 L consumption per 5k miles.
Mobil - On my first M1 fill I've already used 1 L in 2.3k miles.
The Motul oil you were using you state x-cess is this a high mileage blend or just a fancy trade name?
Have you done stop and go driving , highway, sport driving or has the car use been similar.
Also the 63 likes long highway drives, with the occasion ***wiping on a overzealous BMW.
Everyone seems to have the M on the trunk but not in front where it counts

Or maybe they do???
I like to drain pan and cooler into a rad collection pan then replace with two 4.55 liter ( magic marker the level of the new oil) jugs + fleece filter.
When filled back up drain the pan into the two jugs to see what consumption actually is. So far no issues 1/2 liter at best is the usage, not including what is dripping from the filter, have not checked the CC lately but after 2000km nothing but the crankcase smell. Hibernation is upon us here in Canada, hurry up spring, today -20C
Trending Topics
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
I switched from Mobil 1 for that reason. Not a believer anymore.
Im running 5w50 all the time because its the better Oil and has better additives.
Ive done many top speed runs in the Autobahn without any issues




If this guy's car isn't old or beat, then he really shouldn't be using that much oil, regardless of the weight. Or more than these cars generally go through anyway.
Last edited by BLKROKT; Feb 16, 2015 at 10:01 AM.
I'm not noticing pools of oil anywhere (ground or skid plates, I checked)

But...a 5qt jug between the two was 50%, so I went back to Mobil1 for the time being. It's winter in California anyways...mind as well use slightly thinner viscosity oil. Better for cold start ups!
However, if you purchase two 5qt jugs of Mobil1 you should have enough oil left over to last you to the next oil change (assuming you're doing 6,000 mile intervals). I almost always end up filling 8.5 quarts instead of the full 9, so there's at least 1.5 quarts of unused oil left to fill up when it runs low. I'm running the catch can as well.

I have a theory about the headbolts. Could it be the build up in carbon in the cylinders is causing the compression ratio to go up and putting strain on the bolts?
Catalyst poisoning occurs when the catalytic converter is exposed to exhaust containing substances that coat the working surfaces, encapsulating the catalyst so that it cannot contact and treat the exhaust. The most-notable contaminant is lead, so vehicles equipped with catalytic converters can be run only on unleaded fuels. Other common catalyst poisons include fuel sulfur, manganese (originating primarily from the gasoline additive MMT), and silicone, which can enter the exhaust stream if the engine has a leak that allows coolant into the combustion chamber. Phosphorus is another catalyst contaminant. Although phosphorus is no longer used in gasoline, it (and zinc, another low-level catalyst contaminant) was until recently widely used in engine oil antiwear additives such as zinc dithiophosphate (ZDDP). Beginning in 2004, a limit of phosphorus concentration in engine oils was adopted in the API SM and ILSAC GF-4 specifications.
It is *EXTREMELY* unlikely that the headbolt issue is in any way realted to carbon build-up. The M156 is not a direct injection motor, so the heads stay relatively clean when comared with a FSI engine like on my old B7 RS4. Carbon build-up in the intake manifold could rob you of some power, but in order to increase the compression to the point where the head bolts would pop, you would need so much build-up on the piston heads themselves that it would be physically impossible for them not to whack your valves, plugs, cylinder head and come right out through your hood.





