I have, recently, been having detonation/pinging problems in my CL63. Not sure if it is the gas or not. Normally run Shell 91 without issue. (However, there is a noticeable reduction in power....that's a different thread).

Currently running a tank of VP 93 octane which runs a lot better but still an occasional ping under light acceleration circumstances.

Have any of you CL63 owners experienced something like this?

Also, the car uses about 1 quart of oil per 2000 miles. No worries about the oil, but on past motors this burning of Mobil One has mucked up the cylinder heads and actually increased the compression ratio. Go figure.


Mark

PS On long roadtrips into mountain country I have used the available gas at 90 octane and no problems (course it is above 6000 feet).

 

Have always used Chevron 91 oct (usu from same station in Menlo) and have never had problem w/pinging or excessive oil burn....some 14K mis to-date on a couple of CL63s w/no issues....

Have a couple of SF colleagues who've each also had two or three CL63s to-date, and each has had no issues w/pinging or excess oil burn...and I believe each also uses Chevron 91 oct...

Am no expert re: fuel...but I vaguely recall reading Chevron is slightly better/more consistent quality fuel than Shell, given equal oct

 

Mercedes engines are capable of electronically compensating for lower octane fuels so I would doubt it is an octane issue at the pump. It is certainly possible that you got a "bad" tank of fuel, but I would guess your pinging is more related to a computer/sensor etc issue.

I currently am slightly over 11000 miles (delivery 5/07) and I have been using about one quart every 2000-2500 miles. If I am not mistaken the measurement marks on the dipstick are greater than one quart, so be careful with what you add.

 

OK. I am going to try Chevron. I have heard a number of other people say that Chevron has stopped the pinging problem they have had (not AMG engines...just other cars with pinging problems).

My dealer has told me that the 63 engines are oil burners. So not a mystery at this point. They have even taken to using thicker oil so as to slow down the burn rate. The last time I had it in for oil change they had to keep it an extra day while they went out and found the oil. (I never complained about oil usage....they did this on their own.) One quart of oil every 2000 miles does not bother me at all. But it is not what one would expect from this car.

I suspect that the 63 engines use looser oil rings than normal so as to reduce cylinder friction and get the most performance out of the engine. Pretty normal strategy for race engines but not usually used for street engines.

Whatever.

 

Oil burn is like perf/ceramic brake squeaking....my sense is it really varies by specific copy of car, no matter AMG/P/F....and techs make up stories as to what's normal and what's not....

Had one 996TTS that was an oil-burner; another 996TTS that wasn't; and my 997TT wasn't...(and PCCBs on one copy became squeaky after 5K mis; others had silent PCCBs)

Have a colleague who gets a new 65 every 6-12mos....he tells me some copies are oil-burners; others aren't....

Def annoying to have oil burn....like most owners of new AMG CLs, am def not a DIY guy; these are $150K+ daily commuter cars....so would hate to have to waste time stopping in to dealer every 6wks to top off oil....I trade-in cars frequently to minimize wasting my time w/mtce nonsense...

 

The major culprit to pinging is the lousy summer blend California fuel; also AMG 6.2 motor is more sensitive to low octane. The factory clearly recommends 93 oct which we don’t have in California
I’ve had the same pinging issues with my CLK63, usually pings under load on low rpm, and then the engine management system backs off on timing and masks the oct deficiency.
I’ve tried almost every brand of fuel out there including Chevron, Shell, Texaco none of them really took away the pinging.
I blended 100 oct racing fuel, bring up the oct to 96, and I noticed night and day difference.
The pinging went away, and it was way more responsive, and pulled allot harder to the redline.
Basically you have three choices, either put up with occasional pinging run pump gas, or complain to the dealer, and they most likely will update your engine management system (may resolve your problem), or blend high octane fuel.

 

The oil may be causing your preignition. I was using Mobile One in a forced induction car and it was pinging like crazy. I switched to Valvoline synthetic and the problem stopped. The fuel may not be entirely your problem; rather, it may be a combination of your oil and fuel. Switch your fuel and if that doesn't work try Valvoline or Castrol fully synthetic oil.

 

My experience with higher octane fuels is very similar to onofew. When 93 octane is in there, pinging mostly is gone and the car pulls much, much better than with 91 octane.

On the oil topic, I am very reluctant to switch away from Mobil one, Euro formula because I would rather not start a warranty war with the dealer. Although, I would love to try a change just to see if the pinging would stop.

Frankly, the car runs great on 93 octane. And I know that is what is specified by MB/AMG. But the 93 octane is about $5.65/gallon these days, so I would prefer not to have to pay that much extra on a regular basis.

The other thing that is mysterious is that it ran without pinging on 91 octane for about the first 7000 miles and only then did the pinging start (about 3 weeks ago). Maybe that is a function of the summer gas vs winter gas. Or maybe they have cranked up the ethanol portion and that has change things.

I suppose I could take samples of the gasolines down to the County Weights and Measures. That just seems a bit over the top.

 

As long as the oil meets or exceeds manufacturer specs they can't say a thing.

 

This is a good read on the topic:

http://www.synlube.com/synthetic.htm

" 100 % Synthetic, exclusive of carrier oil ".



The "100% Synthetic" relates to the Base Oil or Base Stock, it and only it (the Base Stock) is synthetically made. In case of Mobil 1, it was originally PAO (Poly-alpha-olefin).

The "exclusive of carrier oil" means in English that the Carrier or the Process Oil that is used to "carry" the additives is not synthetic oil and therefore, the final product (Motor Oil)
is NOT 100% Synthetic, even though the Base Oil is 100% Synthetic.



GOT THAT ?



Well then, what does Mobil (now ExxonMobil) have to say about that ?

Q: Is Mobil 1 a fully synthetic oil?

Yes, it’s 100% synthetic. The base stocks used in blending Mobil 1 are all "chemically constructed" instead of being simply segregated out of crude oil like conventional mineral oils.

Q: Then why does it say it contains a petroleum carrier for additives?

All motor oils contain additives that provide extra protection against wear, corrosion and engine deposits. These additives are usually high molecular weight materials – sometimes even solids. Conventional carrier oil is used to make these additives soluble. All motor oils will contain some of this carrier oil, usually only amounting to a small percentage of the finished product.

Source of above Questions and Answers is www.mobil,com and Mobil 1 promotional literature from 1999.

Q: How a Fully Synthetic oil differs from Conventional Oil ?

Conventional motor oils are refined from crude oil that has been pumped from the ground. While petroleum refining is an advanced science, naturally occurring components, such as sulfur, reactive hydrocarbons and other materials, can never be completely removed from petroleum, and thus may end up in conventional motor oil base stocks.
At the opposite end of the spectrum, providing the highest performance and protection level, are fully synthetic motor oils like Mobil 1 with SuperSyn family of lubricants, the leading synthetic motor oil and the "official Motor Oil of NASCAR".
Fully synthetic lubricants are formulated in several ways, using high-performance synthetic base oils. These products are produced either through a chemical reaction called "synthesis", severe refining or other complex chemical processes that yield a molecular uniformity and degree of purity that is impossible to achieve through normal refining process.

Source of above Question and Answer is NASCAR PERFORMANCE - Summer 2003 from article originated by ExxonMobil and titled "Getting up to Speed about SYNTHETIC LUBRICANTS".



AHA !!!

Are you clear on the subject NOW?

Perhaps a small question still lurks on your mind, how small a "small percentage" is?

Well, for that we have to go to a company like Infineum that produces the additive packages such a PARANOX 5043 and PARANOX 5510 for synthetic lubricants.

The active ingredients are 1.94% to 4.07% by Mass (weight) the balance is Petroleum Oil.

That is about 98% or 96% of the "Additive Package" in ready to blend form is Petroleum Oil.

They (Infineum) recommend treat rate for FULLY FORMULATED lubricant (Motor Oil) of 10 to 20% of the finished product.

NOW for you MATH WIZARDS:

If 100% of the Base Oil is 100% Synthetic;

If 98% to 96% of the "Additive Package is Petroleum";

If 10 to 20% of the finished product is the Additive Package;

Then, how many % of Petroleum and how many % of Synthetic are in the finished Motor Oil?

SOLUTION:

When the treat rate is 10% and the Additive Package contains 2% of active ingredients,
then the finished product will be 90% Synthetic with 9.8% Petroleum and 0.2% of additives.

When the treat rate is 20% and the Additive Package contains 4% of the active ingredients,
then the finished product will be 80% Synthetic with 19.2% Petroleum and 0.8% of additives.



The "small percentage" (according to Mobil) actually is 9.8% to 19.2%.

Many investors would be thrilled to get such a "small percentage" return on their money !!

(Just for the record, the average dividends for Mobil and Exxon over last 20 years have been in 2% to 4% range, and they jointly term this as "significant" return on Shareholders’ Equity in their Annual Reports). Currently the ExxonMobil (XOM) stock trades at about $60.00 per share while the quarterly dividend is in 27 to 30 cent range (1.9%)

In recent press release ExxonMobil proudly proclaimed this: "Through its dividends, the corporation has shared its success with its shareholders for more than 100 years and has increased its annual dividend payment to shareholders for 23 consecutive years." - even this statement is not true since ExxonMobil did not exist 23 years ago as it were two separate and Independent companies (Exxon AND Mobil).

OK then "100% Synthetic Motor Oil" is not really "100% Synthetic Motor Oil", but it is perfectly OK to say that it is 100% Synthetic Motor Oil, because the Base Stock is 100% Synthetic and that is what you really mean when the Motor Oil contains as much as 20% of Petroleum, because the Petroleum is not the Base Oil but the Carrier Oil for the Additives !!!

Now if YOU do not understand that, as most people do not, well that is just way too bad.

After all you just might not be willing to pay so much more for Synthetic Motor Oil if you knew it was not "100% Synthetic", or would you ?

Well, you probably are (paying too much)!

And there is more!

In November 2006, ExxonMobil on their www.Mobil 1.com website asked the web visitiors to:

"Ask your stickiest Question"

Well Jeff Willett of St. Peters, MO has asked this:

I have seen claims of gas chromatograph analysis of Mobil 1 Extended Performance SAE 5W-30 API SM dated October 2006, that state it is "mostly mineral oil". Realizing that you can not divulge your exact formulations, what do you say to the critics that claim you are using a high percentage of hydro processed mineral oil in Mobil 1, instead of the more expensive PAO or polyester base stocks?

Amazingly someone (anonymously) from Mobil 1 web has replied, and the reply was even posted briefly on the www.Mobil 1.com :

Just like other companies, we do not discuss our product formulations for obvious proprietary reasons.

Mobil 1 Extended Performance is formulated using combination of high performance fluids including PAO, along with proprietary system of performance additives. But in the end, it is also about performance. Mobil 1 is used by more Original Equipment Manufacturers than any other oil as factory fill in their vehicles. Also take note of the kind of testing we put our product through, including the "Las Vegas field testing" we recently completed. The Mobil 1 technology is also tested each weekend on the race track. In fact, more than 50 percent of NASCAR teams use Mobil 1.

WOW that is a response worthy of another politician !

And just to set the record straight:

1.) SynLube, Inc has been located in Las Vegas since 1989 so we have run our products in hundreds more vehicles in Las Vegas for 18 years - Mobil 1 less than 10 cars for 90 days, about 15,000 miles on the average is the "Las Vegas field test".

2.) The response does not even touch on the fact that the content of the Mobil 1 which is labeled as FULLY SYNTHETIC, is mostly PETROLEUM !

3.) Mobil 1 is used in just handful of vehicles, usually a specialty cars, while their OEM manufacturer uses conventional PETROLEUM in majority of their production, that is true about PORSCHE, GM, CHRYSLER, FORD, MERCEDES-BENZ, etc.

4.) NASCAR Racing engines last typically less than 50 hours of use, and there is no documentable advantage for teams that use Mobil 1 in their vehicles.

Mobil 1 sponsored race cars with Mobil 1 decals all over them fail to win and actually finish less often that their competitors that DO NOT USE Mobil 1 products!, Statistically teams using Mobil 1 are at DISADVANTAGE. Why if Mobil 1 is so superior do the Mobil 1 cars fail to win or even finish ?





Almost Synthetic is Synthetic even when it is Petroleum.

Well, if you think that Mobil or (ExxonMobil now) is less than honest, or even down right deceptive, that is not the worst of it.

Many other brands of Synthetics (Shell, Castrol, Amsoil, etc.) are NOT fully "synthetic" at all, at least by the definition used for years by chemists in all chemical companies around the World.

Some years ago SHELL in Europe and specifically in then West Germany introduced Motor Oils that were manufactured from UHVI Petroleum Base stock that although made from conventional crude oil, was subjected to additional processing not common on "normal" or "typical" Base Oil production. These (UHVI = Ultra High Viscosity Index) Base Stock containing Motor Oils were labeled by SHELL as "Synthetic".

Companies like MOTUL, MOBIL, AGIP in their respective markets did not like that labeling one bit, because the SHELL "synthetic" products were sold for substantially less then their own Brands of "Synthetic" Labeled products.

So years of lawsuits court orders, appeals, contra-suits clogged the courts of several European countries. At different times and in different countries contrary decisions or judgements were made. What was "synthetic" in one country on one day was "not synthetic" in another country at the same time. A real confusion for a region of globe that aimed to "unify" in the near future and become one great continent of "EURO".

What finally evolved from all this confusion was that the label term "Synthetic" is a marketing term, and therefore it is up to the "marketer" of the oil, to define what "synthetic" is.

AHA !!!

So now anytime you subject conventional petroleum oil to any unconventional process or reaction, irrespective of if it works (improves) or not the Base Oil, you can for all practical purposes call it "synthetic" i.e., Man-made.

SAE which had in its lubricant specifications not only definitions of what constitutes a "synthetic" but also a list of specific chemicals used as lubricants that were considered "synthetic".

Although SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) is US based organization, it aims at Global reach, and having one standard in the USA and yet another in most of Europe was deemed as bad as having English and Metric standards of measurements (at the same time).

The decision was made to go along with Europe (after all Metric is better), and as a result all reference to "synthetic" in respect to lubricants was deleted from ALL future SAE publications of SAE Standards relating to Lubricants.

Since SAE is a non-profit organization of Engineers, it had no desire nor financial might to involve itself in never ending lawsuits with mighty oil and chemical companies, so the simple "deletion" of all references to "synthetic" was perhaps the best and easiest decision.

When opportunity is there, it is only natural that some one will seize it.

It was CASTROL with their Syntec® Synthetic Motor Oil, which when first introduced up until December 1997 it was formulated with PAO sourced from Mobil.

In January 1998 CASTROL started to use much cheaper hydroprocessed petroleum base oils from SHELL. Mobil lost the opportunity to sell PAO to CASTROL.

Mobil Oil complained to National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, which in April 1999 finally ruled in CASTROL favor, specifically allowing Syntec® Motor Oil made from SHELL XHVI slack wax stream to be sold and promoted as "synthetic".

To celebrate the victory, CASTROL Company spokesperson said:

"CASTROL is proud to be a major worldwide provider of synthetic formulated lubricants, and looks forward to continued participation in this exciting market. CASTROL is committed to upgrading its products and producing the highest quality synthetic engine oils. We will continue to explore ways to ensure that Syntec® remains a leading performer in the synthetic category"

WOW, someone missed their calling to be a Politician !!!

So now "synthetic" can be marketed as "synthetic" even if it is not a "synthetic"!

A slight clue that as good as "synthetic" is really not all that good, can be found on www.castrol.com , when the recommended oil change interval for CASTROL Syntec® Fully Synthetic Motor Oil is: 3,000 miles or 3 months – just the same as for ordinary conventional Petroleum Motor Oil.

A PENNZOIL with PENNZANE® is not any better and PENNZOIL claims are downright deceptive. The PENNZANE® which is touted as "developed for and used by NASA" has bee actually developed for used in vacuum pumps, and computer drives. It was never intended for or ever used in any engine! PENNZANE® in its pure form costs about $400.00 per US quarts.
It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that in the Consumer version of the "synthetic" motor oil that sells for under $4.00 there is about a drop of PENNZANE® in 5 Gallons !

The Back Label of PENNZOIL "Synthetic" with PENNZANE® also instructs the user to: "change motor oil EVERY 3,000 miles for best performance" !

Why then it costs four times as much conventional Petroleum Motor Oil if it is not all that much better, and definitely does not last in service any longer?

Someone has to PAY extra premium for the "synthetic" on the label, even if the content is not "synthetic".



The SynLube™ Difference

So now that you know the thick and thin of "synthetic", perhaps you finally could and would appreciate the 100% Synthetic Colloidal Super Lubricants from SynLube, Inc.

SynLube Lube-4-Life Lubricants are TOTALLY FULLY 100% Synthetic and NON-Petroleum!
no asterisks, no disclaimers, no excuses, no nonsense, no fine print
– 100% really means 100%.
The Five different Base Oils that are blended together are all
100% Man-made Synthetics - and NON-Petroleum!.
The Three colloidal solid lubricants are also
100% Man-made Synthetics .
The various additives that are incorporated into the final
SynLube™ Lube-4-Life ® products are all
100% Man-made Synthetics all directly blended into the synthetic Base Oils, without the use of ANY Petroleum Carrier Oil or Conventional Process Oils.


Conclusion

Perhaps today being honest and truthful is an old-fashioned and obsolete business ethic, but that’s how we at SynLube, Inc. have been doing business ever since 1969.

No we are not the "First" and we are not the "Biggest" when it comes to lubricants, but being what we are, when it comes to lubrication, we are and can afford to be the "Best in the Solar System, not just the Earth".

And NOW - it is up to YOU the consumer and the vehicle owner or operator.

With every penny that you spend you vote for the product that you ultimately buy and use.

YOU have the final choice!

Will you choose to support products that are NOT what they say or claim ? Will you choose products that promote false advertising?

Or will you choose the very best product, that in the long run cost much less to use, than the mediocre?

When it comes to lubricants for your vehicle(s) the choice is simple:

 

Well......that is far too much info for me to even begin to digest.

I think I will just let the darn car ping.

 

From what my experience, when the Mobil 1 mixes with fuel it causes the fuel to lose its octane stability. In other words, when it mixes with fuel, your effective octane rating is lowered because the Mobile 1 is not stable and preignites. I didn't have that problem when I switched to Valvoline synthetic. The engine went from pinging like crazy to smooth as a sewing machine.

 

OK. That I can understand.

Interesting update: I am now running a tank of Chevron 91 octane. So far, there is no pinging!

I have no idea what is going on. Except maybe Shell gas is not so good. Or maybe the Shell station is cheating on me. Or maybe Chevron gas mixes differently with the chemicals in the Mobil synthetic and it does not ping.