oinick

I am wondering if I should go ahead and get my first service (Interval A) done before 10K miles in my GL320. It seems like a long time to go before the first change (and then in between changes) in a high compression engine, but MB is using very specific synthetic oil in its diesel engines. No doubt, if one follows the prescribed service intervals and performs the required checks, MB will honor both the original and extended warranties. The MB onboard computer seems to be like the BMW system that monitors when oil and other service should be done based on driving style and wear and tear on the engine.

Nonetheless, I would appreciate opinions about whether to have additional oil changes done between the required ones. If you think it is a good idea to have extra ones done, do you have any specific information (general, anecdotal, or specific) as to why?

Thanks.

jpeardm

There's pretty good debates about this on most of the car forums and it seems to come down to that there really is no reason to change the synthetics more often than the life indicators specify. Between the synthetic oil, engine materials and clean fuels, the oil just does not become contaminated as with the older petroleum products. Jiffy Lube and the rest have had us brainwashed into the 3000 mi change interval. That being said, of course there's no harm in changing more often and maybe in some cases of severe use it would prolong engine life. Anyway unless you were to have the oil tested at time of change there is no way to really know the state of the oil after the manufacturers suggested interval. On my GL I'm going to wait to A service and not change inbetween.

jhcicco

I was watching Modern Marvels (OIL) on the history channel and it stated that the synthetics oils are so good that the airline industry does not change the engine oils when the planes get serviced. They only top the oil off.

So I would wait for the 10K mile service.

lkchris

It may "seem like it" but it's not.

This is the 21st century.

lkchris

This was also the case with the big radials in WW2.

However, it was because they came back from flight having burned off so much that a refill was almost the same as a change.

oinick

This "seems" like a slightly hostile response. Wonder what that's about? I simply have never owned a diesel before and was looking for input from others.
.

Waiting-4-550

Synthetic oil rocks for everyone except low-life mechanics who live off oil changes

jhcicco

We had a 86 BMW 524TD (Turbo Diesel - only imported them for 2 years before GM made diesel engines a swear word), drove it for 18 years, 309K miles before we had to shoot it. Never had a problem with the engine and changed the oil every 7500 miles. I would expect that the Synthetic oils would be even better than the real stuff.

boxboss

It isn't necessary. If there is a problem, your warranty will not be voided if you've followed the recommended oil change intervals.

Synthetics can go 10k-15k miles with no problems.

Jlight

I drive a BMW and only use synth. at the BMW intervals - HOWEVER I did do one extra oil change after I put 1500 miles on the car. Just a little extra security

MERCFAN

I will do the first oil change at about 2500 miles. Then after I will follow the recomended oil changes. When a engine is new the first hours of work are when the break in is done. By this time the moving parts, special the rings, are acomodating in their new path of work. By doing that microns of metal will be removed from either the ring and the bore hole. This smal particles are then cleaned by the lubrification oil. This little parts of metal are now mixed with lubrication oil, and until you change the oil they will be there and act as an abrasive material when in contact with other moving parts of the engine. The only way to remove them is changing the oil. Now we can remove them at 2.500 miles or at 10.000 miles as STD recomended. This will not harm your engine but will protect the engine ensuring a longer life. As simple as that. Question. Why MB engines do not recomend this change intervals? Well I think because the damage is not considerable and do not afect to much the life of your engine because the oil filter is retaning about 90% of them. Is up to you now.

CE750

both on my E320 CDI, and my X5, I've done a "break-in" oil change at 1200 miles, then I do them again at 1/2 the manufacturer intervals.. so 5000K for the MB, and 7500K for the BMW. I don't believe in 10000-15000 mile oil changes, and I don't believe in 100,000 mile transmissions!

oinick

Thanks for everyone's opinions. I have decided to do the minimum oil changes as indicated by the car.

I bought the MBUSA extended warranty, which, while not the exact same as the original 50K MB new car warranty, will certainly cover the drivetrain issues that documented oil changes at the dealer will support.

You may note from my profile that I am a big fan of BMW products, and I have been so because of the included maintenance. Indeed my GL is the first MB I have ever bought and the first diesel I have ever bought as well. The BMW is a great car, and I had an X5 that I really loved, but it was just too small, especially for carpooling kids. I was disappointed that the X5 revision for this year was so small and that the rear seat was a joke. Frankly, I was holding out for the X5 because of the included maintenance.

That said, I am not sure that included maintenance is really all that big a deal. In my case, I just sold my 2005 545i with 19000 miles on it. The only thing the included maintenance ever paid for was TWO oil changes, and I had to fight BMW to get them because the onboard computer said I had not driven enough to earn them. This is not the same as warranty coverage, because the car was in the shop frequently for issues related to the iDrive and the satellite radio making a popping noise.

In the end, if you're spending over $65K on a car, you can probably afford to spend a couple hundred bucks every 10K miles on services. In my case, with the extended warranty, I will do the minimum and count on the $3500 I paid for the warranty to do the rest. I have to agree that included maintenance is not free, only prepaid.

Waiting-4-550

I too am leaving BMW for the GL because their X5 just doesn't have enough utility.. I need an SUV now not an SAV.. Bimmer messed up on the new X5. Third row of seats is a preposterous joke

CE750

Oddly, I Agree about the utility, which is why we bought an X5.. it was time to drive something a bit more sporty and fun than an Escalade, as we never really used the space in our XC90, much less a larger SUV. The CDI option on the GL was tempting however, but the Aluminum V6 doesn't have the same appeal to me as the iron block I-6. That BMW V8 is amazing, and the driving manner of the sports package equiped X5 is also amazing for a sedan, much less an "SAV"

To each their own I guess.

As for the original question.. just because you're going to have a 100,000 mile warranty doesn't negate taking "better" care of the engine. First off, you'll have a nicer running engine with less trouble. Secondly, you may end up putting 100,000 miles on the car inside of 5 years.. it's possible, as I've done it. For me a car is a cash purchase and it's meant to last 7-9 years, so I don't mind the extra maintenance.

Nevada Jack

Hey Sam...that 382 HP V8 in the GL550 isn't any slouch either. I have not had the opportunity yet to drive the GL550, but with the ADSII and the Air Suspension it should have some pretty nice driving manners itself.

But as you say, "to each his own."

Nice to see your post here...

CE750

Actually the Escalade has over 400 and I think it's junk.. so it's not the HP that drove me to BMW.... it's the lack of utility for lack of a better description! It is after all an SAV not an SUV.. For SUV's I'd take the GL over the rest in a heart beat.

btw.. totally off topic, but while I'm on the Escalade, check this BBC Top Gear out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5GlDagXfy4

Wolfgang

The OM642 V6 has grey cast iron cylinder sleeves set into the cast aluminum block.

The OM648 I6 has a grey cast crankcase with multivalve aluminum head.

Both are great engines IMNSHO. But the V6 seems to be better suited for trucks due to it's higher and much wider torque curve. Here's a plot,
OM642 DE 30 LA vs OM648 DE32 LA.

CE750

Indeed the V6 does indeed produce more power, but I'm told it's more due to improvements in the 3rd generation CDI (fuel delivery) technology than the type of motor design (I vs. V or 3.2 vs 3.0). The reason MB went to a V6 (or so I am told) was to get them to better fit into the SUV's.. The I6 would be to long and would make mating it to the 7G trans next to impossible. The Al issue was also a weight issue, and not so much an powerplant engineering decision by the engineers. I have Renntech tuning on my CDI and get more or less 221hp/401 feet/lbs of torque whic is so much more than that car really needs.. so I'm sure that kind of power would be well suited to a 5000lbs SUV.

Wolfgang

Lets just compare the plots.

The power increase is small, from 201 to 215 hp, going from the I6 to V6. Wouldn't folks who lust after power buy a 5.5 liter gasser, with 382+ hp?

For torque things changed more, going from the narrow I6 band, which has max torque over just 800 rpms, to a band where max torque is available over 1400 rpms in the V6. This may have to do with the electrically controlled Garrett VNT turbocharger.

I remember for the gasoline engines way back in 1998, the torque curve width was one of the biggest changes as well, when MB switched from I6 to V6 engines, the M112, which had to do with more efficient intake runners.

CE750

The whole Torque vs HP thing is complicated.. I know for example my CDI is slower off the line than the E500 was by about .7 seconds, but in a certain range.. say from 50-90mph it's faster.. More over, BBC Top Gear tested the BMW 530D vs the 545i and while the 530D had more torque, it was about .5 seconds slower off the line, and had a higher top speed. So while the new diesels are impressive indeed in terms of power, they're not the same as the high output V8's.. But then they're getting 2x the fuel efficiency.