Car has no oil leaks. No coolant leaks. I never used to bother whatever dealer or Indy put in. Always figured they was putting in junk oil since they buy in bulk. Car has 90k miles. Average 8k a year and figured it was fine to do oil changes around every 9months. Car is 2014 model s550. I bought cases of mobile 1 synthetic 0w-40 since Mercedes factory specs say to use it. I have to put in a quart almost every few months. Is this normal? Older engine burning way more oil? Should I switch to another brand like Motul or Penzoil platinum? I would want to use Valvoline restore and protect since it safety removes carbon buildup and doesn’t seem as hardcore as an engine flush but it doesn’t come in 0w-40 or 5w-40.
Valvoline engine cleanup is targeted for engine with lower viscosity. No match available for MB Approved 0/5w40.
Without parting from MB Approval... you can upgrade to an ester oil such as MOTUL 5W40 API-SP. It wistands heat better than basic stock can.
Excessive oil consumption falls in two categories.
Burned through loose piston rings or vaporized through PCV into intake.
Both of these issues can be cancelled with better oiling given cylinders bores are not scored.
You need to keep better track of how many miles you are doing in between the adds (and your changes as well). Once we know the exact amount between adds, we can give better advice. Many motors do use oil and it is completely normal. We had a Volvo V70 that used a quart every 1500 miles, and it never wavered over 15 years and 180k miles.
Haven't there been a few posts here about clogged PCV systems on higher mileage cars?
I was literally driving and thinking about the pcv valve and crank case breather hose or ventilation system of past cars. This seems like the only logical answer since I don’t have a catch can. M278 are notorious for cylinder wall scoring as well so that may be a possibility.
Valvoline engine cleanup is targeted for engine with lower viscosity. No match available for MB Approved 0/5w40.
Without parting from MB Approval... you can upgrade to an ester oil such as MOTUL 5W40 API-SP. It wistands heat better than basic stock can.
Excessive oil consumption falls in two categories.
Burned through loose piston rings or vaporized through PCV into intake.
Both of these issues can be cancelled with better oiling given cylinders bores are not scored.
Great insight. Engine never tuned and I don’t drive it hard. Maybe engine is just worn out. I need to just accept internal leaks and adding oil like most other modern cars consuming oil usually through piston rings (Toyota 2azfe).
Maybe I need to utilize a “high mileage” oil.
Strange thing is how dark new oil is. Usually oil is a dark amber color. This stuff looks way darker.
I was literally driving and thinking about the pcv valve and crank case breather hose or ventilation system of past cars. This seems like the only logical answer since I don’t have a catch can. M278 are notorious for cylinder wall scoring as well so that may be a possibility.
You're right abot cylinder scoring on M278's. It only applied to 2014 or earlier M278's in the S-class. And I think there was a mid year change that goes by engine numbers. If your production date is early 2014 or late 2013 you can be sure you're in the era of that being a problem. Not much you can do except continue with business as usual until it becomes unbearable, or you sell the car before it gets too bad.
Mobil One isn't the highest quality oil, but they have a marketing agreement with MB I am sure they pay to play on that Motul is what my indy puts in now that my factory warranty is over and he thinks it is WAY better quality than Mobil 1 and about the same price.
Mobil One isn't the highest quality oil, but they have a marketing agreement with MB I am sure they pay to play on that Motul is what my indy puts in now that my factory warranty is over and he thinks MOTUL is WAY better quality than Mobil 1 and about the same price.
+1: I concur.
MOTUL ester oil takes the heat better with out shading viscosity.
Mobil1 makes a lot of great lubricants but 0w40 stock isn't one.
Mercedes-Benz approval oil should be good for you , I'm a Castrol fan but I would have not used it if it was no the approval list by Mercedes-Benz .Anyway, 0W40 is too thin to me as well .
You're right abot cylinder scoring on M278's. It only applied to 2014 or earlier M278's in the S-class. And I think there was a mid year change that goes by engine numbers. If your production date is early 2014 or late 2013 you can be sure you're in the era of that being a problem. Not much you can do except continue with business as usual until it becomes unbearable, or you sell the car before it gets too bad.
You can search "silitec M278" or something like that on the forum or Google.
I saw a tasos video on YouTube who kind of said that the switch from silitec liners to steel or another material mid cycle on m278 engines was mainly a myth. I know a lot of people say the s560 4.0 m176 is a better engine due to cylinder wall material and open deck design. Cylinder wall scoring has happened to all makes a models when manufacturers cheap out. It’s happens to Porsche flat 6 engines everytime they put profits over quality in various 911’s. I think last one was 997 that had those issues.
I always liked the setup of this car with the m278. Low end torque and horsepower at lower rpm. Solid 7G tronic instead of 9 speed which I feared would be not as strong and cause unnecessary wear due to hunting gears constantly. I never wanted the 4.0 block due to the hot v configuration. I figure it was just too much heat from turbo to engine and vice versa that would make all plastic and gaskets fail prematurely.
I saw a tasos video on YouTube who kind of said that the switch from silitec liners to steel or another material mid cycle on m278 engines was mainly a myth. I know a lot of people say the s560 4.0 m176 is a better engine due to cylinder wall material and open deck design. Cylinder wall scoring has happened to all makes a models when manufacturers cheap out. It’s happens to Porsche flat 6 engines everytime they put profits over quality in various 911’s. I think last one was 997 that had those issues.
I always liked the setup of this car with the m278. Low end torque and horsepower at lower rpm. Solid 7G tronic instead of 9 speed which I feared would be not as strong and cause unnecessary wear due to hunting gears constantly. I never wanted the 4.0 block due to the hot v configuration. I figure it was just too much heat from turbo to engine and vice versa that would make all plastic and gaskets fail prematurely.
Maybe try Castrol Edge 5W-50. I've started using it and like it a lot. Smoother engine at idle and improved throttle response. Relatively inexpensive test. It is API SP rated.
just looking for a post on the 221 and search brought this up
thought it of interest.... Zinc is helpful for reducing cam wear, but it messes up CATs so they have been removing it over the years - and some find a rebuilt engine fails - this gives a great insight in to the timeline and the SAE specs related to its removal
All modern motor oils contain some level of ZDDP (Zinc additive), but not enough to protect an older engine, especially during break-in. Most modern motor oils have a maximum of 800 ppm (parts per million) of ZDDP. However, the recommended bare minimum for flat-tappet cam engines and fresh-built engines of all types is 1,000, but most experts agree that 1,200 ppm of ZDDP in your oil is preferred. You must strike a balance on the ZDDP content in your oil if your vehicle has a catalytic converter; this is where the 1,000 ppm level is sufficient. All motor oils have a rating, commonly SH, SJ, and SL. The SH rating was introduced in 1992, and this oil is no longer available and had 1,200 ppm of zinc phosphorous. In 1996, the SJ rating was introduced, and the ppm levels came down to 1,000. The real problems with premature engine wear in older engines and freshly-built flat-tappet engines began in earnest around 2004 when the SM rating was brought out, which further reduced the ZDDP levels to a maximum of 800. You can see the oil rating in the API “donut” graphic, which is required to be on the label. The current API rating is SN, rated for vehicles made after 2010. ZDDP additives are sometimes formulated for both conventional and synthetic oils, you do need to verify that product you choose is ZDDP additive for synthetic oil or for conventional oil to match your preferred type of engine oil. Technically speaking, Zinc oil additives for synthetic is actually ZDTP, Zinc dialkyldithiophosphate, whereas conventional oil Zinc is ZDDP, Zinc Dialkylphophate.
For break-in, you want to see a ZDDP level of 1,400-1,500 ppm for at least the first 500 miles. After that, you can reduce the ZDDP level to 1,000-1,200. This is not a situation of a little is good; more is better. It is imperative that you follow the directions on the ZDDP additive. What you absolutely don’t want to do is to add too much ZDDP. Once you get about 1,500 ppm, ZDDP starts having the opposite effect inside the engine and gets corrosive, which can clog up the oil passages and cause premature wear inside the engine.
its a bit odd I get a follower type noise on my 273 - running recco MB 229.51 but a 50 50 mix of 229.51 and 229.52 the noise vanishes and has stayed gone thousands of miles later....
just looking for a post on the 221 and search brought this up
thought it of interest.... Zinc is helpful for reducing cam wear, but it messes up CATs so they have been removing it over the years - and some find a rebuilt engine fails - this gives a great insight in to the timeline and the SAE specs related to its removal
All modern motor oils contain some level of ZDDP (Zinc additive), but not enough to protect an older engine, especially during break-in. Most modern motor oils have a maximum of 800 ppm (parts per million) of ZDDP. However, the recommended bare minimum for flat-tappet cam engines and fresh-built engines of all types is 1,000, but most experts agree that 1,200 ppm of ZDDP in your oil is preferred. You must strike a balance on the ZDDP content in your oil if your vehicle has a catalytic converter; this is where the 1,000 ppm level is sufficient. All motor oils have a rating, commonly SH, SJ, and SL. The SH rating was introduced in 1992, and this oil is no longer available and had 1,200 ppm of zinc phosphorous. In 1996, the SJ rating was introduced, and the ppm levels came down to 1,000. The real problems with premature engine wear in older engines and freshly-built flat-tappet engines began in earnest around 2004 when the SM rating was brought out, which further reduced the ZDDP levels to a maximum of 800. You can see the oil rating in the API “donut” graphic, which is required to be on the label. The current API rating is SN, rated for vehicles made after 2010. ZDDP additives are sometimes formulated for both conventional and synthetic oils, you do need to verify that product you choose is ZDDP additive for synthetic oil or for conventional oil to match your preferred type of engine oil. Technically speaking, Zinc oil additives for synthetic is actually ZDTP, Zinc dialkyldithiophosphate, whereas conventional oil Zinc is ZDDP, Zinc Dialkylphophate.
For break-in, you want to see a ZDDP level of 1,400-1,500 ppm for at least the first 500 miles. After that, you can reduce the ZDDP level to 1,000-1,200. This is not a situation of a little is good; more is better. It is imperative that you follow the directions on the ZDDP additive. What you absolutely don’t want to do is to add too much ZDDP. Once you get about 1,500 ppm, ZDDP starts having the opposite effect inside the engine and gets corrosive, which can clog up the oil passages and cause premature wear inside the engine.
its a bit odd I get a follower type noise on my 273 - running recco MB 229.51 but a 50 50 mix of 229.51 and 229.52 the noise vanishes and has stayed gone thousands of miles later....
Agree with most here BUT the newest rating is SP… I think the Takeaway would be that if you are buying an sp oil to deal with LSPI, you are not going to want to add another zinc additive on top, especially if there is no tune, and there are cats.
Valvoline engine cleanup is targeted for engine with lower viscosity. No match available for MB Approved 0/5w40.
Without parting from MB Approval... you can upgrade to an ester oil such as MOTUL 5W40 API-SP. It wistands heat better than basic stock can.
Excessive oil consumption falls in two categories.
Burned through loose piston rings or vaporized through PCV into intake.
Both of these issues can be cancelled with better oiling given cylinders bores are not scored.
Either way you look at it, both are due to ring defects. Rings failing to keep oil out of the combustion process, or rings failing to keep combustion gases from making it into the crankcase. Many people have opinions on their favorite oils, making assumptions of thicker oils being “better” could lead to circulation rate changes, filters not working properly or not making full coating in the tightest tolerances in today’s engines. I’ll stick with what the automotive engineers deem the appropriate oils and filters for the engines they designed.
I saw a tasos video on YouTube who kind of said that the switch from silitec liners to steel or another material mid cycle on m278 engines was mainly a myth. I know a lot of people say the s560 4.0 m176 is a better engine due to cylinder wall material and open deck design. Cylinder wall scoring has happened to all makes a models when manufacturers cheap out. It’s happens to Porsche flat 6 engines everytime they put profits over quality in various 911’s. I think last one was 997 that had those issues.
I always liked the setup of this car with the m278. Low end torque and horsepower at lower rpm. Solid 7G tronic instead of 9 speed which I feared would be not as strong and cause unnecessary wear due to hunting gears constantly. I never wanted the 4.0 block due to the hot v configuration. I figure it was just too much heat from turbo to engine and vice versa that would make all plastic and gaskets fail prematurely.
That topic was covered extensively on several threads on this forum. I can tell you it is 100% real, the switch happened and it mattered...BIG TIME! The older coating was a total disaster for the M278 engines. I sincerely hope yours isn't one of them because there's no remedy. I'll try to find the correct info and post it. It even shows acceptable cylinder scoring patterns; I'm referring to the MB produced info. YT videos are a crapshoot; most of the time you can't depend on the information, either misleading, sensationalized, or lacking of context. Usually it takes viewing several YT videos to get a complete picture.
Either way you look at it, both are due to ring defects. Rings failing to keep oil out of the combustion process, or rings failing to keep combustion gases from making it into the crankcase. Many people have opinions on their favorite oils, making assumptions of thicker oils being “better” could lead to circulation rate changes, filters not working properly or not making full coating in the tightest tolerances in today’s engines. I’ll stick with what the automotive engineers deem the appropriate oils and filters for the engines they designed.
Its not a ring defect per se. Theres plenty of people with no oil consumption that have owned these cars since new. It is that the rings were made for thin oil. The problem with the oil originally recommended, which has found to be of the wrong composition for these engines, is that it caused more carbon to form in the rings if people followed long oil change intervals. The carbon that forms causes stuck rings. Consider that both the engine builders and the oil engineers did not know the long term minuses with direct injection engines and prior to sp oils. The recommendations of thicker oil in many of these conversations rely on clean rings and engine. The "thicker" oil is not detrimental to anything other than top horsepower and fuel economy.
Either way you look at it, both are due to ring defects. Rings failing to keep oil out of the combustion process, or rings failing to keep combustion gases from making it into the crankcase.
Many people have opinions on their favorite oils, making assumptions of thicker oils being “better” could lead to circulation rate changes, filters not working properly or not making full coating in the tightest tolerances in today’s engines.
I’ll stick with what the automotive engineers deem the appropriate oils and filters for the engines they designed.
that's a conventional POV to be respected.
With Approved oil conditions, one can expect everything that was designed for the engine future.
When you hear the distinctive clunkiness of your engine hot or cold, you know it's lubed as intended.
Its not a ring defect per se. Theres plenty of people with no oil consumption that have owned these cars since new. It is that the rings were made for thin oil. The problem with the oil originally recommended, which has found to be of the wrong composition for these engines, is that it caused more carbon to form in the rings if people followed long oil change intervals. The carbon that forms causes stuck rings. Consider that both the engine builders and the oil engineers did not know the long term minuses with direct injection engines and prior to sp oils. The recommendations of thicker oil in many of these conversations rely on clean rings and engine. The "thicker" oil is not detrimental to anything other than top horsepower and fuel economy.
When hearing drafty engine clunkiness, one can wonder what small incremental changes could deliver...
By feeding a 0/5W50 oil really endup sheared at the top of W40 range instead of down into W30.
For engine driveability purpose, we are not trying to go super heavy 20w50/60. We only seeking a "good steady W40" translated as a 0/5w50 lubricant.
Engine responding extremely well to small change, speaks volume which way works best outside "Approved" range.
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
