Stuart,

How have you been? Thanks for all the help when I need it!

General question about oil grades. My 2000 E430 calls for Mobil 1 0W40. However this grade is much more expensive than the more common 5W30 and 10W40. Since all are synthetic does it really matter which I use? I live in central Illinois where we rarely have extreme cold or hot temperatures. A co-worker with an E320 buys whatever Mobil 1 is cheapest and has reached high miles without problems.

What are my risks?

Thanks, Matt

 

Use the recommended oil. Period.

MB have had a Class Act against them regarding use of incorrect oil and it has cost them dear. Using non approved oils appears to wreck MB engines.

The whole idea of the synthetic oil requirement is that it facilitates extended change points and the MB ASSYST service prompt is based on this premise.
This (I understand) was the basis of the Class Act which sited the use of standard oils but at extended change intervals as advised by the on board ASSYST computer.

"Ow" refers to the cold end performance. This ensures that oil gets to the parts that need it with minimum delay, especially on very cold starts, but also on more normal temp starts.

The 40 refers to high temp performance and since your car is well capable of speeds well beyond your likely useage parameters the spec may be a little over the top. HOWEVER it will help to maintain lubrication film under arduous conditions of high temp or high engine load.

You say Mobil 1 0w-40 is expensive. I agree.

Retail for Mobil 1 here in the UK is 100 USD for 4 lts (or Quarts as you call them). Yes £50 for 4 ltrs or £12.50/ltr!! This is the price currently being asked by Halfords, a garage DIY type auto shop.

However it is available at knocked down price of about £7/ltr or even £4.50/ltr if you buy 20ltrs at a time on eBay.

No I do not exaggerate.

By the way using Mobil 1 appears to help in eliminating cold start "tappet noise" or clicking and even appears to improves oil consumption on ageing engines.

Use the best and you won't be disappointed.

Use conventional mineral or even synthethic without the "special" Mobil 1 additives and you take your chances. It's your call.

Stuart

 

Stuart,

I guess I shouldn't complain. I pay $5.79/ltr. I also experience the tappet noise. It seems to come and go. Is this something to be concerned about? Itsounds like avavle adjustment is needed but I assume the engine has hydraulic lifters. What's the cause and should I worry about it?

Thanks, Matt

 

Hi Matt,
Not sure about the "tappet" noise. Seems to be an MB "feature"!
If it comes and goes it can't be a problem with the oil dispensing system on the cams since it wouldn't go.

Purely speculation but since the Mobil 1 0-40 appears to help in reducing this issue I guess that inadequate oil is reaching the parts that require it when the oil becomes a bit "tired" co,bined with being cold.

I can't escape the fact that new oil seems to resolve the problem only for it to return at some future date. Not sure about the hot / cold weather temp cycle but I can imagine that it is worse in the winter, but not really sure about this. I just live with the issue since I only really hear it when I get the car out of a confined space.

BOTH my M112 320V6 engines exhibit the same intermittent fault.

Stuart.

 

Stuart,

Just out of curiosity, what two M112 vehicles do you have and how many miles( or kilometers)? My M113 is turning 100k miles. Is it reasonable to expect upwards of 300k miles with very good maintenance? Wondering what these German's are capable of!

Also, here is my next question. MB calls for 89 or 90 octane gas (mid-grade here). Is this requirement just to help initial emissions requirements or does the engine actually need a higher octane than regular 87 octane? I don't want the engine to retard the timing due to the lower octane and thus cause engine/cylinder deposites. I notice absolutely no performance difference.

Thanks, Matt

 

My current MB's are a R170 SLK 320 (86k miles) and a w220 S Class 320 (120k miles).
The w220 doesn't have the same emmissions set up. European vs Califorian on the SLK.
I believe this is since the M112 in the R170 was relatively low volume except in the USA and not worth the impications of complexity on the production line of different engine assemblies with different tunes (and associated hardware).
The V6 is so much nicer than the 4 cyl kompressor without any real degradation in fuel consumption etc. although performance of the two models is very similar.

I expect both engines to complete 200, 300k maybe more miles without major mechanical degradation. This is why I purchased them. However most manufacturers engines will now complete similar mileages. I saw an MB S Class on eBay the other day with 985000 miles and the guy want 5500 dollars! No mention about how many engines etc!

Use the recommended fuel. The engine has been tuned (and tested) for the recommended grade. It may well be able to accommodate lower grade fuel but will not be operating at optimum efficiency when doing so since the ignition will "back off" to avoid knocking.

Why do you want to use low gradefuel?
I know premium cost a penny or two more but after all you have purchased a "performance" car what is the point of throwing that performance away by using poor quality fuel?
In Europe fuel is lots more expensive than in the USA and the European solution is good quality fuel and highly tuned engines (relatively modest capacity engines) vs the USA model of laarge engines running less efficienty but able to run on less good fuel.

Over time the USA will HAVE TO follow the European model and of course Hydrogen in an internal combustion engine will become the norm ASAP. (See BMW and MB)
All this hybrid stuff is in my opion just a political distraction not to mention waste of time and money. Wonder if this will provoke some reaction??

Stuart

 

Stuart,

You make some good points. The difference between 87 and 91(93) octance is about 20 to 30 cents. With gas prices reaching all time highs, I'm not real eager to add another 10% to the cost. That is why I tend toward the 87 octane. The usual premium has additional detergents but the cleanliness should not really be any better than 87. The performance difference is minimal during every day use. I'm driving this thing to work and the grocery store....not track days.

The real question is efficiency. I wonder if I'm losing the 10% cost savings with a 10% loss in efficiency due to the ignition timing adjustment. No real way to figure out percent efficiency difference. Regardless I'm starting to cut hairs here. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't hurting the engine long term with the 87 octane.

Yourother statements are accurate. Hybrid is a bandaid. However, the world has plenty of fossil fuel. For example, I work in the mining industry and the virgining oil sands reserve in Canada is immense. Double the reserves of Saudi Arabia! Assuming the rest of the world can mandate emissions regulations like Europe and the US, fuel supply should not be a problem.

Matt

 

Hi Matt,

I repeat.
"Use the recommended fuel. The engine has been tuned (and tested) for the recommended grade. Your vehicle MAY well be able to accommodate lower grade fuel BUT the engine WILL NOT be operating at optimum efficiency when doing so since the ignition will "back off" to avoid knocking.

I don't have access to the exact performance (efficiency) figures but I guess the fuel saving will be cancelled out by reduced efficiency and therefore poorer gas mileage PLUS you run the RISK (I don't know the odds. Most probably the ECU will do a good job but your guess is as good as mine) of damaging the engine by CONSISTENTLY asking it to back off the ignition otherwise MB COULKD HAVE stated that 87 can be used as an alternative sunject to performance degradation.

It will be EMMISSIONS (legislation) that eventually dictates the use of Hydrogen vs current fuels. Today's fuels although referred to generically as Petrol / Gas are very different to what they used to be 50 years ago when I became part of the auto industry.

My (cynical) view is that latest drive for reduced emmissions thru the taxation system (in Europe) is a revenue opportunity to good to miss.

Comes under the heading of "DOING THE RIGHT THING!" and is therefore difficult to argue against.

Don't misunderstand me, we MUST BE more eco minded since spewing out exhaust gases UNNECESSARILY CANNOT be a good thing.

However I'm not convinced that cars = global warming.
1 volcano = all the cars in the world BUT we ALL have to become more responsible since the scientific "Jury" is divided.

At the risk of stirring a hornets nest my view is that the USA (and of course the "developing" world) MUST start to become MORE RESPONSIBLE over the PROFLIGATE use of fossil fuels.

Unfortunately the MARKET FORCES COST EQUATION (Supply vs Demand) WILL NOT cause ("Rich") individuals / Nations to think about their actions.

BUT I DIGRESS!

Stuart

 

What oil grade should i use for the E430 1998 ? It have 95435 miles.
Thank You

 

I think the problem we are facing is a double edged sword. There is an additive called ZDDP which lowers engine wear, but it reduces the life of the catalytic converter. ZDDP has been lowering in motor oils due to the EPA. All car companies are facing this same problem and we have to figure out which oil contain a higher amount to prevent engine wear, but it may more at a cost of reducing the life of the catalytic converter. If you look up ZDDP on the Internet, there are lots of sites that are discussing this.

I also think that this additive might be added to transmission fluid and gear fluid for the rear end and there might be some changes as to the levels in certain products. There might be some products that are offered that is used in other countries that aren't requiring the reduction of ZDDP. Something to look into.