229.3 or 229.5 for older Mercedes diesel engine

Messages
10
Location
Germany
Hello, What oil spec should be used for a 2001 Mercedes W203 C200 CDI (euro3, no DPF)? I was reading that both 229.3 and .5 should work. The car in question has approximately 310.000 km, runs great and at the moment is using a Mobil 5W30 ESP Formula which is a 229.51 spec and I guess it's not the right oil for the car. Regarding the weights, should a xW-40 be used? The temperatures are rather high at the moment, going all the way up to 35 degrees Celsius. When it comes to the actual oils, I could get Mobil 1 0W-40, Castrol 0W-40 A3/B4 (some others as well) and any Liqui Moly oil as I live in Germany. What oil would you guys recommend? Thanks! Later edit : what is actually rather strange, is that both Castrol and Mobil, using their oil selectors will recommend oils with the 229.51 spec for this car, even if they still provide older MB spec oils.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,450
Location
Alaska
WHY are you using a low SAPS oil in a diesel without DPF? There is no earthly reason to do that. I'd recommend Mobil 1 0W40 or something similar. Charlie
 

stefun

Thread starter
Messages
10
Location
Germany
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Is that an OM611 engine? Anyway, in a non-DPF engine, you can use pretty much any MB spec oil, according to this: http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/downloadf.php?filename=en/Spec_223_2.pdf So yes, 229.5 approved oil would be just fine. The ESP oil you're currently using should be fine as well since Germany has ultra low sulfur gasoline, but as Charlie pointed out, it's not really needed since you have no DPF.
Yes, it is the OM611 engine. Right now I am considering : Liqui Moly Leichtlauf High Tech 5W-40, Mobil 1 New Life 0W-40, Castrol Edge 0W-40 A4/B4.
 
Last edited:
Messages
12,321
Location
Colorado Springs
Originally Posted By: stefun
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Is that an OM611 engine? Anyway, in a non-DPF engine, you can use pretty much any MB spec oil, according to this: http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/downloadf.php?filename=en/Spec_223_2.pdf So yes, 229.5 approved oil would be just fine. The ESP oil you're currently using should be fine as well since Germany has ultra low sulfur gasoline, but as Charlie pointed out, it's not really needed since you have no DPF.
Yes, it is the OM611 engine. Right now I am considering : Liqui Moly Leichtlauf High Tech 5W-40, Mobil 1 New Life 0W-40, Castrol Edge 0W-40 A4/B4.
You can go with Mobil1 0W40 New Life ESP. You have on German market 0W40 ESP which is Mid-SAPS oil that meets MB 229.51 or you could go wth regular Full-SAPS 0W40 that meets MB 229.5. M1 recommends Full-SAPS 0W40 MB 229.5 Here are specs for M1 0W40 ESP Mobil1 0W40 ESP
 
Last edited:
Messages
163
Location
Tennessee
I thought all of these specs from MB,VW and BMW is all geared toward preserving the emission controls while the engine is under warranty and factory oci. Would these specs matter if a operator shortened the change interval or didn't have the emission equipment being a older model. I don't know so was a asking for clarification. I understand that if you have emission equipment then you have to use the spec oil. Do you have to use what the new cars use?
 
Last edited:
Messages
40,710
Location
Great Lakes
Originally Posted By: simplistic
Would these specs matter if a operator shortened the change interval or didn't have the emission equipment being a older model.
They would matter, because they're not only about aftertreatment compatibility and long intervals. These Euro specs also help ensure reduced wear, reduced sludge formation, and lower piston deposits, regardless what your OCI is. Specs such as MB 229.5 exceed API SN in these categories by a long shot, at least on paper. Would you really notice a difference in real life? I don't know.
 
Messages
1,723
Location
Virginia
I'd probably go M1 0w-40. But if you have the Castrol 0w-40 available to you, and it meets the oil requirements, and it's cheaper, then you might as well save a few bucks.
 
Messages
4,575
Location
Kuwait
Even if you do not have a DPF, the oil you are currently using is an <span style="font-weight: bold">excellent</span> oil. If it's not too expensive, I would continue to use it - especially with the quality of the fuel you are using.
 
Messages
1,450
Location
Alaska
Originally Posted By: Falcon_LS
Even if you do not have a DPF, the oil you are currently using is an excellent oil. If it's not too expensive, I would continue to use it - especially with the quality of the fuel you are using.
I beg to differ. 229.51 are inevitable compromises due to the mandate for low SAPS. You will achieve longer OCI and possibly better protection with the higher SAPS 229.5 oil. The main "environmental advantage" would be longer OCI. There will be absolutely no difference in tailpipe emissions. Charlie
 
Messages
201
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Originally Posted By: m37charlie
Originally Posted By: Falcon_LS
Even if you do not have a DPF, the oil you are currently using is an excellent oil. If it's not too expensive, I would continue to use it - especially with the quality of the fuel you are using.
I beg to differ. 229.51 are inevitable compromises due to the mandate for low SAPS. You will achieve longer OCI and possibly better protection with the higher SAPS 229.5 oil. The main "environmental advantage" would be longer OCI. There will be absolutely no difference in tailpipe emissions. Charlie
Do you have evidence of this?
 
Messages
1,450
Location
Alaska
2 points. 1) Zn/P levels and detergent levels are lowered to meet limits that help preserve catalyst function. 2) My own UOA testing on a BMW X5 35d show better TBN retention and decreased Fe/Al levels with a 228.51 oil (1.0% SA, higher TBN, same Zn/P as 229.51/LL04) compared to a 229.51/LL04 oil. I can only surmise that wear numbers would be even lower if I were to bump the ZDDP level but I don't care to do that because my emission devices are intact and functioning. Charlie
 
Messages
201
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Originally Posted By: m37charlie
2 points. 1) Zn/P levels and detergent levels are lowered to meet limits that help preserve catalyst function. 2) My own UOA testing on a BMW X5 35d show better TBN retention and decreased Fe/Al levels with a 228.51 oil (1.0% SA, higher TBN, same Zn/P as 229.51/LL04) compared to a 229.51/LL04 oil. I can only surmise that wear numbers would be even lower if I were to bump the ZDDP level but I don't care to do that because my emission devices are intact and functioning. Charlie
I'm curious, haven't phosphorus and zinc levels been dropping with each successive generation of oils and yet, for example API SN, is considered to be more "cleaning" with better wear protection than the previous generation? Also, I looked over your previous UOAs on your X5. At what point did you distinguish that the oil was responsible for less wear vs the washing out of break-in material? Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to learn here.
 
Messages
1,450
Location
Alaska
Yes, one can argue about the Fe/Al levels all day, but if you believe detergents are worth anything (why else would they put them in all oils?), isn't a starting TBN of 9.6 better than 6? And a drain TAN/TBN of 3.9/3.7 vs 4.8/1.5? With more miles on the Delvac 1 LE vs the 229.51/LL04 oil? Is there any definite reason why the ACEA "C" oils are BETTER than an established excellent 229.5 oil like M1 0W40 in an application that doesn't call for them? Charlie
 
Messages
201
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Originally Posted By: m37charlie
Yes, one can argue about the Fe/Al levels all day, but if you believe detergents are worth anything (why else would they put them in all oils?), isn't a starting TBN of 9.6 better than 6? And a drain TAN/TBN of 3.9/3.7 vs 4.8/1.5? With more miles on the Delvac 1 LE vs the 229.51/LL04 oil? Is there any definite reason why the ACEA "C" oils are BETTER than an established excellent 229.5 oil like M1 0W40 in an application that doesn't call for them? Charlie
But isn't the point of an UOA to check on levels of wear metals such as Fe and Al because that would tell us about the performance of an oil? Isn't a higher starting TBN only useful if TBN retention is good as you start to mention when you bring up the TAN/TBN relationship? You may have run more miles, but I think my question is still valid. At what point did you distinguish that a specific oil was giving you better results due to less wear vs the washing out of break-in material? Based on what I've read here on BITOG, TAN and TBN are only markers of the condition of the oil which is an indirect measurement of its ability to lubricate and protect against wear. I'm not saying the Mobil 1 ESP is necessarily a BETTER alternative, but you contended it is not an excellent oil. It is certainly possible it may work better in the OP's vehicle than it did in yours. It could also be worse. It all depends on the conditions the OP is operating under i.e. length of OCI, % of short tripping etc. My position is that the Mobil 1 ESP could be a perfectly viable candidate if things like costs and operating conditions are taken into account. Or the OP can just go the easy route and use the Mobil 1 0W-40 or any other oil which specifically carries the original specs required by his/her engine.
 
Top