Best oil for W210 E 270

Messages
10,248
Location
MA
No, two different applications.
MB229.5 is current, but so called High-SAPS oil, intended for vehicles without SCR/DPF or GPF (like yours).
MB229.51 is Low-SAPS oil approval or as some would say "diesel" oil. It is for vehicles, both diesel and gas that have aftertreatment equipment (DPF/GPF).
Bcs. your vehicle is diesel, regardless that you do not have DPF, I would still go MB229.51/MB229.52.
I would just shoot for 229.52 which supersedes 229.51. Check the approval lists, any 229.52 oil on the approved list should be fine. Basically 229.5 is best for gas, 229.52 is best for diesel even though you could use 229.51 or 229.52 in gas engines.

 
Messages
11,689
Location
Colorado Springs
I would just shoot for 229.52 which supersedes 229.51. Check the approval lists, any 229.52 oil on the approved list should be fine. Basically 229.5 is best for gas, 229.52 is best for diesel even though you could use 229.51 or 229.52 in gas engines.

Most oils with MB229.52 have dual MB229.51 and MB229.52 approvals. That is why I mentioned that way.
 
Messages
11,689
Location
Colorado Springs
Those High SAPS oils have good antiwear properties, but are not so friendly with DPF filters and emmision standars. To solve this problem in low-SAPS oil manufacturers added extra antiwear additives, but with that did they achieve antiwear properties that high-SAPS oil has?
Yes they do achieve as Low-SAPS oils are on the market since 2004 in Europe, and thsoe diesel taxis are still clocking 100's of thousands of km's.
 

Mercboy

Thread starter
Messages
13
I would just shoot for 229.52 which supersedes 229.51. Check the approval lists, any 229.52 oil on the approved list should be fine. Basically 229.5 is best for gas, 229.52 is best for diesel even though you could use 229.51 or 229.52 in gas engines.

Thanks for recommendations. According what we all said in this thread, can it be that 229.52 is slightlyyy better for diesels without DPF than 229.5? A lot of online oil recommenders don't show 229.52 but it could be because 229.52 is not so old approval.
 
Last edited:
Messages
10,248
Location
MA
Thanks for recommendations. According what we all said in this thread, can it be that 229.52 is slightlyyy better for diesels without DPF than 229.5? A lot of online oil recommenders don't show 229.52 but it could be because 229.52 is not so old approval.
Basically 229.5 is meant for gas vehicles. 229.52 is the latest spec for diesels so doesn't get mentioned that often if you're look at older documentation. That supersedes 229.51. 229.5 and 229.52 are two different types of oil for two different purposes. I still use 229.5 only in my gas vehicle, wouldn't put 229.51 or 229.52 in it even though I could.
 

Mercboy

Thread starter
Messages
13
Basically 229.5 is meant for gas vehicles. 229.52 is the latest spec for diesels so doesn't get mentioned that often if you're look at older documentation. That supersedes 229.51. 229.5 and 229.52 are two different types of oil for two different purposes. I still use 229.5 only in my gas vehicle, wouldn't put 229.51 or 229.52 in it even though I could.
Have to disagree with you. Approval 229.5 is for diesel and gas engines without DPF filter just there is a bit more gas engines that uses 229.5 approval.
 
Messages
99
Location
WI
The best fuel economy numbers I've seen were around 35-36mpg, but my speed of 68mph on the interstate was too nerve-wracking and I chickened out after an hour or so. I resumed cruising at around 78-80mph :) At those speeds I'm seeing 31-32mpg.
 

Mercboy

Thread starter
Messages
13
The best fuel economy numbers I've seen were around 35-36mpg, but my speed of 68mph on the interstate was too nerve-wracking and I chickened out after an hour or so. I resumed cruising at around 78-80mph :) At those speeds I'm seeing 31-32mpg.
Not bad for more than 200hp engine but could it be better? With my mentioned car I cruise 49-52 mph with fuel consumption of 52 mpg (average 1700rpm) but when someone else drive my car it is 42 mpg.
 
Messages
99
Location
WI
I'm sure it could be better, I just can't drive it that slow. On the interstates, you'd be a nuisance to most big rigs, which have to find a way around you and that ties up the passing lane.

Even so, the OM651 in my GLK drives all four wheels and the GLK is rather heavy. Plus, the extra power it makes (~250hp/450 lbs-ft Tq) can burn quite a bit more fuel when pushed.

So I'm perfectly happy with 32mpg average.
 

Mercboy

Thread starter
Messages
13
I'm sure it could be better, I just can't drive it that slow. On the interstates, you'd be a nuisance to most big rigs, which have to find a way around you and that ties up the passing lane.

Even so, the OM651 in my GLK drives all four wheels and the GLK is rather heavy. Plus, the extra power it makes (~250hp/450 lbs-ft Tq) can burn quite a bit more fuel when pushed.

So I'm perfectly happy with 32mpg average.
The difference is that you drive on highway if I'm correct. I would have similar consumption as you on highway, maybe litle higher mpg.
 
Top