Delvac ESP vs. SHC

Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,461
Location
Alaska
I have an 05 Mercedes 906 (EGR) in a Unimog U500. It calls for Mercedes 228.3 or 228.5 oil; 228.5 preferred. I was using Delvac 5W-40 (228.5) but the Mobil jobber now has only ESP (228.3). ESP is lower on zinc based antiwear ingredients and TBN. So I ordered 55 gal of Delvac SHC, which is 228.5 and has the most zinc based antiwear stuff, a TBN of 16, etc., but is only CF/ACEA E4. I gather the main issue with EGR is just using a synthetic like Delvac to avoid gumming up the valve; the additives are problems with the converters and particulate filters, which I don't have. My owners manual says CF is OK and Mercedes' database on operating fluids definitely likes 228.5 the most, so I think I've done the right thing....? Charlie
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
325
Location
Schafflund, Germany
Charlie, since 2006 or so, MB228.5 (and ACEA E4) requires a TBN of 12 or higher. Newer products with a TBN <12 will no longer be able to meet MB228.5 and/or ACEA E4. With its TBN 10.1, Delvac 1 ESP is not a candidate for the current issues of these specification. Whether Delvac 1 ESP can pass all MB engine tests on a 228.5 level, is nothing I can tell. As far as I know, most "high quality" MB228.3 lubricants do fail the 228.5 piston cleanliness requirements, while wear protection is not an issue. OEMs like MAN actually use a Mercedes test engine to test engine oils against their own specifications. Since the MAN M3277 approval popped up in the PDS, we can presume that D1 ESP meets the same cleanliness requirements as many other MB228.5 lubricants do. The particular test engine is an OM441LA, it's part of the ACEA test protocol also. In the meantime, it has been replaced by the OM501LA. Though, OM441LA test data may still be used. In other words, Delvac 1 ESP is likely to pass MB228.5 except for the TBN requirement, but you may ask ExxonMobil to verify. If you run ULSD or LSD, TBN 10.1 should not be a problem. Also, it's the TBN retention and TBN/TAN balance that matters. As for Delvac 1 SHC, some would call it a bit outdated. I would say it is still an MB 228.5 lubricant. Others may know more about the MB approvals. A board member named Doug Hillary might have some insight here.
 

m37charlie

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,461
Location
Alaska
 Originally Posted By: Extreme-Duty
Charlie, As for Delvac 1 SHC, some would call it a bit outdated. I would say it is still an MB 228.5 lubricant.
I guess the fact that SHC is rated 228.5 is the ultimate decision making factor. It's the only 228.5 5W-40 I can get, and we see winter temps here down to -34 C. I try not to use the Unimog when it's that kind of cold though it's nice to know SHC has a pour point of -54 C. (-65 F.). The preheater heats the block well but not the oil very much. And Mercedes doesn't seem to mind that it has a pretty high sulfated ash of 1.8%. What is TAN? Thanks, Charlie
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
1,808
Location
Saint Paul (ex-San Diego)
I looked at the Mobil website for Delvac SHC, http://www.exxonmobil.com/UK-English/Marine/PDS/GLXXENMRNEMMobil_Delvac_1_SHC_5W-40.asp and at this Lubrizol website that compares various diesel specs. http://sas-origin.OnstreamMedia.com/origin/lubrizol/EOACEA2009/RP/HD/index.html and from what I can see, the 228.51 and E5 specifications are very weak, and the Delvac SHC is a mediocre oil compared to either the CI-4+ version or the ESP. Now that you have 55 gallons, I guess you'll want to go ahead and use it... but I think that's a mistake.
 

m37charlie

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,461
Location
Alaska
I need 228.5, not 228.51. Actually it seems 228.5 is tops in wear, piston deposits and bore polishing. And it's definitely superior to 228.3 in these categories, probably due to higher sulfated ash ingredients. And SHC is superior to ESP in VI, pour point and TBN. All important to me because of where I live (Alaska) and the fact that the vehicle travels out of North America. That Lubrizol site is great. I've seen that diagram once before. BTW, using a synthetic is important to me because I change once a year and they recommend doing it every 700 hrs. It takes 30.4 qts with filter for a 6.4L motor. Charlie
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
5,117
Location
Airlie Beach Australia
Hi, Extreme-Duty - Delvac 1 SHC 5W-40 was available here until around 2002. It was withdrawn due to a lack of sales! It was a MB228.5, MTU 2000/4000 MAN M3277, VDS-2 Approved lubricant It was formulated for Euro use and Quality certified as CF/CF/EC, E4-98/B4-98/B3-98 when withdrawn from sale here Use it with confidence in the applications it was intended for
 

m37charlie

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,461
Location
Alaska
I had to get SHC special order from across the country. Can you get the pre-ESP Delvac in Australia? Thanks, Charlie
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
325
Location
Schafflund, Germany
Charlie, like Doug said, there is no reason not to use Delvac 1 SHC in an MB228.5 application. Regarding TAN and TBN, this is how it's described in the BITOG glossary: TAN (Total Acid Number) The quantity of base, expressed in terms of the equivalent number of milligrams (mg) of Potasium Hydroxide, that is required to titrat the strong acid constituents present in 1 gram (g) of oil sample. (ASTM Method D 644 or D 974). TBN Total Base Number) The quantity of acid, expressed in terms of the equivalent number of milligrams (mg) of Potasium Hydroxide, that is required to titrat the strong base constituents present in 1 gram (g) of oil sample. (ASTM Method D 644 or D 974). In a nutshell, TAN tells you about the acid formation in the oil, while TBN tells you about the oil's ability to neutralize these acids. Since TAN is a measure of acid concentration and not of acid strength, it's only a vague indicator of the corrosive potential in your crankcase. There is a UOA pH test available, painting a better picture of a lubricant's total corrosiveness. Doug, Delvac 1 SHC was withdrawn for some time over here too. They brought it back because they could not get an MAN approval for Delvac 1 CI-4+. This is what XOM's German tech told me on the phone.
 
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
2,482
Location
Toronto, Canada
Slightly off topic. The MB906 non-EGR is a superb engine. The EGR-equipped model, which Mercedes labels as the 902, has problems with the EGR system.
 

m37charlie

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,461
Location
Alaska
Yes, I have a 902. But I'm in the process of analyzing the voltages on the engine side of the plug going to the EGR valve and the resistances on the valve side so I can do a workaround without limp mode. If you've done this already pls advise. Charlie
 
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
2,482
Location
Toronto, Canada
 Originally Posted By: m37charlie
Yes, I have a 902. But I'm in the process of analyzing the voltages on the engine side of the plug going to the EGR valve and the resistances on the valve side so I can do a workaround without limp mode. If you've done this already pls advise. Charlie
Sorry,I have never worked on a EGR-equipped MBE. I know someone who has one and he has had all kinds of problems with the EGR. While under warranty the dealer ate the costs, but now the truck is off warranty and it is going to be on his dime.
 

m37charlie

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,461
Location
Alaska
Yes,I had the cooler replaced under warranty with an upgraded part #. I figure if I disable the valve the cooler will never fail and my engine will stay a lot cleaner. NOx smog is not an issue in my area. Charlie
 

m37charlie

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,461
Location
Alaska
I've had absolutely no engine problems in >30K miles since replacing the EGR with a steel plate and leaving the valve wired in for electronic happiness. Charlie
 
Top