MB 229.5 and NOACK limit

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quattro Pete

Quattro Pete

Joined
Oct 30, 2002
Messages
42,225
Location
Great Lakes
First, is it true that the 229.5 spec requires NOACK to be no more than 10%? This is the info I found in one of Mobil's publications, but just wanted to confirm. And if so, how can oils with NOACK higher than 10% claim to meet the MB 229.5 spec? One such oil that comes to mind is PU 5w-40 with NOACK of 11%.
 
Perhaps they meant their target is 10%, but they allow up to 13%? Most VW 502-certified oils are about 10-12%, from what I've seen. Some are lower, maybe 9%. The 502 cert isn't vastly different from 229.5 since they both use A3/B4 as their "base".
 
Quote:
they both use A3/B4 as their "base".
Yeah, I know. Most of these Euro long drain specs (229.5, LL01, 502.00) use ACEA A3/B4 as the starting point, but there has got to be some meaningful differences between them, otherwise, why have them?
 
When I overlay 229.5, 502, and LL01 with the Lubrizol graphing tool, it actually seems that 229.5 is "stricter" than the others despite sharing the same A3/B4 base. From what I can see, anything meeting 229.5 would surely satisfy 502 and LL01, and then some.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. MB 229.5 and VW 504.00 are two of the most demanding gasoline engine specs currently. That's probably why XOM uses 229.5 as sort of a benchmark, and that's why it got me wondering if maybe it has more stringent NOACK requirements.
 
I just wish more companies would publish NOACK values, and that we'd see more oils with low-NOACK like Redline and the like.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Quote:
they both use A3/B4 as their "base".
Yeah, I know. Most of these Euro long drain specs (229.5, LL01, 502.00) use ACEA A3/B4 as the starting point, but there has got to be some meaningful differences between them, otherwise, why have them?
VANOS, Different engines, dry sumps, high or low rpm operation, etc.
 
Originally Posted By: BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Quote:
they both use A3/B4 as their "base".
Yeah, I know. Most of these Euro long drain specs (229.5, LL01, 502.00) use ACEA A3/B4 as the starting point, but there has got to be some meaningful differences between them, otherwise, why have them?
VANOS, Different engines, dry sumps, high or low rpm operation, etc.
What I meant by "there has got be some meaningful differences between them" was that there must be more stringent testing requirements than what ACEA calls for (so for example NOACK of 10 as opposed to NOACK of 13).
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Quote:
they both use A3/B4 as their "base".
Yeah, I know. Most of these Euro long drain specs (229.5, LL01, 502.00) use ACEA A3/B4 as the starting point, but there has got to be some meaningful differences between them, otherwise, why have them?
VANOS, Different engines, dry sumps, high or low rpm operation, etc.
What I meant by "there has got be some meaningful differences between them" was that there must be more stringent testing requirements than what ACEA calls for (so for example NOACK of 10 as opposed to NOACK of 13).
Gotcha!!
 
If this is the same doc, I can confirm the 229.5 limit they published of 10%, and M1 0W-40's NOACK of 9% for the current and previous formulation. As MB's factory and service supplier XOM is in the position to know this well but it's odd given Shell's 5W-40 on MB's own list.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: vinu_neuro
If this is the same doc, I can confirm the 229.5 limit they published of 10%, and M1 0W-40's NOACK of 9% for the current and previous formulation.
Yup. It's that whole VISOM presentation doc.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
First, is it true that the 229.5 spec requires NOACK to be no more than 10%?
yes, it is true. MB 229.5 and MB229.51 NOACK limits are 10%. MB 229.1&229.3 - 13%, MB229.31 - 12%.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
First, is it true that the 229.5 spec requires NOACK to be no more than 10%? This is the info I found in one of Mobil's publications, but just wanted to confirm. And if so, how can oils with NOACK higher than 10% claim to meet the MB 229.5 spec? One such oil that comes to mind is PU 5w-40 with NOACK of 11%.
If MB 229.5 is 10% then how is PU 5W 40 MB 229.5 cert with 11% ? http://www.pennzoil.com/documents/PENNZOILULTRAEuropean5W40.pdf
 
Originally Posted By: avss1
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
First, is it true that the 229.5 spec requires NOACK to be no more than 10%?
yes, it is true. MB 229.5 and MB229.51 NOACK limits are 10%.
Would you happen to have a link to some official MB literature on this?
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Would you happen to have a link to some official MB literature on this?
unfortunately no. I have downloaded file from MB BEVO, but that link is not avalaible now
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
MB 229.1/3/5 fuel economy
Replies
10
Views
2K
barryh
N
  • Locked
Looking for the truth. 2021 M5 Competition 5w30 vs 5w40.
Replies
9
Views
1K
dnewton3
S
Mobil Super 3000
Replies
7
Views
3K
sk_pete
I
  • Locked
Seeking guidance: What is the best choice in MBZ 229.3 or 229.5 oils for these particular circumstances?
2
Replies
29
Views
6K
Astro14
S
Pennzoil 0w40: PUP vs. Euro in GDI turbo
Replies
3
Views
2K
Bill7
Top