Valvoline 5w40, 2941 miles, 2011 MercedesBenz E350

[1maniac]

I picked up this car a few months ago. She went into the stealer for a noisy engine problem last week. I pulled an oil sample via the dipstick tube before she went in. There was a TSB for wrist pin bearings failing and causing noise and cylinder wall scuffing. The stealer replaced the water pump and belt, under warranty, as the source of the noise and confirmed the cylinder walls were all A-ok.
I received this UOA today.
The dealer also changed the oil with Mobil-1 Formula M 5w40, and a fresh filter.
Quiet as a mouse now she is.


[img:center][/img]

 

[abycat]

Looks good. The Mobil should give you better numbers than the valvolene. imo.

 

[1maniac]

I agree and we shall see what the M1 yields. I was not going to change the oil but the stealer made me an offer on service that I could not refuse. I plan to run the M1 out to 5k and then sample again....

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: abycat
The Mobil should give you better numbers than the valvolene. imo.

Better numbers? What is wrong with these numbers?

BTW, here is M1 after 11K miles in the 3-liter version of this engine:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3168551#Post3168551

 

[abycat]

I think the numbers are a bit high for being less than half of the average km and more than half of the actual ppm. Still splitting hairs but I think a different oil choice than valvolene could result in less wear.

 

[abycat]

Not saying his report was at all bad. Great report actually.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: abycat
I think the numbers are a bit high for being less than half of the average km and more than half of the actual ppm. Still splitting hairs but I think a different oil choice than valvolene could result in less wear.



From what I've seen here wear metals tend to trend lower as the oil change interval carries on.
What I'm saying is that on the front end of the oci wear metals are shed faster then as miles accumulate less wear metals are shed.
But let's get serious here. At 16ppm for roughly half of the universal average miles means that at 6000 miles iron would be at 32ppm or less,which is a difference of 6ppm when compared to the universal average.
Are we seriously saying that 6ppm is even remotely significant,especially when the engine is still breaking in somewhat.
Looks good. Engine should last forever.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: abycat
The Mobil should give you better numbers than the valvolene. imo.

Better numbers? What is wrong with these numbers?

BTW, here is M1 after 11K miles in the 3-liter version of this engine:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3168551#Post3168551


I am looking at your report, and truth is M1 is really shear stable.
I should get my M1 ESP UOA next week, if it is not true 5K oil, I will go back to M1 0W40.

 

[neo3]

The only possible aluminum oil-lubricated-friction part of the engine I can think of would be aluminum cylinder liners, which would be pretty uncommon but Mercedes does use "aluminum/silicon" liners in some newer engines (don't know if yours is one). So if you have these, the aluminum number wouldn't be comparable to "univeral averages", since most cars would have steel liners.

 

[1maniac]

Aluminum is up and i still have a light "knock,knock,knock,knock, coming from the passenger side mid engine area. Intermittent but noticeable when it happens. I cannot pin point with the stethoscope but its definitely engine related......