Wrong OEM oil filter ruins Mercedes engine

[NGRhodes]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
By the way the so-called "TSB" from an oil-filter distributor posted above that claimed that the plastic extension props a "valve" open and without it there would be no oil circulating through the engine was another major fake news. On the contrary the plastic extension closes a hole in the anti-drain-back valve, rather than propping it open, as I described above.


How are you so sure that the valve is an ADBV and not another type of valve, can you provide reference/details ?
You even state an ADBV would not set off an engine code, which indicates that this is some other type of valve such as a pressure relief valve.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
My take:

This TSB isn't written by MB. I'm not sure what to make of it.

https://mbworld.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=358805&d=1500146124

The "valve" is clearly an anti-drain-back valve. We all know that less than a psi of oil pressure is enough to push them open. Certainly that flimsy plastic piece can't apply any more psi than that.

So, I would think that even without an oil filter, there would be no engine problem.

The owner took the car to a second shop and they assured him that there was no engine damage. If you had oil starvation, his engine would have been ruined.

The engine code he got that started all this seemed to be a cold-start issue.

Perhaps MB found out that there was some problem during cold starts with the anti-drain-back valve (ADBV) and they decided to add this ad hoc plastic extension to eliminate the ADBV operation. It's very bizarre. In any case I doubt there is any engine damage.


Going by memory of the earlier MB filters this ADBV does not function quite like those found in a spin on filter. Its only job is to prevent oil flowing back down into the pan, it doesn't open and close in use and is not part of any sort of bypass valve.
On the earlier one there was a support in the center with an o ring on the bottom, you removed it along with the cap and the filter housing drained otherwise you would pull the filter and a litre of oil with it (old diesels), a new lower o ring and upper cover o ring were installed and that's it.

Now they did away with the support tube and put the drain on the filter itself instead of the center tube, without it the engine will not build up enough oil pressure to prevent damage but enough to activate the pressure switch and a major portion of the oil is now going right back into the pan before it goes through the system.
It has the same effect as leaving a galley plug out when doing a rebuilt. This is how I remember them working.

This has nothing to do with MB, it has more to do with the moron who installed it. If they had any sort of clue as to how this thing worked and why it is made the way it is they would never had put anything else in. Its a simple redesign in order to eliminate the tube from the cap which might not work well with a spin on cap as it would rotate the tube in the o ring or the o ring itself during installation. The results could be a damaged and leaky o ring so they moved it to the filter instead.

Edit: Running without this is not the same a running without a ADBV for a day as someone posted, it is not a "valve" but more of a stopper, it would be the same as running with a hole in the filter with a hose on it directing the oil back to the pan instead of on the ground.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
There are many threads on multiple forums where dealers will claim one thing and it will turn out to be something else. That's somewhat common. They usually like to jump to the most expensive conclusion first.

Yes, I agree.

 

[funflyer]

Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
Well, this has gotten complicated. How else could the oil change have caused the problem? Did the dealer take pictures or bother to have the owner see the evidence? Did the oil change have a start without oil added or something?



I think it's quite evident what happened without pictures or actually showing the owner anything. Owner knew which filter he provided to the shop for the change. It's also evident that every engine start using the incorrect filter was without oil in the filter housing. The owner has learned a very expensive lesson, remember, "nothing is idiot-proof to a sufficiently capable idiot"

 

[FlyPenFly]

Bottom end engine noise with a CEL related to engine timing... I would not buy that car, that's for sure. MB has plenty of reason to not honor an engine warranty on that vehicle now. If I were him, I would at a minimum get an oil test.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: Trav
.....This has nothing to do with MB, it has more to do with the moron who installed it. If they had any sort of clue as to how this thing worked and why it is made the way it is they would never had put anything else in. Its a simple redesign in order to eliminate the tube from the cap which might not work well with a spin on cap as it would rotate the tube in the o ring or the o ring itself during installation. The results could be a damaged and leaky o ring so they moved it to the filter instead....

Basically what I said about the installer at the start of this thread, just a different word, 'incompetent'. I'd add and have added the owner did the installer no favor by providing the incorrect cartridge. And as it's his vehicle he ultimately "owns it".

Based on what you post apparently nothing wrong with the "simple redesign", it's an improvement.

Also now that it's clear the tsb is from a completely unrelated aftermarket filter company with no ties to MB, that becomes irrelevant as an authoritative source.

As for any damage that may or may not have occurred or based on what MB dealer said after the fact, not much interest to me. 'If' there are issues now, ultimately it's the owner supplying the wrong cartridge and the installer for using it. Bottom line, had the correct cartridge been used, whatever happened wouldn't have occured.

 

[Eddie]

Agree 100% with Sayjac.. Ed

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Originally Posted By: Trav
.....This has nothing to do with MB, it has more to do with the moron who installed it. If they had any sort of clue as to how this thing worked and why it is made the way it is they would never had put anything else in. Its a simple redesign in order to eliminate the tube from the cap which might not work well with a spin on cap as it would rotate the tube in the o ring or the o ring itself during installation. The results could be a damaged and leaky o ring so they moved it to the filter instead....

Basically what I said about the installer at the start of this thread, just a different word, 'incompetent'. I'd add and have added the owner did the installer no favor by providing the incorrect cartridge. And as it's his vehicle he ultimately "owns it".

Based on what you post apparently nothing wrong with the "simple redesign", it's an improvement.

Also now that it's clear the tsb is from a completely unrelated aftermarket filter company with no ties to MB, that becomes irrelevant as an authoritative source.

As for any damage that may or may not have occurred or based on what MB dealer said after the fact, not much interest to me. 'If' there are issues now, ultimately it's the owner supplying the wrong cartridge and the installer for using it. Bottom line, had the correct cartridge been used, whatever happened wouldn't have occured.



The "mechanic" and the lube place by default is not blameless here either. sure the guy provided the wrong part that's not in dispute but they opted to use it instead of saying we only install parts we supply.
The person doing the job just by the job description should know the part was not correct, it didn't even look the same and yet again opted to use it instead of saying its not the correct part we cant use this putting it back on the customer.

If I do a master cylinder job and the customer provides the part and I use it knowing its not the correct part I would be on the hook big time in court if anything happened.
If I do injectors for someone and they provide the o rings and I see they are not the same and use them anyway and the guy installs them, checks for leaks finds none and then an hour after burns his car or boat down is it his fault or mine? I don't believe anyone will buy my argument that its his because he provided the o rings.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Bottom line, had the correct cartridge been used, whatever happened wouldn't have occured.


I agree 100%! I still feel the shop is at fault as I mentioned earlier. The difference is so obvious a kid in kindergarten could tell you the two filters are different. I bet if this goes to court the shop would come out on the short end of the stick!

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: Eddie
Agree 100% with Sayjac.. Ed


X 1,000,000

 

[UG_Passat]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Based on what I read and saw, I'll say that whoever installed the wrong 'cartidge' filter is 'incompetent'. Except for both being a cartridge filters, they don't even match up in design and construction. The correct 276 has the extension prongs that the earlier model MB cartridge doesn't use. This is similar to/same as what FCA did with their current 3.6L Pentastar engines and their cartridges.

Whoever put it in should have been able to tell something wasn't right with the fit, not mention that it didn't match the design of the one that came out, the 276.

As for filter nomenclature, I refer to the filters in question here as 'cartridge' filters. That is, they are strictly an element or 'cartridge', that gets installed in a permanent engine housing. Otoh, a canister filter includes both the filter element and can together in one, the common term a spin on filter.


Yes, it's real easy to pass the blame. The bottom line is the wrong filter was installed, someone installed it, look there for the cause of the problem.


Customer supplied wrong filter.

Lots of shops have a policy of not allowing customers to bring in their own parts for this reason. They do not want the liability of a wrong or defective part. Looks like the quick change shop will have an updated parts policy.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Going by memory of the earlier MB filters this ADBV does not function quite like those found in a spin on filter. Its only job is to prevent oil flowing back down into the pan, it doesn't open and close in use and is not part of any sort of bypass valve.
On the earlier one there was a support in the center with an o ring on the bottom, you removed it along with the cap and the filter housing drained otherwise you would pull the filter and a litre of oil with it (old diesels), a new lower o ring and upper cover o ring were installed and that's it.

Now they did away with the support tube and put the drain on the filter itself instead of the center tube, without it the engine will not build up enough oil pressure to prevent damage but enough to activate the pressure switch and a major portion of the oil is now going right back into the pan before it goes through the system.
It has the same effect as leaving a galley plug out when doing a rebuilt. This is how I remember them working.

Thank you, Trav. Yes, I located the patent of a similar design and it's not an anti-drain-back valve (ADBV). It's a plug that opens when you remove the cap or oil filter so that any oil in the housing drains into the oil pan. In other words the hole in this plug opens into a passageway to the oil pan. It remains closed at all times except when the cap/oil filter is removed. Note that most oil-filter housings seem to be facing upward these days and there is no chance of oil spilling onto the ground from the housing. It's for removing the dirty oil in the housing, not to prevent a messy oil spill.

As you said given the size of the plug and hole in this case, it's unlikely that the oil pump can provide enough oil flow and/or pressure through the system if it's left unplugged, as a lot of oil would flow back into the oil pan from the open hole.

The third-party TSB posted here that made the claim that this plastic extension actually pushes a valve open is wrong. It's the opposite with it closing an otherwise-open hole.

In my opinion this is an overengineered bad design. MB should have kept the plug attached to the cap instead of the oil filter if they wanted a housing drain hole like this.

Yes, the shop is at fault and the owner should have done a better research as well. I hope there wasn't serious engine damage.

Mahle GmbH patent US 5516425 A

 

[Trav]

I would like to see them go back to the old style cap with two nuts on top and the metal center. There is no doubt in my mind the engine is hosed if it was driven or ran for any amount of time.
The bottom end and etched cylinders are the most likely damaged parts due to oil starvation but depending on how long it ran any and all lubricated parts may be damaged. New engine time, its probably cheaper than sleeving and rebuilding the old one.

 

[Jetronic]

The drain valve cap got moved to the filter to assure that the o-ring gets changed at every filter change. Even if you supply the o-ring with the filter for the old design, you can't be sure every mechanic will change them. I've seen some pretty horrid looking o-rings on the hyundai diesels I service.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: UG_Passat
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Based on what I read and saw, I'll say that whoever installed the wrong 'cartidge' filter is 'incompetent'. Except for both being a cartridge filters, they don't even match up in design and construction. The correct 276 has the extension prongs that the earlier model MB cartridge doesn't use. This is similar to/same as what FCA did with their current 3.6L Pentastar engines and their cartridges.

Whoever put it in should have been able to tell something wasn't right with the fit, not mention that it didn't match the design of the one that came out, the 276.

As for filter nomenclature, I refer to the filters in question here as 'cartridge' filters. That is, they are strictly an element or 'cartridge', that gets installed in a permanent engine housing. Otoh, a canister filter includes both the filter element and can together in one, the common term a spin on filter.


Yes, it's real easy to pass the blame. The bottom line is the wrong filter was installed, someone installed it, look there for the cause of the problem.


Customer supplied wrong filter.

Lots of shops have a policy of not allowing customers to bring in their own parts for this reason. They do not want the liability of a wrong or defective part. Looks like the quick change shop will have an updated parts policy.


If they have to eat the cost of the engine, I'm sure they'd be updating their policy. Maybe even booting the guy who changed the oil for not using a bit of common sense. The difference between the two filters is night and day.

 

[FlyPenFly]

So everyone earlier saying the engine is not ruined is wrong you say?