Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 07-17-2011, 02:16 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sine View Post
..leathermang - yep, I use Delo 400 15W40 exclusively....
What I was pointing out was that in the summer you should be using STRAIGHT 40 wt... not a multi weight...
Right from the FSM...

Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-17-2011, 02:37 PM
sixto's Avatar
smoke gets in your eyes
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Eastern TN
Posts: 20,841
A sidebar if folks don't mind - what vacuum issue or pinched wires can cause a 617 to idle poorly? Does an 85 have ELR?

My suspects would include a leaky old style primer pump, the rack damper and a faulty key switch. I guess a faulty key switch is a vacuum issue.

Sixto
87 300D
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-17-2011, 02:53 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 18,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixto View Post
A sidebar if folks don't mind - what vacuum issue or pinched wires can cause a 617 to idle poorly? Does an 85 have ELR?

My suspects would include a leaky old style primer pump, the rack damper and a faulty key switch. I guess a faulty key switch is a vacuum issue.

Sixto
87 300D
I was wondering the same thing. That's why I was arguing for a hole in the intake manifold--ie disconnected boost control line.
85 has a rack position sensor but it doesn't effect idle.
I have no idea what pinching those wires would do to how the engine runs. I can't imagine a connection.
Wouldn't it be likely that whatever the problem is, it's connected to the valve adjustment process somehow?
__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-17-2011, 03:38 PM
Orv's Avatar
Orv Orv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sine View Post
Pit-stop 1: Stopped at Autozone and checked my oil level, which was about halfway between the full and low marks. Went in to get some Delo to top it off. I was careful not to put too much in, checking the oil level as I went.
This is unrelated to your problem, but I would not be too aggressive about topping off the oil in these engines. Both of the ones I've owned have used more oil when near the full mark than when near the add mark; I end up adding far less oil between changes if I wait until it gets down to 'add' before putting in more. Generally what I see is fairly rapid oil consumption until halfway between add and full, then slower after that.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-17-2011, 04:11 PM
JHZR2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 5,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by leathermang View Post
What I was pointing out was that in the summer you should be using STRAIGHT 40 wt... not a multi weight...
Right from the FSM...
Highly obsolete anymore. Might make sense if ambient is constantly over 30, which could mean summer use... And the vehicle is in constant use.

I'd much rather get faster flow at startup via a better viscosity at "cold", I.e. not 100C conditions.

VII and basestock chemistry has come a long way in 30 years. Were starting to see 5 and 10w-30 oils in HD diesel use at standard conditions... Clearances and tolerances haven't changed that much.

No need to start an oil thread, but no need for people to start running out to get straight wt oils.

Even the different mb vidc charts show how oil chemistry changes midify selection ranges...
__________________
Current Diesels:
1981 240D (73K)
1982 300CD (169k)
1985 190D (169k)
1991 350SD (113k)
1991 350SD (206k)
1991 300D (228k)
1993 300SD (291k)
1993 300D 2.5T (338k)
1996 Dodge Ram CTD (442k)
1996 Dodge Ram CTD (265k)

Past Diesels:
1983 300D (228K)
1985 300D (233K)
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-17-2011, 04:28 PM
vwnate1's Avatar
Diesel Dandy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sunny So. Cal. !
Posts: 7,718
Question A Fuel Problem

Is what it sounds like to me .

Before fooling with leaky O-Rings , I'd replace the obviously clogged intake screen as it should never be blkack inside .

This is why Mercedes specifies using the clear ones , so you can see the buildup of debris & crud before you give it a high speed run and suck more crud from the tank in and it clogs, reducing power and causing shaking @ idle

If you'd ruined the engine you'd know by now : it'd be smoking out the tailpipe to beat the band and also pissing oil out of every joint ~ your pix clearly show a clean & dry OM617 engine , thus it's not bad .

Relax and take it step by step , not changing parts & O-Rings willy - nilly .

Diesel 911 is your freind here .
__________________
-Nate
1982 240D 408,XXX miles
Ignorance is the mother of suspicion and fear is the father

I did then what I knew how to do ~ now that I know better I do better
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-17-2011, 05:46 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHZR2 View Post
Highly obsolete anymore. Might make sense if ambient is constantly over 30, which could mean summer use... And the vehicle is in constant use.

I'd much rather get faster flow at startup via a better viscosity at "cold", I.e. not 100C conditions.

VII and basestock chemistry has come a long way in 30 years. Were starting to see 5 and 10w-30 oils in HD diesel use at standard conditions... Clearances and tolerances haven't changed that much.

No need to start an oil thread, but no need for people to start running out to get straight wt oils.

Even the different mb vidc charts show how oil chemistry changes midify selection ranges...
" Recommendations " are now influenced by the need to maximize corporate mpg stats... NOT for longevity.. they do not care... in fact will be pleased to have your MB wear out a little faster so you can buy another one from them...
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-17-2011, 06:17 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 2,515
And as a point of reference, oil level between the full and add marks is perfectly fine. There was no need to mess with that in the first place. Do not continuously top off your oil or you will continuously top off your oil. Let it find its sweet spot and leave it be until it gets down near the add mark.
__________________
Len
'59 220S Cabriolet-SOLD and living happily in Malta
'83 240D 351,500 miles original owner-SOLD
'88 560SL 41,000 miles - totaled and parted out
https://sites.google.com/site/mercedesstuff/home
'99 E300 turbo 227,500 miles
'03 SLK320 40,000 miles - gave to my daughter
'14 Smart electric coupe 28,500 miles
'14 Smart electric cabriolet 28,500 miles
'15 Smart electric coupe 28,000 miles

Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-17-2011, 06:45 PM
Yak Yak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 1,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by leathermang View Post
What I was pointing out was that in the summer you should be using STRAIGHT 40 wt... not a multi weight...
Right from the FSM...
I'm confused. Which official recommendation do I follow? Even in this Texas heatwave the temps got under +86 F ambient in the mornings, so you shouldn't be using straight 40W, unless it's Africa hot.

As long as it wasn't 10W-40, or SAE 10W. Those are Strengstens Verboten! Right from the FSM and the electronic owners manual, of course.

I don't think the viscosity of the oil is an issue here.
Attached Thumbnails
Did I kill my OM617 with oil??-oil1.jpg   Did I kill my OM617 with oil??-oil2.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:58 AM
wildest's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Southern Pines NC
Posts: 261
TSB on oil levels

I've read, probably here, that there is a TSB from Mercedes stating that the oil level in the 123's should not be over the halfway mark on the low to full mark on the dipstick. I know that is not much without the link to verify, but I lost that link in a hard drive crash, so I'll try to find the info again. I run straight weight oil in the summer, but I let the oil temp get up before I do any hard running with it.
__________________
1985 300D-189k The 'UD', Ivory and Pinkamino
1979 300D-211k Dark Gray, Parchment
A 1980 Harley-~166k and
A 1994 Ford diesel pickup-349k and
A 1990 gasser Volvo wagon-145k
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-18-2011, 01:42 AM
JHZR2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 5,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by leathermang View Post
" Recommendations " are now influenced by the need to maximize corporate mpg stats... NOT for longevity.. they do not care... in fact will be pleased to have your MB wear out a little faster so you can buy another one from them...
Give me a break. Really?

Is that why trucking fleets run 15w-40 over SAE 40?

Fuel economy in those tests is ruled by the 100c oil viscosity. Guess what? A 5w-40, 15w-40 and SAE 40 are all the same viscosity at 100c.

It is far better to have adequate flow as fast as possible under any conditions.

And if you look at any UOA from any HDEO, youll see that it retains proper viscosity over a LONG time... It would be one thing if they weren't shear stable, but they are.

So what exactly do you think y ou're getting out of running a straight weight? 30 years ago there was bona fide benefit. Things have changed just a bit, and oils are more than a little but better now.
__________________
Current Diesels:
1981 240D (73K)
1982 300CD (169k)
1985 190D (169k)
1991 350SD (113k)
1991 350SD (206k)
1991 300D (228k)
1993 300SD (291k)
1993 300D 2.5T (338k)
1996 Dodge Ram CTD (442k)
1996 Dodge Ram CTD (265k)

Past Diesels:
1983 300D (228K)
1985 300D (233K)
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-18-2011, 02:30 AM
JHZR2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 5,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yak View Post
I'm confused. Which official recommendation do I follow? Even in this Texas heatwave the temps got under +86 F ambient in the mornings, so you shouldn't be using straight 40W, unless it's Africa hot.

As long as it wasn't 10W-40, or SAE 10W. Those are Strengstens Verboten! Right from the FSM and the electronic owners manual, of course.

I don't think the viscosity of the oil is an issue here.






An older and newer version of the chart that is easier to see. The newer one is interesting, as it shows how he change in specs and standards broadens the range of specced oil.

In reality at temperature under load, were considerate of the HT/HS viscosity as a measure of protection. But to get that, we need to be aware of the basics.

The differences between different viscosity oils, conventional and syn, are large - even at the same labeled viscosity.

Let's start with the 'w' portion, like 0w- 5w- and 10w-

These correspond to the Low Temperature (°C) Cranking Viscosity, in units of maximum cP (centipoise), tested by the ASTM D5293 method. The specs are:

0w- => 6200 cP max at -35
5w- => 6600 cP max at -30
10w- => 7000 cP max at -25

And so on.

So, what do those mean? They are the definitions of the highest the viscosity that an oil can be at some test temperature. Some really good oils can meet more than one, for example schaeffer's 15w40 diesel oil actually can test out to be a 10w-40, due to its performance at -25C, similarly, Amsoil 'acd' qualifies as a straight SAE30 weight oil, but its performance at low temperatures also qualifies it to to be a 10w-30 as well. Viscosity/temperature curves are not linear, relating to the coiling/uncoiling of the viscosity index improvers (polymers spoken about earlier) as well as the molecules of the oil basestock itself.

Now, the higher number:
These get a little bit trickier. Two 30 weight oils can span a fairly large range, and still qualify as a 30wt. In general:
Xw-20 is 6.6-9.9 cSt at 100C
Xw-30 is 10-13 cSt at 100C
Xw-40 is 13-16.5 cSt at 100C

And so on. The ranges are not identical.

So, you can have a very thin 30 weight, like Mobil 1, which is only 10 cSt, or a very heavy 30 weight oil, like the made in germany castrol syntec, which is about 12.1 cSt.

Now, there are also ratings. API, ILSAC and ACEA. What is interesting is the newer viscosity temperature chart, which broadened the range for 10w-30, for example, if it met the CCMC G5 spec. Why? Because that was actually the precursor to the euro (ACEA) oil specs. What is interesting is that this spec was the precursor to the A3/B3 spec, which is for higher stress conditions. You can have an A1/B1 spec oil in any viscosity you like, or an A3/B3 oil in the exact same viscosity. The difference? Robustness. The A3/B3 (CCMC G5) will have a higher high Temp/high shear viscosity, which means that under severe temperature and load conditions it will retain robustness and full protection, while also being lower viscosity to provide superior flow, thermal removal characteristics and economy.

The reason why I note this is in response to the confusion and commentary that it is all about economy, as if protection of the engine was automatically compromised. It isn't. MB doesn't want you using some crap multigrade. That is true. But when the oil with correct robustness in terms of viscosity under stress is applied, it becomes a non issue.

40wt was specified 30 years ago (and 10w-40 was not allowed) because oils were far less robust and less spec controlled. As these ratings came forth to judge the duty and use characteristic more clearly, the opportunity to use alternate, superior fluids was expanded because it started to be more foolproof and a spec could draw the right product without issue. When MB expanded the 10w-30 temp range, the only thing that happened was that a high HT/HS performance fluid was able to be specced by invoking the G5 part. All of a sudden you could have a superior foil in use, with a lower viscosity at operatic temps because you knew the quality and metrics of the oil being used. It wasn't just someone dumping 10w-30 havoline in there for fun.

So with the enhanced specifications have come easily recognizable highly robust oils that can do the same or better than a straight weigh oil, while offering superior starting properties when "cold", I.e. Not operating temp.

40wt is a hold ack to old tomes and is obsolete. It has it's place in industry, but auto use is not one of them anymore. There just is no benefit compared to 15w-40 oils which have proven to be robust and reliable under all conditions. While 40wt can be used, the question is why? It does sell better in the third world. Here in the US, there is no compelling benefit, and the FSms don't explicitly state what viscosity is truly "preferred".

A multigrade will give you year round performance, better flow at the start under all conditions, and given that there isn't a cost delta, a superior product that will protect better.

People can feel free to run 40vt when it suits them. It is on the chart. However there are real benefits to selecting the multigrade, and nothing states that anything will be better in any way with a straight oil. The flexibility of using the multi is just another perk.
__________________
Current Diesels:
1981 240D (73K)
1982 300CD (169k)
1985 190D (169k)
1991 350SD (113k)
1991 350SD (206k)
1991 300D (228k)
1993 300SD (291k)
1993 300D 2.5T (338k)
1996 Dodge Ram CTD (442k)
1996 Dodge Ram CTD (265k)

Past Diesels:
1983 300D (228K)
1985 300D (233K)
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-18-2011, 02:26 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 14
Wow JHZR2, thanks for the write-up. I was already in the camp of "oil technology from 30 years ago can't really be compared" before I read it, but it's interesting to see the reasoning.

Quick update; I did a full inspection of my valve work this morning, and except for correcting a gap on the second intake valve, everything was perfect and well-tightened. It's still idling rougher than after the first valve adjustment and seems to be a bit down on power, but I can at least say the engine is in good health.

VWNate1, I think you're right on the money with the clogged fuel filter diagnosis. That seems to fit with everything I'm getting right now - reduced power and slightly shaky idle. I also forgot to mention that on my last stop before the highway the other day, I filled up the tank with diesel. Maybe that contributed to the dislodging of some sludge.

I'm planning to replace that prefilter and see how she runs

EDIT: Just looked over the plastic overboost lines; thie insides toward the manifold are black with soot. Planning to clean the banjo bolts and lines; that should make a difference

Last edited by Sine; 07-18-2011 at 03:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-18-2011, 03:14 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,281
[QUOTE=JHZR2;2753638]....It is far better to have adequate flow as fast as possible under any conditions./QUOTE]

If you really believed that you would have a PreOiler on your car... just like many trucks do....
Do you have a preoiler ?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-18-2011, 09:09 PM
vstech's Avatar
DD MOD, HVAC,MCP,Mac,GMAC
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mount Holly, NC
Posts: 26,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHZR2 View Post





An older and newer version of the chart that is easier to see. The newer one is interesting, as it shows how he change in specs and standards broadens the range of specced oil.

In reality at temperature under load, were considerate of the HT/HS viscosity as a measure of protection. But to get that, we need to be aware of the basics.

The differences between different viscosity oils, conventional and syn, are large - even at the same labeled viscosity.

Let's start with the 'w' portion, like 0w- 5w- and 10w-

These correspond to the Low Temperature (°C) Cranking Viscosity, in units of maximum cP (centipoise), tested by the ASTM D5293 method. The specs are:

0w- => 6200 cP max at -35
5w- => 6600 cP max at -30
10w- => 7000 cP max at -25

And so on.

So, what do those mean? They are the definitions of the highest the viscosity that an oil can be at some test temperature. Some really good oils can meet more than one, for example schaeffer's 15w40 diesel oil actually can test out to be a 10w-40, due to its performance at -25C, similarly, Amsoil 'acd' qualifies as a straight SAE30 weight oil, but its performance at low temperatures also qualifies it to to be a 10w-30 as well. Viscosity/temperature curves are not linear, relating to the coiling/uncoiling of the viscosity index improvers (polymers spoken about earlier) as well as the molecules of the oil basestock itself.

Now, the higher number:
These get a little bit trickier. Two 30 weight oils can span a fairly large range, and still qualify as a 30wt. In general:
Xw-20 is 6.6-9.9 cSt at 100C
Xw-30 is 10-13 cSt at 100C
Xw-40 is 13-16.5 cSt at 100C

And so on. The ranges are not identical.

So, you can have a very thin 30 weight, like Mobil 1, which is only 10 cSt, or a very heavy 30 weight oil, like the made in germany castrol syntec, which is about 12.1 cSt.

Now, there are also ratings. API, ILSAC and ACEA. What is interesting is the newer viscosity temperature chart, which broadened the range for 10w-30, for example, if it met the CCMC G5 spec. Why? Because that was actually the precursor to the euro (ACEA) oil specs. What is interesting is that this spec was the precursor to the A3/B3 spec, which is for higher stress conditions. You can have an A1/B1 spec oil in any viscosity you like, or an A3/B3 oil in the exact same viscosity. The difference? Robustness. The A3/B3 (CCMC G5) will have a higher high Temp/high shear viscosity, which means that under severe temperature and load conditions it will retain robustness and full protection, while also being lower viscosity to provide superior flow, thermal removal characteristics and economy.

The reason why I note this is in response to the confusion and commentary that it is all about economy, as if protection of the engine was automatically compromised. It isn't. MB doesn't want you using some crap multigrade. That is true. But when the oil with correct robustness in terms of viscosity under stress is applied, it becomes a non issue.

40wt was specified 30 years ago (and 10w-40 was not allowed) because oils were far less robust and less spec controlled. As these ratings came forth to judge the duty and use characteristic more clearly, the opportunity to use alternate, superior fluids was expanded because it started to be more foolproof and a spec could draw the right product without issue. When MB expanded the 10w-30 temp range, the only thing that happened was that a high HT/HS performance fluid was able to be specced by invoking the G5 part. All of a sudden you could have a superior foil in use, with a lower viscosity at operatic temps because you knew the quality and metrics of the oil being used. It wasn't just someone dumping 10w-30 havoline in there for fun.

So with the enhanced specifications have come easily recognizable highly robust oils that can do the same or better than a straight weigh oil, while offering superior starting properties when "cold", I.e. Not operating temp.

40wt is a hold ack to old tomes and is obsolete. It has it's place in industry, but auto use is not one of them anymore. There just is no benefit compared to 15w-40 oils which have proven to be robust and reliable under all conditions. While 40wt can be used, the question is why? It does sell better in the third world. Here in the US, there is no compelling benefit, and the FSms don't explicitly state what viscosity is truly "preferred".

A multigrade will give you year round performance, better flow at the start under all conditions, and given that there isn't a cost delta, a superior product that will protect better.

People can feel free to run 40vt when it suits them. It is on the chart. However there are real benefits to selecting the multigrade, and nothing states that anything will be better in any way with a straight oil. The flexibility of using the multi is just another perk.
take serious note of the last line of the oil recommendation image...
"in temps above 30C use straight weight 40 oil EXCEPT FOR 617 TURBO DIESEL..."
to me, this means the diesel should ALWAYS use multigrade oil

__________________
John HAUL AWAY, OR CRUSHED CARS!!! HELP ME keep the cars out of the crusher! A/C Thread
"as I ride with my a/c on... I have fond memories of sweaty oily saturdays and spewing R12 into the air. THANKS for all you do!

My drivers:
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5-5SPEED!!!

1987 300TD
1987 300TD
1994GMC 2500 6.5Turbo truck... I had to put the ladder somewhere!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page