oil analysis - 6k OCI on Delvac 1 in a 617 turbo - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

gsxr · #16 05-28-2004, 06:16 PM

Here's the recent results from my 1984 300D. The soot load has been rather high, but everything else seems to be improving. Current fill is M-1 15W-50, and may use D-1 next time:

http://www.meimann.com/docs/mercedes/oil_analysis_84s.pdf

Dana B. · #17 05-28-2004, 08:03 PM

Gixxer, Hard to read, because your report reads sideways.

JHZR2 · #18 05-28-2004, 08:48 PM

wow... those iron readings are high. dont know why

Palangi · #19 05-28-2004, 09:11 PM

JHZR2, The reason I asked about fuel addatives was, my 300D showed potassium at about 20 the last 2 times, but has not shown any water or antifreeze. The oil analysis folks (Blackstone) seem to think it was coming from the Redline DFC. I stopped using it, and will be curious to see how the K looks next time.

JHZR2 · #20 05-28-2004, 09:17 PM

very interesting. My truck showed high K and Na on the first analysis I did. GM has had problems with bad intake manifold gaskets, and coolant slowly dribbling into the oil. Ive thought it was that, and havent found anything when taking it to my really good dealer, even from pressure testing, etc.

Maybe its from a fuel additive... Ill have to see.

Thanks for the input!

JMH

Gurkha · #21 05-29-2004, 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JHZR2
I am actively involved in the oil analysis community. I am also a major user of synthetic oils, thus my use of delvac 1.

If you look at the delo's lube basestock, its quite good. Its additive package however contains no friction modifier additives such as molybdenum, which I have found causes this oil to provide inferior fuel economy to a friction modified HDEO or a synthetic oil. And my mileage figures prove it over long sampling times (many thousands of miles).

No arguing that chevron makes great oils, their basestocks are second to none as far ad conventional oils go, and oil analysis wear rates attest to that. But MPG and extended drain intervals are my game. And prior to this analysis, I could only extrapolate to the soot loading on a 617 at times beyond 3-4k. Now I know I can get more bang for my buck by running delvac 1 longer, and retaining the assurance that I have what is certainly the best oil on the market. YMMV. Mileage alone wont recoup the higher costs of delvac 1 change. However, two delo changes at $6/gal, with $8 filters, and the difference in mileage Ive realized (27 with delo vs 30 with delvac 1) over all seasonal and driving conditions, gives me this:

Delvac 1:
gallons of fuel/6000 miles: 200
Price @ $1.65/gal: $330
quarts of oil/6000 mi: 8
Price@ $4.77/qt: $38
Price of 1 filter/OCI: $8
Total cost: $376

Conventional:
gallons of fuel/6000 miles: 222
Price @ 1.65/gal: 366
quarts of oil/6000 mi: 16
price@ $1.5/qt: $24
Price of 2 filters for OCI: $16
Total cost: $406

Now sure, maybe conventional oil can could be driven for more than 3000 mi, but typically it isnt the greatest idea, especially consdering that conventional oil typically can suspend up to 2% soot, and synthetics, as of last I heard, could suspend up to approx. 4% I like that buffer. Plus, Ive noticed a decrease of performance in the conventionals past approximately 3500 miles, due to soot loading likely thickening up the oil.

Im not trying to start a war or say that anyone else is wrong, or my oil is better. Definitely not. I think that chevron and pennzoil dino oils are excellent, and on par with a lot of synthetics, and with often a better additive package. its just that Ive made a switch to synthetics and have been happy with them, and havent really noticed an added cost, since the change intervals can be comfortably extended out longer.

JMH

I dont wish to get into an argument with you as from your post I gather that your knowledge level on lubrication far exceeds mine, but if I were you, I would give the Delo a chance before passing on the judgment. Out in the hot middle east where temperature of over 50c and perpetual dust are common occurence, Delo 400 has proved to be an instant hit with fleet owners as well as SUV owners, Nissan, Toyota and Mitsubishi dealers highly reccomend this oil for their SUVs. It is a CI-4 rated oil so long drain stability is well documented. Fleets are stretching this oil for as long as 25000 miles with oil analysis, out on the Dodge and Ford light truck forums, this oil has been positively accepted and drain intervals of 7500 miles are quite common. The oil analysis is especialy encouraging with very low iron count even after hard towing in hot weather and the TBN number retained after 7500 miles is only around 35% less than the original TBN of 13. I can personaly testify to the stability of this oil as I recently drove my OM 616 turbo engined Gurkha at 55c weather with my engine temp at a steady 95c for around 900 grueling miles of highway and stop and go. The oil shows no signs of thinning or soot. The engine noise level remians the same, I have seen higher rated oil give up in less hostile conditions. All signs of a hard working quality diesel oil. The Delo-400 is the only oil to meet the million mile spec from Cummins and GM truck division.

Dont get me wrong, I too am a big fan of synthetic oil and have always been a Mobil-I fan, in fact my trannies and diffs only carry that stuff and nothing else. Sadly out here in India, Delvac-I costs $12 a liter whereas the Delo-400 costs $3 a liter. Considering that, Delo-400 is really good choice for people like us.

JHZR2 · #22 05-29-2004, 01:23 AM

Thanks for your post, thats really neat to hear about the grueling conditions that these engines and that oil can withstand.

Believe me, I gave delo a try. In older E30 BMWs, Ive seen absolutely remarkable wear rates using it. but as I said earlier, its an MPG thing. my mpg just wasnt as good using delo as when using other conventional oils (pennzoil, delvac 1300). Thats just what I found.

I am actually considering switching my BMW 318i delo 400, as the base oil is pretty good adn I think itd bea good match.

The problem overall is, if you want to pick one oil and stick with it, it really needs to be a 5w-40 in either the bmw or MB, because a 15w- oil just gets too thick when it stays below 30F all the time.Thats not to say Ive ever had oil related starting issues, but you can definitely feel the difference in the way the car cranks and runs for the first few seconds.

Ill never argue that delo, delvac 1300 or pennzoil long life are excellent oils - they certainly are. But I like the reassurance, cold flow and good results with wear rates and MPG that I get with delvac 1.

JMH

Gurkha · #23 05-29-2004, 01:27 AM

Fully agree with the cold temp issue and 15W-40 oils, I too get poor mileage during winters when the temps are down to 0c or less but in my case, I have no choice but to grin and bear it.

Sooty Taillight · #24 05-29-2004, 01:50 AM

I have little knowledge about your trade and have open ears! I do understand that a bicyle chain does not realize temperature variant, or scrubers that initiate longevity.

Eleven years ago, upon a cross country trip in my 86 G-20 Chevy van, with 305 CI, I bought new, and at 86K, somewhere in the deserts of south eastern California, having been using Slik-50, all my hydrualic lifters started to become dry and valve noise was loude until, a road side oil change, with regular everyday oil, did it return to normal.

I heard later that my oil filter probably got maxed from the clogging from the PTFE, or, teflon, and caused a drop in oil pressure from a prolonged period of operation.

I drove on that trip appro. 500 mi per day. No harm came, but it scared me.

Gurkha · #25 05-29-2004, 03:29 AM

One of the reasons Slick-50 is a definite No-No in engines specialy when you have the likes of AMSOIL, MOBIL-I, Delo etc. why go through the un-neccesary risk.

gsxr · #26 05-29-2004, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dana B.
Gixxer, Hard to read, because your report reads sideways.

When you open the file with Acrobat Reader, select the menu option to rotate 90 degrees (CW or CCW, I forget which it needs). I couldn't get the silly thing to save in landscape format (sideways). Also mess with the view size (percent) as needed to make it legible.

Or just print it out!

Dana B. · #27 05-29-2004, 03:13 PM

Gottit.

#28 05-29-2004, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JHZR2
Funny how you say that about pennzoil, regarding their sales based upon marketing and their name... Its the same about rotella. Shell Rotella conventional oil is very ordinary as far as its base lube oil and its additive package goes. Cold flow properties are worse than delvac delo or pennzoil conventionals.

There have been a lot of things said about conventional pennzoil... causes sludge, ash, wax, etc., but from a base lube standpoint, its specs are excelent for a conventional oil, and from an additive package standpoint, I dont really know of any better.

JMH

I gotta disagree about the claim of Rotella being only average. I tried both Delo 400 and Rotella back when I drove big trucks. I had a period of time where I was running rocky mountain doubles between Salt Lake City, UT., and Denver, CO. Running Delo in this condition was causing me to use a gallon of oil between refuels on a relatively young Caterpillar 3406E engine. Switching back to Rotella, the oil consumption would stop entirely. Fuel mileage would bump up a tenth as well. With this, I stayed strictly on Rotella, and insisted on it when the oil was changed in the truck.

When I bought my Dodge, I immediately put it on Rotella after it's first oil change. When I started my 50 mile commutes, I tried different change intervals before settling on 5,000 miles. I now have 104,500 miles on this truck, and blowby is so minimal, that it doesn't drip oil from the breather tube onto the pavement after being run, and I can start it stone cold below freezing without waiting for the "wait to start" light to shut off. It'll fire off within the second revolution every start. I've been able to easily pour Rotella oil even below zero. Rotella has proven to me to be well up to the task of severe service.

JHZR2 · #29 05-29-2004, 10:46 PM

well, my comments are based upon the fact that cold flow performance of rotella has historically been inferior to that of the other HDEOs (recently that has changed, and the pour point, for example of rotella is better than that of delo 400, and the same as rotella synthetic). Pour point isnt the tell all criteria for a good oil base, but it can give some insight; actual viscosity at certain temps tell all.

However, analysis has shown that the additive package of rotella is historically a bit weaker. Now what does that mean? Not too much, i suppose; Ive seen plenty of really great analyses with very low wear rates from supposedly inferior or common oils, and plenty of great results where dino oils trend better than synthetics. But all in all, given the price vs additive package, TBN, low temp performance, etc., Id still have to say that rotella is ordinary. Not bad, not an inferior choice, just ordinary compared to oils like delo with a real good base lube, or delvac 1300s with a really good additive package, complete with moly, etc.

JMH

Gurkha · #30 05-30-2004, 12:17 AM

If we were to compare the Delvac-I 5W-40 with the Delo, then the right comparison would be with the Delo-400 synthetic and in that case, the specs are quite evenly matched with the Delo having VI of 175 compared to Delvac-I's 151, the Delvac-I has a PP of -49 versus Delo 400 synth's -45. HTHS remains the same at 2.90 and TBN too is close with Delo-400 at 12.5 and Mobil Delvac-I at 12. Nocack is same for both at 13.

Now this is where it gets intersting, if HTHS is to be taken, none of the synthetic oils from either Delo or Mobil come close to Mobil Delvac conventional's rating of 4.40, this is due to the moly package in conventinal Delvac-1, the synthetic scores much lower in the HTHS rating. The Delo-400 Isosynth scores 3.70 which isnt shabby but nothing close to 4.40. There are oils from other manufacturers which have even higher moly package yeilding higher HTHS numbers.

HTHS is quite important if one is putting the engine to severe duty like hauling more than rated load, extended high speed runs in above normal temperatures etc. In lieu of all this, what is your opinion, do you think we should stick to using conventinal oils with extended moly package when subjecting our vehicles to severe duty?