Sounds more like you are tearing down neglected engines with lack of regular maintenance. It takes a bit of work to get a normal engine that bad (unless you tear apart Toyotas)

Here's a pic of an M104 that someone i know is tearing down, with 225K, and it's running dino oil. It's was shockingly clean- considering how it's kept. This was taken last week- head gasket time.


My own car is at least this clean underneath as well- dino 20/50 according to the records.

rjp

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
03 540I (GAK!!)
81 280E (W123)
70 LeMans Sport with pissed off Poncho 462"
1989 Silverado Step Side (under the knife- complete restomod)

I assume you mean cheaper by intervals. It isn't actually cheaper in cost.

rjp

__________________
03 540I (GAK!!)
81 280E (W123)
70 LeMans Sport with pissed off Poncho 462"
1989 Silverado Step Side (under the knife- complete restomod)

$5/quart once a year + 1 oil filter. Non synthetic oil is a waste of time and money by comparison.

__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words

I accept your claim that the dealer put in Mobil 1 from the beginning but that doesn't show what it came with from the factory. It's not something that can be documented - on the production card or anywhere else. But Mercedes wasn't putting Mobil 1 in from the factory for 1988 models - not even close. The O'Keefe litigation and settlement a decade later make absolutely no sense in that context.

Just to point out the most grievous flaw in your logic - switching X number of cars over from conventional to synthetic without new leaks doesn't prove that synthetic isn't more likely to leak. If the theorum was that synthetic always caused leaks then conversion without a leak would disprove the theory.

Here's one way to prove the theory - take a car without leaks on conventional oil, switch it to synthetic, experience leaks, switch it back to conventional and see the leaks stop. This has happened to me twice. And as stated earlier Mercedes has ackowleged the synthetic oil leak problem.

i can't believe there are still people fighting this. That synthetic oil is NOT more prone to leak is the old wive's tale.

If I'm ever in need of entertainment I just go look up an oil thread.

It doesn't matter what one says, you know someone with the direct opposite view will counter.

Let's all agree to buy a good quality oil and change it and the filter on a regular basis.

There may not be much else were we can.

Let's see who will counter this post.

Not really, depends on your actual change intervals. You are still risking excessive wear yours being a flat tappet engine as well.


I"m aware what it says on the side of the bottle, it just isn't always good for what us older owners have.


rjp

__________________
03 540I (GAK!!)
81 280E (W123)
70 LeMans Sport with pissed off Poncho 462"
1989 Silverado Step Side (under the knife- complete restomod)

Like I said before, once a year which comes out to 8000-15000 miles depending which car we're talking about.
Just about every OHC engine manufactured in the last 20 years has flat tappets. They don't experience excessive wear with synthetic. I'm not sure where this myth came from either.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that using synthetic oil in an M103 with long change intervals causes excessive wear or oil leaks.

__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words

You're kidding right?

Ask anyone who owns a domestic, or a Porsche owner what happens when flat tappet followers meet low ZDDP synthetic.

Your anecdotal evidence based on 37K miles on a vehicle you've owned a few years is faulty. There's a reason Brad Penn, Valvoline, et. all are coming out with "vintage" formula oils, to address exactly what I'm talking about.

rjp

__________________
03 540I (GAK!!)
81 280E (W123)
70 LeMans Sport with pissed off Poncho 462"
1989 Silverado Step Side (under the knife- complete restomod)

Interesting comment on the 20-50 in the 1991 300SE. When I bought my 1991 300SE in West Texas 20 years ago, the dealer was recommending Kendall 20-50.
The owners manual recommended all the usual oils, but the 20-50 was the heaviest oil recommended, and not suggested to be used below 32 degrees.
It does get hot out there, and folks drive really fast, so I can see the logic in the 20W-50 recommendation.

But, I'm a subscriber to the approach that initial cold start is where the vast majority of engine wear occurs, so I went with 10-40, and then switched to the Valvoline Max Life 10-40 when it came out about 10 years ago. 220k miles and still going strong with very minimal oil usage between 4-5k mile changes, and very infrequent seal/gasket leaks.
I like the Max Life because the adds say that it is formulated with additional detergents, a bit more seal softener, and is taken from the high end of the viscosity range. I don't know if all this is true, but if it is, it sounds like all the things we should be doing in an old engine.

I've run all kinds of oils in all kinds of engines for 50 years, and never had any kind of oil-related failure or wear issue in any one of them.
Yeah, technology changes, and 1991 300SE's are running hardened flat-tappet cams while modern motors are roller lifter. But the same approach seems to still apply - use a good brand oil in the viscosity range recommended, and change it pretty often, and worry about something else.
Works for me.

DG

Thanks everyone for all of the advice. I don't see that anyone said they were using 5W 30 so I wonder why Kragen told me to use that? I think I am going to use 20W 50. Thank again everyone for helping!

NOOOO!!! NOT THAT!


(just kiddin with ya )


rjp

__________________
03 540I (GAK!!)
81 280E (W123)
70 LeMans Sport with pissed off Poncho 462"
1989 Silverado Step Side (under the knife- complete restomod)