Are thinner oils damaging MB Bluetec engines?

[2004tdigls]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: 2004tdigls
the extended oil change intervals is the reason, my neigbhour is a mechanic at Mercedes Benz Vancouver, there are 3 sprinter vans in the shop with siezed engines currently undergoing engine replacement.

merecedes, like BMW wants their cars to be percieved as "maintenance free", what this means in reality is that the vehicle owner just changes the engine instead of changing the oil

change the oil at half the recommended interval and ignore the oil service monitor system

http://www.stephensservice.com/bluetec-diesel-issuesproblems/

"To summarize, what oil to use in different areas & driving conditions.
Stop & go city driving in sub-zero weather. Use the 5w/30 CK-4 rated oil. Change every 3000 miles. Brand doesn’t matter.
Below freezing weather & mountain driving. Use 15W/40 CK-4 rated oil. Change every 3000 miles.
Everything else, use 10W/60 or 20W/60 & change every 5000 miles"


This requires good

you wouldn't laugh if you needed a new engine at 50, 000 KM

https://pawlikautomotive.com/2010-mercedes-benz-gl350-engine-replacement/

 

[chrisri]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Alfa never had problems with their engines, you as a European should know that. Alfa/Fiat engines are well known for their longevity, diesels having almost cult status.

My friends e46 330d dumped fuel info a crankcase via high pressure pump and caused engine to overrun at 200K. He had kid and a wife in a car, and thankfully he is mechanically inclined so he stopped the engine before it run over. What would happen if the missus was driving?
BMW is getting to stupid for its own good.

Is that why we have another thread on another forum about Fiat V6 and CJ-4 oils?

Probably. For similar reasons we also have all that threads on failing VWs and some BMW's.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Alfa never had problems with their engines, you as a European should know that. Alfa/Fiat engines are well known for their longevity, diesels having almost cult status.

My friends e46 330d dumped fuel info a crankcase via high pressure pump and caused engine to overrun at 200K. He had kid and a wife in a car, and thankfully he is mechanically inclined so he stopped the engine before it run over. What would happen if the missus was driving?
BMW is getting to stupid for its own good.

Is that why we have another thread on another forum about Fiat V6 and CJ-4 oils?

Probably. For similar reasons we also have all that threads on failing VWs and some BMW's.

That is not the point. You mentioned one BMW (which has much better reputation then Alfa engines, by the way) and now you are saying "similar."
Well, we can go back to 1.7 33 where AR forgot to put parts of installation, Twin Spark engines and slew of problems in 156. It was like youa re buying barrel without bottom. I had AR, and Lancia (boxer, and TS and JTD) and they are good. BMW good? LOL

 

[chrisri]

Alfa 1.5 and 1.7 with all of hers shortcomings were a rocket compared to the e21 4inline. I know, I had both.

Alfa 16v bottom end problems were caused because of similar conditions that you point out when you defend your beloved brand VW- poor maintenance by the idiot owners who never checked oil and know rats and about cars.

Both companies build good drivers cars, with, historically, BMW had edge in overall product in last two decades.

You, being Bosnian, and me being littoral Croatian could never agree on this. You guys simply ADORE your VWs, Audis and BMWs, no matter how problematic they can be.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
Alfa 1.5 and 1.7 with all of hers shortcomings were a rocket compared to the e21 4inline. I know, I had both.

Alfa 16v bottom end problems were caused because of similar conditions that you point out when you defend your beloved brand VW- poor maintenance by the idiot owners who never checked oil and know rats and about cars.

Both companies build good drivers cars, with, historically, BMW had edge in overall product in last two decades.

You, being Bosnian, and me being littoral Croatian could never agree on this. You guys simply ADORE your VWs, Audis and BMWs, no matter how problematic they can be.

Of all shortcoming? Would you have enough space to list all of them?
156 poor maintenance? LOL, those engines are long before DI found its way to Alfa. And you also say, BMW has edge last two decades? Did not know that Alfa 164 was pinnacle of technological achievements of that time.
I guess Fiat was on verge of selling Alfa because it was just that good of a product. If VW, BMW etc. have same issues as AR or Fiat, why then Fiat or AR does not sell equal amount of cars? I mean, if AR is such a good product, and it is cheaper then BMW, where is the problem then? Conspiracy theory against Italy? Secret German families running EU?

 

[chrisri]

What are you talking about? What was wrong with the 164? 164 v6 was quite of a car then. And 156? What problems? Front suspension, upper wishbones? Sure. How about that front suspension on a B5? That was something. Or a 3.0 tdi. Great engines, brilliant cars. Or 2.0 tfsi or tdi oil consumption. Or diff assembly on my 09 caddy that failed at 90K? And now whining at 250K again. Brilliant.

Sell numbers do not always mirror products quality. VW is making [censored] for ages and sell great, SAAB made great cars before GM and it went down.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
What are you talking about? What was wrong with the 164? 164 v6 was quite of a car then. And 156? What problems? Front suspension, upper wishbones? Sure. How about that front suspension on a B5? That was something. Or a 3.0 tdi. Great engines, brilliant cars. Or 2.0 tfsi or tdi oil consumption. Or diff assembly on my 09 caddy that failed at 90K? And now whining at 250K again. Brilliant.

Sell numbers do not always mirror products quality. VW is making [censored] for ages and sell great, SAAB made great cars before GM and it went down.

LOL, yeah, Alfa Romeo was all this time misunderstood.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
inline 6 is preferable over v6 for a luxury vehicle with front engine and rwd. it just makes more sense.

Of course, but cost cutting....


Also packaging. Which means marketing....

An inline six is long, and won't fit in a compact car, or with a short hood. It won't fit in most of the new C-class car's, nor in the GLK SUVs.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
inline 6 is preferable over v6 for a luxury vehicle with front engine and rwd. it just makes more sense.

Of course, but cost cutting....


Also packaging. Which means marketing....

An inline six is long, and won't fit in a compact car, or with a short hood. It won't fit in most of the new C-class car's, nor in the GLK SUVs.

Of course. Part of cost cutting. You can run different platforms and have more flexibility designing cars.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: edyvw

Intrudes passenger cell? You really can hear everything here.


yes you can. And the info was from Volvo regarding their transverse I6 installation. Everything said was true, you just don't agree. that does not make you correct.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
yes you can. And the info was from Volvo regarding their transverse I6 installation. Everything said was true, you just don't agree. that does not make you correct.


I remember the advertisements (ads, fluff) that Volvo made back in the day.

Advertising isn't science, any more than an Austin Kimberly made any sort of engineering sense, except in the eyes of marketers.

Australia's Ford Falcons are still straight 6, have 5 star for as long as 5 star has been in existance...and are still longitudinal

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
yes you can. And the info was from Volvo regarding their transverse I6 installation. Everything said was true, you just don't agree. that does not make you correct.


I remember the advertisements (ads, fluff) that Volvo made back in the day.

Advertising isn't science, any more than an Austin Kimberly made any sort of engineering sense, except in the eyes of marketers.

Australia's Ford Falcons are still straight 6, have 5 star for as long as 5 star has been in existance...and are still longitudinal


If you really do remember then you know that the statements were corroborated by their engineers in major car rags. No one said you could not do it, they just stated that the packaging was much easier. Think cheaper if you prefer.

I love the sounds and feel of a straight six FAR more than a V6, but the I6 is simply too long for most smaller car designs...

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
yes you can. And the info was from Volvo regarding their transverse I6 installation. Everything said was true, you just don't agree. that does not make you correct.


I remember the advertisements (ads, fluff) that Volvo made back in the day.

Advertising isn't science, any more than an Austin Kimberly made any sort of engineering sense, except in the eyes of marketers.

Australia's Ford Falcons are still straight 6, have 5 star for as long as 5 star has been in existance...and are still longitudinal


If you really do remember then you know that the statements were corroborated by their engineers in major car rags. No one said you could not do it, they just stated that the packaging was much easier. Think cheaper if you prefer.

I love the sounds and feel of a straight six FAR more than a V6, but the I6 is simply too long for most smaller car designs...

They are too long because car manufacturers are trying to save a buck, so they share platforms.
As for Volvo and transverse I6, try to work on it with AWD version. It is nightmare.

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

I think the key is that cars that generally have the i6 are RWD. Most cars with V6's are traverse mount with the Charger/Challenger/300 and the Mustang/Camaro as exceptions.

No, V6 RWD cars are still the norm. The 1984 Nissan 300ZX was equipped with a V6 and RWD, and ever since then, every Z-car has had a V6 engine and RWD.

Nissan did this to reduce the number of engine variants that it had to build. By building a V6, they were able to build a FWD Nissan Maxima in 1985. The L-series or RB-series inline 6 were too long to be used in a transverse FWD application.

Variants of the Z31 sold in Japan had an optional inline engine, it was some kind of RB-series engine. Since crash test standards there were a few years behind the USA, it may have been possible to fit that engine under a very short hood. Part of the reason the that the Datsun 240, 260, and 280 had a longer hood was because they needed to pass crash test standards and still accommodate the inline 6.

The Inifinti G35 was an RWD car with a V6, and it was replaced by the G37 which was also RWD with a V6 engine.

The Lexus IS-series originally had an inline 6 and RWD, but later it used a V6 that was a variant of what was found in the Toyota Avalon.

Another thing to consider is that cars that were RWD, but didn't have the engine in the front usually had a V6 engine, not an inline. The Pontiac Fiero and Acura NSX are the first 2 cars I can think of.

 

[alex_at]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: chrisri
What are you talking about? What was wrong with the 164? 164 v6 was quite of a car then. And 156? What problems? Front suspension, upper wishbones? Sure. How about that front suspension on a B5? That was something. Or a 3.0 tdi. Great engines, brilliant cars. Or 2.0 tfsi or tdi oil consumption. Or diff assembly on my 09 caddy that failed at 90K? And now whining at 250K again. Brilliant.

Sell numbers do not always mirror products quality. VW is making [censored] for ages and sell great, SAAB made great cars before GM and it went down.

LOL, yeah, Alfa Romeo was all this time misunderstood.


I give you my quote on this:

Of all the cars that I've owned over the years the best cars and most troublefree engines were italians.

I had a 1989 Lancia Dedra 2.0ie, a 2004 Fiat Stilo 1.9 JTD 3door, a 2005 Fiat Stilo 1.9 JTD 5door and I now have a Lancia Thesis 2.4 JTD. These were the most reliable cars in terms of engine reliability I ever owned. I also had a 2001 Mercedes Benz W210 E270 CDI which had a great engine - the only CDI engine in the lineup that wasn't a Mercedes Benz engine, it was made by VM Motori in Italy.

In 2008 I bought a 2006 Volkswagen Phaeton with the 3.0 TDI engine. Till now, I have well over 20.000€ in repairs invested. I had to replace all the injectors, they were completely worn out, I had to replace both upper cam chains and tensioners, I had to replace the common rail fuel pump, I had to replace the complete intake manifold, the EGR valve twice, the throttle valve body and other bits and pieces.

I would by an italian Diesel engine again without any hesitation. A Volkswagen/Audi? I'm not so sure.

[censored], my aunt had a 2001 Fiat Multipla 1.9 JTD that has been involved in multiple car accidents, was completely neglected in terms of maintenance. She sold it perfectly running with somwhere around 450.000 km on the clock. After the car passed 300.000km the maintenance was even more neglected due to the decision that the car would be replaced as soon as it broke down. I drove it 2 years ago with 400.000 on the clock - the engine and gearbox were as strong as ever. Just the paint and the interior had worn due to the age and neglection. The engine has never been opened, the only thing replaced other than tires, brakes, oil and coolant (which is regular or better unregular in this case maintenance anyway). At 380.000km a new clutch was installed, other than that the engine, gearbox and drivetrain were factory original.
I found that very very impressive.

 

[edyvw]

I had Alfa Romeo (good ole boxer engine) and Lancia Lybra 2.4 jtd with 150hp version.
The engines were a blast to drive, but both never liked cold weather. Both engines were in mint condition, but on -30c, I never knew what would happen. One thing with German cars is that you know they will fire up on that temperature.
On your note about Phaeton. V6 CR TDI in both 3.0 and 2.7ltr versions is so so engine, and it is a consequence of VW investing in PD technology which of course, never came to fruition due to Euro emission standards.
But let's be serious, Opel was making great gas engines for decades, where are they now? Italians always had great engines, while they work, problem was everything else in the car. In last decade or two things got better, but let's not forget such gems as Tipo, Alfa 75 etc.

 

[chrisri]

Tipo won car of the year back then, it was the most roomy, most comfortable hatch in late 80s. The 1.8 and 2.0 16v were very capable cars- if not as inspiring to drive as the older, lighter cars.

Now compare that to the mk2 Golf.

Let's not even begin with Lancia Delta hatchback, car had rear multilink in 1979 with road manners that VWs of that era could only dream about.

And 75?. Seriously? One of the most sought after affordable youngtimer today. For a decent, but non restored one, you will pay 5K Euro. And to freshen her another 5K. That will buy you a lot of 80s Passats.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
Tipo won car of the year back then, it was the most roomy, most comfortable hatch in late 80s. The 1.8 and 2.0 16v were very capable cars- if not as inspiring to drive as the older, lighter cars.

Now compare that to the mk2 Golf.

Let's not even begin with Lancia Delta hatchback, car had rear multilink in 1979 with road manners that VWs of that era could only dream about.

And 75?. Seriously? One of the most sought after affordable youngtimer today. For a decent, but non restored one, you will pay 5K Euro. And to freshen her another 5K. That will buy you a lot of 80s Passats.

Seriously? Tipo? A plastic car whose dash would disintegrate after 3 years. A lot of [censored] cars won car of the year award.
Mk2 Golf would run on anything. I am definitely not fan of one, would never buy it, I actually hate it. But comparing quality of Golf mk2 and Italians from 80's is like comparing North Korean computer with Apple. 75 is now collection car. That is far different from car that you use on daily basis.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: artificialist
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

I think the key is that cars that generally have the i6 are RWD. Most cars with V6's are traverse mount with the Charger/Challenger/300 and the Mustang/Camaro as exceptions.

No, V6 RWD cars are still the norm. The 1984 Nissan 300ZX was equipped with a V6 and RWD, and ever since then, every Z-car has had a V6 engine and RWD.

Nissan did this to reduce the number of engine variants that it had to build. By building a V6, they were able to build a FWD Nissan Maxima in 1985. The L-series or RB-series inline 6 were too long to be used in a transverse FWD application.

Variants of the Z31 sold in Japan had an optional inline engine, it was some kind of RB-series engine. Since crash test standards there were a few years behind the USA, it may have been possible to fit that engine under a very short hood. Part of the reason the that the Datsun 240, 260, and 280 had a longer hood was because they needed to pass crash test standards and still accommodate the inline 6.

The Inifinti G35 was an RWD car with a V6, and it was replaced by the G37 which was also RWD with a V6 engine.

The Lexus IS-series originally had an inline 6 and RWD, but later it used a V6 that was a variant of what was found in the Toyota Avalon.

Another thing to consider is that cars that were RWD, but didn't have the engine in the front usually had a V6 engine, not an inline. The Pontiac Fiero and Acura NSX are the first 2 cars I can think of.
What was "found" in the Avalon was the CAMRY V6.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: artificialist
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

I think the key is that cars that generally have the i6 are RWD. Most cars with V6's are traverse mount with the Charger/Challenger/300 and the Mustang/Camaro as exceptions.

No, V6 RWD cars are still the norm. The 1984 Nissan 300ZX was equipped with a V6 and RWD, and ever since then, every Z-car has had a V6 engine and RWD.

Nissan did this to reduce the number of engine variants that it had to build. By building a V6, they were able to build a FWD Nissan Maxima in 1985. The L-series or RB-series inline 6 were too long to be used in a transverse FWD application.

Variants of the Z31 sold in Japan had an optional inline engine, it was some kind of RB-series engine. Since crash test standards there were a few years behind the USA, it may have been possible to fit that engine under a very short hood. Part of the reason the that the Datsun 240, 260, and 280 had a longer hood was because they needed to pass crash test standards and still accommodate the inline 6.

The Inifinti G35 was an RWD car with a V6, and it was replaced by the G37 which was also RWD with a V6 engine.

The Lexus IS-series originally had an inline 6 and RWD, but later it used a V6 that was a variant of what was found in the Toyota Avalon.

Another thing to consider is that cars that were RWD, but didn't have the engine in the front usually had a V6 engine, not an inline. The Pontiac Fiero and Acura NSX are the first 2 cars I can think of.
What was "found" in the Avalon was the CAMRY V6.

It is Toyota V6. One has Di another does not. As of this year, they share exactly same engine!