Well, you're kind of asking the wrong guy. I am a Bosch certified diesel technician and I am not a fan of pulling emissions equipment off anything. So IMO I would stick with the recommended C3 oils, but it's your vehicle.
Ravenol 5w30 REP vs VMS vs VMP
- Thread starter andreigbs
- Start date
Originally Posted by andreigbs
Quote
I am not a fan of pulling emissions equipment off anything
Neither am I, but if push comes to shove I will amputate to save the patient
That said, would running a full synth HD oil like the ones I mentioned be detrimental in any way?
I don't know the long term ramifications. I would like to think if an oil is ok for a DPF in a Ford pickup that it's probably ok for a Mercedes Bluetec, but I don't know if that's actually the case. I would suspect SAPS levels in even DPF friendly HDEO's are higher than something with 229.51 approval.
Quote
I am not a fan of pulling emissions equipment off anything
Neither am I, but if push comes to shove I will amputate to save the patient
That said, would running a full synth HD oil like the ones I mentioned be detrimental in any way?
I don't know the long term ramifications. I would like to think if an oil is ok for a DPF in a Ford pickup that it's probably ok for a Mercedes Bluetec, but I don't know if that's actually the case. I would suspect SAPS levels in even DPF friendly HDEO's are higher than something with 229.51 approval.
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
I would like to think if an oil is ok for a DPF in a Ford pickup that it's probably ok for a Mercedes Bluetec, but I don't know if that's actually the case. I would suspect SAPS levels in even DPF friendly HDEO's are higher than something with 229.51 approval.
My thinking as well, with the only real difference being that on HD vehicles like class 8 OTRs the DPF is designed to be taken down and cleaned at regular intervals. Something 200k or 300k miles if I'm not mistaken (correction appreciated).
The DPF on my Bluetec however, and on all other passenger diesels, isn't designed for that even though you probably could have it cleaned if needed. It's just that the fittings, pipings, and container itself are not meant to be accessed and regularly serviceable.
But while HDEOs contain slightly more SA% than MB specs allow, I can't really imagine that a 0.02% difference is going to be significant. If anything, it may require regens more often perhaps. As it stands, current mileage interval average between regens is about 500-600 miles.
I would like to think if an oil is ok for a DPF in a Ford pickup that it's probably ok for a Mercedes Bluetec, but I don't know if that's actually the case. I would suspect SAPS levels in even DPF friendly HDEO's are higher than something with 229.51 approval.
My thinking as well, with the only real difference being that on HD vehicles like class 8 OTRs the DPF is designed to be taken down and cleaned at regular intervals. Something 200k or 300k miles if I'm not mistaken (correction appreciated).
The DPF on my Bluetec however, and on all other passenger diesels, isn't designed for that even though you probably could have it cleaned if needed. It's just that the fittings, pipings, and container itself are not meant to be accessed and regularly serviceable.
But while HDEOs contain slightly more SA% than MB specs allow, I can't really imagine that a 0.02% difference is going to be significant. If anything, it may require regens more often perhaps. As it stands, current mileage interval average between regens is about 500-600 miles.
I am very happy with the REP in my EcoBoost (no, no UOAs for those asking for the cliched 'proof', sorry).
Not sure how it would perform in your Merc, but certainly you could pick worse oils to use.
Not sure how it would perform in your Merc, but certainly you could pick worse oils to use.
I don't believe UOAs are proof of much other than how the oil itself held up. But that's a debate for another day...
The reasons I'm looking at the REP is 1) it carries both MB specs 229.51 and .52 for the Bluetecs, 2) I can get 10L for $84 which means $8.40/L for excellent oil, 3) it has "racing" on the label
Could you perhaps elaborate a bit on how/why the REP makes you happy? Obviously, Ralf Schumacher endorsing it would typically be enough for me (LOL) but real user experiences would be ideal. TIA.
The reasons I'm looking at the REP is 1) it carries both MB specs 229.51 and .52 for the Bluetecs, 2) I can get 10L for $84 which means $8.40/L for excellent oil, 3) it has "racing" on the label
Could you perhaps elaborate a bit on how/why the REP makes you happy? Obviously, Ralf Schumacher endorsing it would typically be enough for me (LOL) but real user experiences would be ideal. TIA.
Ravenol has never used WS2, it uses organic tungsten,
CAS: 1159919-46-6
name: Amines, bis(C11-14-branched and linear alkyl), tungstates
Ravenol has never used WS2, it uses organic tungsten,
CAS: 1159919-46-6
name: Amines, bis(C11-14-branched and linear alkyl), tungstates
Ravenol has never used WS2, it uses organic tungsten,
CAS: 1159919-46-6
name: Amines, bis(C11-14-branched and linear alkyl), tungstates
Organic tungsten creates a chemical lubricating film on the friction surface of the engine, which can repair wear to a certain extent. The chemical lubricating film can reduce friction and lubricate the engine very well.
Tungsten...it's no antimony.
Gents,
In search of a Euro oil for my Bluetec OM651, I came across the above 3 flavors of Ravenol.
Besides the price and specs (229.51/.52), can anyone help shed some light on what would be the advantage of the "Racing" formula?
I haven't tried Ravenol yet, but if there's some magic elixir in the Racing version to improve longevity and performance in my Bluetec, I would surely be interested.
Currently at 106,xxx miles and no issues (DPF or otherwise) to report with current oil choice (yes, I read the whole 12-pg LM overrated thread, and that's what I've been using).
Thoughts please?
My thoughts are, one of the best oils that meet 229.51 and 229.52 is on sale quite a few times during the year for less than $6 a qt. Mobil 1 0w30/5w30 ESP.
There is nothing at all special about Ravenol.
Oil producers have been messing around with Tungsten since I was a kid and that was long time ago.
Last edited:
Seems most of the "racing" oils from Ravenol are out of stock. I've used the RUP 5w40 in my A4 alot and am coming up on my 80k oil change and cant find any.
The special thing about it is that it is actually what it claims to be. Synthetic PAO/Ester and an engineered add pack. Is it better than that old school Castrolite? Don't know, but it certainly isn't a modern group III declaring itself a synthetic when it really is quasi-synthetic. If there is a need for something that exceeds as far as temperature or oxidative qualities then I say go for it.
Last edited:
Does Ravenol publish the results of their oxidative tests so statements like this could be substantiated?
Last edited:
Years ago that may have made a difference but not anymore. It is the final formulation that matters not the base stock.
It could also be said that anything done to refine crude oil is in some way synthesizing it.
One meaning of synthesizing
To combine (a number of things) into a coherent whole.
I just got that big book written by the Dr. about all manner of oil. I will try and quote some of his perspective about this subject soon.
The MB oil specs are high, if an oil meets the specs it doesn't matter if the base stock is old dog whiz and peanut oil with a splash of strawberry jam.
HC technology and mixing bases is so advanced now that as Trav said final product is what matters.
Now, that being said, companies can achieve what they want probably easier by using PAO or POE. Sometimes if oil is aimed at high performance cars that might see track, PAO or POE will be present in higher quantities. That still does not mean they are better than majority Group III oils. Mobil1 ESP Formula 5W30 that was discontinued was arguably best MB229.51, VW504.00/507.00 oil available on the market. Current version is still probably best, although some performance numbers are worse than in previous version.
We have somewhat veered away from my point, labeling. Whether dog whiz, peanut butter and a strawberry jam is the best isn't at issue. If that dog whiz, peanut butter ,strawberry jam called itself a synthetic because the peanut butter was "synthesized" from crunchy to smooth is the topic at hand.
Not at all, the point is if the oil meets the manufactures spec what base stock was used is irrelevant. The days of true synthetic and earth oil labeled synthetic are long gone as far as regular engine oil are concerned.