Recent Topics
Typical generic TPMS install costs
by Patrick0525 - 09/17/19 05:23 PM
Marvel Ultimate Fuel and Motor Treatment
by 03s - 09/17/19 03:50 PM
Upcoming tire sales?
by supton - 09/17/19 03:44 PM
Welding Rusted Control Arm Mount
by George7941 - 09/17/19 03:42 PM
15w40 in my automatic trans.
by Ursatdx - 09/17/19 03:16 PM
Update on my Stihl BG 86
by 1978elcamino - 09/17/19 03:11 PM
Offset print oil
by Matt_Pill - 09/17/19 03:06 PM
Which 508.00 oil would you choose?
by Vigg - 09/17/19 02:55 PM
Any BMW LL04 recommendations?
by M3m3x5 - 09/17/19 02:18 PM
5W30 Suggestions/Subaru
by Motoretro - 09/17/19 02:18 PM
Recommend Costco tires
by henni - 09/17/19 01:58 PM
Castrol SRF Shortage
by kyoo - 09/17/19 01:26 PM
All aftermarket drums and shoes = junk?
by nthach - 09/17/19 12:38 PM
Synthetic ISO 32 Hydraulic Fluid for BL-7000SLX
by 05UFCaptain - 09/17/19 11:51 AM
TPS only seeing 3.7v at WOT
by joegreen - 09/17/19 11:39 AM
Granite Countertops Are Magnetic. Who Knew ?
by Dwight_Frye - 09/17/19 09:44 AM
2019 J.D. Power VDS
by buster - 09/17/19 09:05 AM
Possible to add catch can?
by cwilliamsws6 - 09/17/19 09:02 AM
Update on GF-6
by buster - 09/17/19 08:40 AM
motul eco-lite 5w30
by avi1777 - 09/17/19 07:47 AM
Newest Members
thetransman, SamBilbrey, williamfoster060, kappa8, jayrod65
69308 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
106 registered members (4WD, 2004tdigls, ABomb369, 2002 Maxima SE, AC1DD, 13 invisible), 2,232 guests, and 30 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics294,697
Posts5,064,824
Members69,308
Most Online3,532
Jul 30th, 2019
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: MB 229.3 in 229.5 application [Re: SlavaB] #5210577 09/11/19 11:18 PM
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 7,850
E
edyvw Offline
Offline
E
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 7,850
Originally Posted by SlavaB
Originally Posted by zeng

Exactly.
To be precise, the 229.5 specs requires at least 1.8% fuel saving.


Sounds interesting, can you share the source of this information?

MB229.5 has a bit of higher fuel economy demenads. However, if you ahve both oils with HTHS of 3.7, that is hypothetical laboratory saving.


15' Toyota Sienna AWD (Mobil1 5W30 EP+OEM filter).
11' VW Tiguan 2.0T (Castrol 0W40+MANN filter)
Re: MB 229.3 in 229.5 application [Re: SlavaB] #5210598 09/12/19 01:07 AM
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,712
Z
zeng Offline
Offline
Z
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,712
Originally Posted by SlavaB
Originally Posted by zeng

Exactly.
To be precise, the 229.5 specs requires at least 1.8% fuel saving.


Sounds interesting, can you share the source of this information?

Has read it in the wild wild world of internet ..
not sure if this helps,

0229.5 1.8% fuel savings.png
Last edited by zeng; 09/12/19 01:12 AM.
Re: MB 229.3 in 229.5 application [Re: zeng] #5210634 09/12/19 04:00 AM
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 889
W
weasley Offline
Offline
W
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 889
Originally Posted by zeng
Exactly.
To be precise, the 229.5 specs requires at least 1.8% fuel saving.

Since we're being precise, I have no idea where this 1.8% number came from? The MB229.5 spec requires testing in the M111FE, with different minimum limits for xW-30 and xW-40. Neither limit is 1.8%. Furthermore there is also an M111FE limit for MB229.3, but it is lower than for MB229.5. MB229.5 also requires testing in a chassis dyno FE test, whereas MB229.3 doesn't.

Source? Well, MB don't publish their specs publicly, but you can get an idea here. It's a bit old and the MB spec have been updated since then, but they are similar to this.


2017 SEAT Leon 1.4 EcoTSI 150 FR Technology DSG
2018 Volvo XC60 D4
2011 KTM 990 SMT
Re: MB 229.3 in 229.5 application [Re: weasley] #5210656 09/12/19 05:54 AM
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 42
L
Lowflyer Offline
Offline
L
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by weasley
I have no idea where this 1.8% number came from?
Maybe, because it can be 5W-50 with 229.3, but not with 229.5? I can imagine, than between thikest 5W-50 and thinny 0W-40, we can achieve 1.8% savings whistle

"Its a trap!" wink


On the arduous way...to learn...English.
Re: MB 229.3 in 229.5 application [Re: weasley] #5211557 09/13/19 09:11 AM
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 64
D
DrDanger Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 64
Originally Posted by weasley
Originally Posted by zeng
Exactly.
To be precise, the 229.5 specs requires at least 1.8% fuel saving.

Since we're being precise, I have no idea where this 1.8% number came from? The MB229.5 spec requires testing in the M111FE, with different minimum limits for xW-30 and xW-40. Neither limit is 1.8%. Furthermore there is also an M111FE limit for MB229.3, but it is lower than for MB229.5. MB229.5 also requires testing in a chassis dyno FE test, whereas MB229.3 doesn't.

Source? Well, MB don't publish their specs publicly, but you can get an idea here. It's a bit old and the MB spec have been updated since then, but they are similar to this.


Now that is some good info. Rare these days. Thank you for that!

Page 2 of 2 1 2
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™