Hmm...I'd be interested to know his recommendations for E320 CDI engines, too. It seems that the higher the viscocity (to a point), the better for the Diesel engine. But the OM648 engine doesn't have to worry about things like DPF's and AdBlue and such.
1 - 5 of 32 Posts
No, I doubt very seriously "one angry old man" knows better. 
I'm sure the factory engineers know, and it looks like that was this "angry old man's" point, namely that the factory engineers *do* know better, but they're being muzzled by A.) their employer, and B.) the US Government. In this case, he's talking about maintenance of a car that could be pretty reliable, if the *proper* maintenance is done on it.
I consider this plausible because it wouldn't be the first time a car manufacturer made design choices and recommendations, for business reasons, that didn't serve the customer in the best reasonable way, "reasonable", in this case, meaning not causing problems down the road. Older folks will remember the "planned obselescence" policies of GM, Ford, and Chrysler back in the 1970's and 1980's. They will also remember the difference between the Ford Granada and its replacement, the Ford Fairmont. The former may not have been pretty, but it was very reliable, while the latter was a problem-child from birth due to Ford's sucky implementation of the then-new EPA regs. Advancing the Fairmont's timing after purchase fixed most of the problems. Granted, it came at the expense of a little more emissions, but the car would run much better. Why did Ford not do it right? Because it was cheaper to do it wrong and just retard the timing. Customer? They'll be buying another car in 3 years, so goodie for us (Ford)! GM and Chrysler did similar things. GM, Ford, and Chrysler knew their cars. But for business reasons, they made bad (for the customer) recommendations and design choices. I remember those days.
And that's the *other* reason Japanese cars became so popular.
Regarding Mercedes-Benz, remember that they used to tell people, "automatic transmissions are sealed for life, no maintenance required." They had to backpedal on that one due to complaints, remember? This article looks in much the same vein. The car could run very well...with the Proper Maintenance.
I'm sure the factory engineers know, and it looks like that was this "angry old man's" point, namely that the factory engineers *do* know better, but they're being muzzled by A.) their employer, and B.) the US Government. In this case, he's talking about maintenance of a car that could be pretty reliable, if the *proper* maintenance is done on it.I consider this plausible because it wouldn't be the first time a car manufacturer made design choices and recommendations, for business reasons, that didn't serve the customer in the best reasonable way, "reasonable", in this case, meaning not causing problems down the road. Older folks will remember the "planned obselescence" policies of GM, Ford, and Chrysler back in the 1970's and 1980's. They will also remember the difference between the Ford Granada and its replacement, the Ford Fairmont. The former may not have been pretty, but it was very reliable, while the latter was a problem-child from birth due to Ford's sucky implementation of the then-new EPA regs. Advancing the Fairmont's timing after purchase fixed most of the problems. Granted, it came at the expense of a little more emissions, but the car would run much better. Why did Ford not do it right? Because it was cheaper to do it wrong and just retard the timing. Customer? They'll be buying another car in 3 years, so goodie for us (Ford)! GM and Chrysler did similar things. GM, Ford, and Chrysler knew their cars. But for business reasons, they made bad (for the customer) recommendations and design choices. I remember those days.
And that's the *other* reason Japanese cars became so popular.
Regarding Mercedes-Benz, remember that they used to tell people, "automatic transmissions are sealed for life, no maintenance required." They had to backpedal on that one due to complaints, remember? This article looks in much the same vein. The car could run very well...with the Proper Maintenance.
Thanks. We've got the same engine (mine's a 2005 E320 CDI), so the recommendation is germane for my car as well. Appreciate your sharing the knowledge.
It's interesting that Stephen says to change the oil every 5,000 miles. I do exactly this with my (turbodiesel) pickup truck as well and have done so religiously since I bought it. This is despite the owner's manual saying 7,500 miles. I had started on 15W-40 dino Diesel oil (Shell Rotella) until about 60,000 miles. Then I learned about 5W-40 fully synthetic Diesel oil, which I've been using since (we do get below freezing in my area during winter). People have told me that the 6.0L Ford Powerstroke Diesels are so unreliable. Well, I do proper maintenance on mine, and it has served me with aplomb since 2003 when I bought it. I will assume the same is true of the M-B CDI turbodiesels or any other turbodiesel.
By the way, my oil change regimen is 5,000 miles on any of my S-Class Mercedes-Benzes as well. My Civic gets new oil/filter every 3,000 miles (full synthetic, of course), since it's a bit older. Guess I'm just old-school. Maybe it's even a waste; I dunno. But I do know that my vehicles run great, though, so apparently "old school" still works! Once again, my Dad was right.
It's interesting that Stephen says to change the oil every 5,000 miles. I do exactly this with my (turbodiesel) pickup truck as well and have done so religiously since I bought it. This is despite the owner's manual saying 7,500 miles. I had started on 15W-40 dino Diesel oil (Shell Rotella) until about 60,000 miles. Then I learned about 5W-40 fully synthetic Diesel oil, which I've been using since (we do get below freezing in my area during winter). People have told me that the 6.0L Ford Powerstroke Diesels are so unreliable. Well, I do proper maintenance on mine, and it has served me with aplomb since 2003 when I bought it. I will assume the same is true of the M-B CDI turbodiesels or any other turbodiesel.
By the way, my oil change regimen is 5,000 miles on any of my S-Class Mercedes-Benzes as well. My Civic gets new oil/filter every 3,000 miles (full synthetic, of course), since it's a bit older. Guess I'm just old-school. Maybe it's even a waste; I dunno. But I do know that my vehicles run great, though, so apparently "old school" still works! Once again, my Dad was right.
1 - 5 of 32 Posts
