Why do people want to complain about dexos?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
It's kind of like blank music CD-Rs with the license fees going to ASCAP. Maybe it's the principle of the thing. I might be recording my garage band on those CD-Rs and am at the same time sending money off to Celene Dion.

OT, but you don't know how bad that is in Canada. CD-Rs are ridiculously more money than DVD-Rs, thanks to the Canadian fee, much of which does, I'm sure, go to Celine.
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: cp3
Please forgive me for not shedding a tear for the oil companies costs!


Me either. I may shed a few, though, when those costs are passed on to me... with a little extra for their handling fees.
 
These complaints are just people with too much time on their hands. Here is a Dexos1 approved oil at 6/$30.00.

Mag1 Dexos1

Analysis says push for 7.5k miles of usage. How could a consumer complain about that? Maybe just maybe some of the people complaining are oil company employees paid to surf the web. Especially popular sites like this one. The others are just loyalist who have been brainwashed into parting with their money. I used to be like that.
 
Licensing fees are a perfectly acceptable model of business - I don't see anyone complaining about the even more absurd fees BP, Shell, and Exxon pay to be marked as Top Tier Gasoline.
 
The Penrite 5w30 synthetic that I last used is Dexos 1 licenced and is cheaper than the likes of Durablend that claim DX1 but is not even licenced. It's also almost half the price of M1 5w30 so it's not the Dexos licence that's costing the customer, not in Australia anyway.
 
Originally Posted By: Hyde244
Licensing fees are a perfectly acceptable model of business - I don't see anyone complaining about the even more absurd fees BP, Shell, and Exxon pay to be marked as Top Tier Gasoline.


There are many states where top tier gas is the exact same price as regular gas and so I'm not so sure how "absurd" the fee is. Furthermore, many oils pay licensing fee after licensing fee but it is not the same with gasoline. The absurdity with gasoline is that any rumor will cause it to spike 10-20 cents in a day and, even when the rumor turns out to be false, the price goes down 1-2 cents every day or two
frown.gif
 
DEXOS is a money grabbing way of gathering money back for loss of sales of they're own oil. IMO..

Just because an oil isn't DEXOS licensed doesn't mean it doesn't meet spec like some people think..

Just means they don't wanna spend money on the licensing..

All oil suppliers were given the specs to meet DEXOS, so in turn they know if it meets/exceeds or not.. That's why they post it in the bottle
 
Originally Posted By: stchman
I have noticed that a LOT of folks here on this forum seem to take the dexos thing personally.

They complain that dexos is GM strong arming the oil companies into paying them these obscene fees and that the price for a quart of oil will go way up. As a consumer I see no price difference between dexos oils and non-dexos oils. If Valvoline and Amsoil are saving such a boatlod of cash by not paying GM's exorbitant fees, then their oils should be far less expensive. This does not appear to be the case.

Is it because some of the oil religions are being offended? I think so.

I look at it this way, GM is giving a 5 year 100K mile warranty on the drivetrain, they want to make sure people are using quality oil and doing their maintenance when they are supposed to. Trust me, working for 6+ years in the quick lube industry, I have seen more than my share of people that only maintain their car when something goes out. You would shudder at the people that only change the oil when the oil light comes on???!!!!

I don't blame GM for putting restrictions, I would do it as well.


stchman,

Personally I don't mind the Dexos labeling. It appears most quality oils are getting the label on them anyway. Besides that I'm more of a synthetic user myself so that's why I go by my OLM in my GM cars instead of going by mileage.

Durango
 
I don't mind the Dexos spec either. It takes GM's two previous oil specs 6094M and 4718M and combines them into one. The old 6094M was just a change in low temp pumpability and was easily met by almost all conventional oils on the shelf. The 4718M was originally a Corvette spec that required lower NOACK volatility and a cap on oxidation at high temps (which were more stringent than the GF4 specs at the time). It's how GM got away with no oil cooler on the Vette because they were struggling with how to package it in the bumper and plumb it. It later found its way into a myriad of other 6.0/6.2+ applications. Currently, it is near impossible to find a DEXOS oil that isn't at least a synblend, most being a full synthetic. It makes me feel much better about going the full life of the OLM, something I've never done on conventional oil. GM also uses it as a way to tout lower overall TCO when they sell a vehicle, which is something all manufacturers are in too right now. That's all worth $.07 a gallon if you ask me.
 
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
I don't mind the Dexos spec either. It takes GM's two previous oil specs 6094M and 4718M and combines them into one. The old 6094M was just a change in low temp pumpability and was easily met by almost all conventional oils on the shelf. The 4718M was originally a Corvette spec that required lower NOACK volatility and a cap on oxidation at high temps (which were more stringent than the GF4 specs at the time). It's how GM got away with no oil cooler on the Vette because they were struggling with how to package it in the bumper and plumb it. It later found its way into a myriad of other 6.0/6.2+ applications. Currently, it is near impossible to find a DEXOS oil that isn't at least a synblend, most being a full synthetic. It makes me feel much better about going the full life of the OLM, something I've never done on conventional oil. GM also uses it as a way to tout lower overall TCO when they sell a vehicle, which is something all manufacturers are in too right now. That's all worth $.07 a gallon if you ask me.


The point is not the specs but the royalties, something other OEM's don't do with their certifications/approvals.

Specs like LL-01, LL-98....etc are also long-life oil specs and the euro marques maintain lists of approved lubricants. But there are no royalties associated with this, only the cost of obtaining the approval, which is the case for I believe all brands that aren't GM.
 
As a minor counterpoint, though, Overkill, at least dexos1 certification has visibility on an oil bottle. Reading the fine print for non-BITOGers who don't have all this business memorized is not going to be easy.

Then again, I don't want oil bottles to look like they're plastered with race car liveries, either. M1 logos on the McLaren Mercedes, Mercedes logos on the M1 0w-40, right?
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
I don't mind the Dexos spec either. It takes GM's two previous oil specs 6094M and 4718M and combines them into one. The old 6094M was just a change in low temp pumpability and was easily met by almost all conventional oils on the shelf. The 4718M was originally a Corvette spec that required lower NOACK volatility and a cap on oxidation at high temps (which were more stringent than the GF4 specs at the time). It's how GM got away with no oil cooler on the Vette because they were struggling with how to package it in the bumper and plumb it. It later found its way into a myriad of other 6.0/6.2+ applications. Currently, it is near impossible to find a DEXOS oil that isn't at least a synblend, most being a full synthetic. It makes me feel much better about going the full life of the OLM, something I've never done on conventional oil. GM also uses it as a way to tout lower overall TCO when they sell a vehicle, which is something all manufacturers are in too right now. That's all worth $.07 a gallon if you ask me.


The point is not the specs but the royalties, something other OEM's don't do with their certifications/approvals.

Specs like LL-01, LL-98....etc are also long-life oil specs and the euro marques maintain lists of approved lubricants. But there are no royalties associated with this, only the cost of obtaining the approval, which is the case for I believe all brands that aren't GM.


If you were EM/SOPUS/Ashland, wouldn't you be happy to pay the royalty now that millions of cars are required to use your higher margin top shelf synthetics vs the traditionally prices conventionals? I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. And so far, the royalty doesn't appear to have been passed on to the consumer.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
If you were EM/SOPUS/Ashland, wouldn't you be happy to pay the royalty now that millions of cars are required to use your higher margin top shelf synthetics vs the traditionally prices conventionals?

Just because you pay royalty is not a guarantee that someone will actually buy your product. Dexos1 royalty fees are based on potential sales, not actual sales. Besides, these companies likely already had products that met dexos1 requirements. The only thing the royalty fee would give them is the ability to slap on the dexos1 logo on the bottle.

Quote:
And so far, the royalty doesn't appear to have been passed on to the consumer.

It's an extra cost. Sooner or later it'll get passed onto the end user, one way or another. The company won't just gladly eat it.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
As a minor counterpoint, though, Overkill, at least dexos1 certification has visibility on an oil bottle. Reading the fine print for non-BITOGers who don't have all this business memorized is not going to be easy.

Then again, I don't want oil bottles to look like they're plastered with race car liveries, either. M1 logos on the McLaren Mercedes, Mercedes logos on the M1 0w-40, right?
wink.gif


There's already the NASCAR logo.
 
And yes, all these long life specs in effect shift the demand from mineral to synthetic oil, except that only GM asks for royalties. Maybe API does too, I can't remember now.

However, as the sales shift from mineral to synthetic, the amount of actual product sold comes down since most people will run the synthetic oil longer.
 
I think what is totally amusing about the whole dexos/GM thing is how GM actively promotes flex fuel vehicles using ethanol, but the dexos spec is WEAKER regarding ethanol use than the ILSAC GF-5 spec, which most oils meet along with the API SN spec.

This whole dexos thing is a ruse. Just a way to give those auto owners who have a large paranoia gland something to worry about. I have no problem, in general, with the spec. Just that it is not that big of a deal. I have a 2013 Chevrolet Silverado with a 5.3L engine in it. Since dropping the factory fill oil at 1200 miles, it has not seen any oil that has a dexos emblem on it. It gets Schaeffer 9003D 5w30 which claims it meets and exceeds the dexos spec, but doesn't have the label on the front, nor is it on the "approved" list. I I sleep just fine at night.
 
There are two separate factors in play here.
GM wanted an oil spec that would allow any of its cars sold worldwide to run safely to OLM limits, a laudable goal.
Yeah, to be adequate for the turbos or for tracked new Corvettes in stock form (all three of them in the continental US) or the DIs such an oil would be overkill for most GM engines, but GM could always adjust the OLM algorithym to account for that and to allow longer drains on the lo-po cars.
So far, so good.
GM then said that if a blender wanted to display the dorky looking Dexos logo on its oil, it would have to pass the certification tests and then pay GM a fee to license this trademarked bit of nonsense.
Many, maybe most blenders balked, and instead give the buyer the information that their oil meets or exceeds Dexos 1, while avoiding the trademark licensing fee.
Most likely all OTS synthetics easily meet Dexos 1, logo or not.
 
If GM had their way, every part your gm car needed (including oil) would only be available from a licensed gm seller/reseller. This scam is 60 years old, they've just found a way to apply the same type of twisted logic with motor oil. Problem is the oil companies blinked.Hopefully these lic. Deals the oil companies signed will expire and not be renewed. This is nonsense, could you imagine, a bottle of oil covered with an approval spec/logo from every manufacturer out their. My 3 Vehicles are all GM
 
Originally Posted By: Sw296inchblue
could you imagine, a bottle of oil covered with an approval spec/logo from every manufacturer out their. My 3 Vehicles are all GM


I don't think you've looked at many oil bottles lately
wink.gif


Next time you are in an auto parts store, take a look at the back of a Mobil 1 0w-40 bottle
smile.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top