Recent Topics
Would syn be good for truck that sits a lot?
by Chris B.
20 minutes 44 seconds ago
Avoid State Farm!
by DBMaster
36 minutes 0 seconds ago
Plastic Hub caps making noise
by Mark72
49 minutes 18 seconds ago
Honda Eu2000I Extended Run System
by Ope_Freak
Today at 01:49 PM
Cessna to intro diesel 172 for 2015
by LoneRanger
Today at 12:37 PM
Oil and filter recommendation
by cb_13
Today at 12:27 PM
11000mAh Dual USB Power Bank/Car Jump Starter $55
by doyall
Today at 11:07 AM
Easier On Oil : V-6 or I-4 ?
by ChrisD46
Today at 10:39 AM
7/29-8/25 Auto Sales Ad
by tenderloin
Today at 09:55 AM
Dealership radiator flush job
by Idlewild294
Today at 09:54 AM
People are stupid
by Stelth
Today at 09:28 AM
Castrol SynBlend 5w/30 5,500miles 12 Canyon
by NewC-05
Today at 07:47 AM
Newest Members
jjs1235, Tomas, bovk, papafordboy, mrmjmab61
50794 Registered Users
Who's Online
93 registered (29662, 05LGTLtd, 2010_FX4, 1 FMF, 97f150, 10 invisible), 2221 Guests and 221 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
50794 Members
64 Forums
216989 Topics
3416372 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
Topic Options
#3295223 - 02/26/14 03:01 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Solarent]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 894
Loc: Kellogg, IA
My 2013 Silverado, the manual states dexos1 or equivalent. So I generally don't waste any time or sleep worrying about if a motor oil is on the "approved" list. The one I use claims to meet the spec, though it is not on the list. And that is fine with me. As to whether it is right, wrong, or somewhere in between for GM to get a royalty fee out of an oil that is on the "approved" list really doesn't mean much. Heck, Mobil has to pay a royalty to NASCAR to have that "official oil" branding on it's products. No different with some other product being the "official" product of whatever organization.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3295341 - 02/26/14 04:49 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Solarent]
Trav Offline


Registered: 11/20/06
Posts: 9157
Loc: MA, Mittelfranken.de
Just one of the things unique to Dexos spec.
Quote:
The GM dexos oil has one spec that ILSAC and API labeled oils do not have. This is quite important! That dexos requirement is for better resistance to aeration, which is the whipping of air bubbles into the oil. Engines with variable valvetrain (variable camshaft timing) technology use engine oil as a hydraulic fluid to move components in the engine, i.e., hydraulic lifters.

If air bubbles are in the oil, the lifters will not act as fast as the engine controllers expect. On the mild end, this can limit engine performance and economy. On the extreme end, this slow response can throw a MIL or DTC check engine code. Chevy, Dodge and Ford police vehicles all use engines with a variable valvetrain timing!

For all practical purposes, put Mobil 1 in all GM police vehicles. The use of synthetic oil has always been a good match for how we use our vehicles. Now, according to GM, it is a requirement.


http://www.hendonpub.com/police_fleet_manager/articles/2012/1112/dexos1_motor_oil_required

Quote:
Key differences between dexos1 and ILSAC GF-5/API SN are:

GM Proprietary Test: Opel RNT and Opel OP-1

Includes ACEA Engine Tests: TU5JP, TU3MS and M271SL

Higher Seq. IIIG Weighted Piston Demerit requirement: 4.5 vs. 4.0

Higher Seq. VG sludge requirements: AES 8.3 vs 8.0, RCS 8.5 vs 8.3

Lower Noack Volatility: 13% vs 15%

Better Shear Stability: Requires passing the Bosch Injector
Shear Stability Test


http://www.mfaoil.com/images/E0138901/dexos.pdf

And Dexos vs GF-5

http://www.pceo.com/101510_EO_PV1202_AR.pdf
_________________________
ASE L1, Master. Deutsch Meisterbrief.

Top
#3295365 - 02/26/14 05:10 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: demarpaint]
strat81 Offline


Registered: 01/09/10
Posts: 715
Loc: Nebraska
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: strat81


However, if I'm mistaken, I'd bet there are many others that are too. "I can put any Dexos oil in my Vette or CTS-V and run hot laps with no problem."



If that's what your Vette or CTS-V calls for and GM warranties the engine, what's the problem? I'd be more concerned using an oil they don't approve and running hot laps. JMO


Under warranty, a blown engine is an inconvenience.

Out of warranty, a blown engine can cost big $$$$.
_________________________
Molon Labe

Top
#3295367 - 02/26/14 05:12 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Trav]
strat81 Offline


Registered: 01/09/10
Posts: 715
Loc: Nebraska
Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: strat81
It makes me uneasy that the same oil that's spec'd for puttering around at 50mph is also spec'd worldwide and may be used in sustained high speed driving in Germany or for track use anywhere.

Things change. Todays oils are not the same as they were even 10 years ago, lot of Opels and Fords run on the Autobahn every day for years on 5w30 without any lubrication problem.
If its good enough for an LS7 or LS9 its good enough for an Opel 1.4 or 2.0 regardless of how high it revs.

A few years ago i would agree with you 100% but like i said things change. Todays commercially available retail oils have never been better.
I believe GM when they say the Dexos spec is that good, after all its them that will have to foot the bill if it isn't.

You (and GM) may be right.

But compared to other high-end specs like BMW LL-01 and Honda HTO-06, Dexos seems weak.

*shrug*
_________________________
Molon Labe

Top
#3295385 - 02/26/14 05:35 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: strat81]
Trav Offline


Registered: 11/20/06
Posts: 9157
Loc: MA, Mittelfranken.de
Many Dexos approved oils also meet other specs like HTO-6.
Some German/Euro cars like BMW and MB use oils with a higher min HTHS. Its not better or worse it depends on how the engine was built.
GM has had great success globally with 5w30, they build the engines to run on that viscosity.
That is not to say they wont run well on alternative viscosities which may be spec for different climates eg extreme hot or extreme cold climates or due to availability.

Quote:
Mobil 1 5W-30 synthetic motor oil meets or exceeds the requirements of:
ACEA A1/B1, A5/B5
API SN, SM, SL, SJ
ILSAC GF-5
Ford WSS-M2C946-A
Ford WSS-M2C929-A

Mobil 1 5W-30 has the following builder approvals:
General Motors Service Fill dexos1 dexos1 logo
Honda / Acura HTO-06

Mobil 1 5W-30 is recommended by ExxonMobil for use in applications requiring:
General Motors 4718M
General Motors 6094M
_________________________
ASE L1, Master. Deutsch Meisterbrief.

Top
#3295476 - 02/26/14 07:18 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Trav]
fdcg27 Offline


Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 8980
Loc: OH
Require an oil with a transparent standard?
Sure.
Require an oil with an opaque standard and a logo the blender has to pay for?
Cash grab, pure and simple.
Nothing wrong with GM setting an oil spec.
Everything wrong with GM not publishing the spec and charging a royalty on every quart for the lame logo.
Mercedes doesn't do this, VAG doesn't do this and BMW doesn't do this.
Why should lowly GM?
I'm quite sure that any oil carrying the Dexos logo is a good oil.
The thing is, many others are as well and without some recognized spec, like A3/B4, buyers are left in the dark as to what is really required.
Pay GM or you can't have an oil meeting the spec?
Ludicrous!
_________________________
12 Accord LX 22K HGMO 0W-20
09 Forester 64K PU 5W-30
02 Accord 127K G-Oil 5W-30
01 Focus ZX3 98K Synpower 10W-30
95 BMW 318iC 146K Defy 10W-40

Top
#3295504 - 02/26/14 07:42 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Solarent]
buster Offline


Registered: 11/16/02
Posts: 29086
Loc: NJ
This is really a good thing overall, I think. We're getting to the point where brand no longer matters because the specs are now so demanding and synthetics are becoming so common that all the companies are now offering "top tier" oils. And they all perform very similarly. It's mostly all marketing.

10 years ago or so, it was Mobil 1 or a very average synthetic and below average regular API conventional oils. So the gap has closed significantly.. All of the companies are fighting to differentiate their products with 50 tiers. It's becoming riiiiidiculous. But that's how it works.

Consumers will often go with what is the least expensive. If I'm an automotive company and concerned about the reliability of the engines we produce, I'd rather see the bar raised. Especially considering the pressure coming from regulators with CAFE etc.
_________________________
2014 3 S GT AT - OE oil
2003 Forester XS 5spd - M1 0w40

Top
#3295514 - 02/26/14 07:51 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Trav]
FutureDoc Offline


Registered: 10/30/13
Posts: 534
Loc: North Carolina
Originally Posted By: Trav
The GM dexos oil has one spec that ILSAC and API labeled oils do not have. This is quite important! That dexos requirement is for better resistance to aeration, which is the whipping of air bubbles into the oil. Engines with variable valvetrain (variable camshaft timing) technology use engine oil as a hydraulic fluid to move components in the engine, i.e., hydraulic lifters.


Which is?

Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
Key differences between dexos1 and ILSAC GF-5/API SN are:

GM Proprietary Test: Opel RNT and Opel OP-1

Includes ACEA Engine Tests: TU5JP, TU3MS and M271SL

Higher Seq. IIIG Weighted Piston Demerit requirement: 4.5 vs. 4.0

Higher Seq. VG sludge requirements: AES 8.3 vs 8.0, RCS 8.5 vs 8.3

Lower Noack Volatility: 13% vs 15%

Better Shear Stability: Requires passing the Bosch Injector
Shear Stability Test


OK, we are kinda getting some information, but not much. Still a really murky area. Volatility is the only metric that is commonly available. ILSAC Gl-5 varies from 7.5 to 8.9. The piston varnish would be 7.5 but average engine would be 8.0 for sludge 8.9 for varnish, rockers are 8.3. More data please

See, numbers are useful. If we had the full breakdown of Dexos, then we could compare ILSAC/API against Dexos... rather than depend on non-scale graphs.

---

On a side note,is it just me or did the older 4718M seem to have a higher "tier" of oil choices than Dexos. Sure API and ILSAC standards have jumped and conventionals have gotten better but it seemed like 4718M was more exclusive



Edited by FutureDoc (02/26/14 07:55 PM)
_________________________
'01 MR2 Spyder, 55K+, M1 AFE 0w30 & Toyota Filter
'99 Subaru Legacy Outback, 205K+, QS HM/T5 Blend & Wix
'14 Subaru Outback, factory fill 0w20

Top
#3295584 - 02/26/14 09:08 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: fdcg27]
TrevorS Offline


Registered: 07/14/13
Posts: 1281
Loc: California
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Require an oil with a transparent standard?
Sure.
Require an oil with an opaque standard and a logo the blender has to pay for?
Cash grab, pure and simple.
Nothing wrong with GM setting an oil spec.
Everything wrong with GM not publishing the spec and charging a royalty on every quart for the lame logo.
Mercedes doesn't do this, VAG doesn't do this and BMW doesn't do this.
Why should lowly GM?
I'm quite sure that any oil carrying the Dexos logo is a good oil.
The thing is, many others are as well and without some recognized spec, like A3/B4, buyers are left in the dark as to what is really required.
Pay GM or you can't have an oil meeting the spec?
Ludicrous!


Agree

And I wonder if in a roundabout way it violates that Moss Magnussen Act?

After all you are required to buy an oil that profits the car manufacturer.

Top
#3295595 - 02/26/14 09:23 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: TrevorS]
FutureDoc Offline


Registered: 10/30/13
Posts: 534
Loc: North Carolina
Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Require an oil with a transparent standard?
Sure.
Require an oil with an opaque standard and a logo the blender has to pay for?
Cash grab, pure and simple.
Nothing wrong with GM setting an oil spec.
Everything wrong with GM not publishing the spec and charging a royalty on every quart for the lame logo.
Mercedes doesn't do this, VAG doesn't do this and BMW doesn't do this.
Why should lowly GM?
I'm quite sure that any oil carrying the Dexos logo is a good oil.
The thing is, many others are as well and without some recognized spec, like A3/B4, buyers are left in the dark as to what is really required.
Pay GM or you can't have an oil meeting the spec?
Ludicrous!


Agree

And I wonder if in a roundabout way it violates that Moss Magnussen Act?

After all you are required to buy an oil that profits the car manufacturer.


Agree overall

They get around it by allowing other oil companies to license their product. So they are not forcing the consumer to by a specific brand or their brand. To them, the are offering the consumer a "choice" and that kinda gets around it. Still not in the spirit of the law IMO.

However, it is their burden proof to say you did not meet their specs. So, there is that loophole that as long as you use an oil that meets the specs of Dexos, then it is fine (even if it is not Dexos licensed) however, because they keep that spec secret, then it makes it a big murky mess that the consumer might not easily be able to know beforehand.

For example, "Supertech Syn" (our favorite non-Dexos debate brand) could potentially meet Dexos standards (It's NOACK is meets the Dexos standard btw) but without knowing those "proprietary" tests GM uses, we dont know for certain. So, logically, we can neither confirm nor deny that any non-dexos labeled oil meets Dexos spec. Because it is a license and has that "payment" attached to it, no-one knows if the non-labeled oils are less than spec or that the blender/oil just did not pay the fee.

Shame that GM "bought back" the government's stake because it would have been interesting to use FOIA to dig out the Dexos standards (but I doubt that would fly anyway)
_________________________
'01 MR2 Spyder, 55K+, M1 AFE 0w30 & Toyota Filter
'99 Subaru Legacy Outback, 205K+, QS HM/T5 Blend & Wix
'14 Subaru Outback, factory fill 0w20

Top
#3295729 - 02/26/14 11:41 PM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: FutureDoc]
Nate1979 Offline


Registered: 04/08/13
Posts: 338
Loc: Portland, OR
I have never heard such ridiculous arguments. Are you telling me that if GM published the Dexos spec that Walmart has published enough performance info on their Supertech oils to allow you to judge if it meets the spec or not? You have got to be kidding. Please post a single example of an oil company that has published all of their performance specs for a single oil showing they meet a spec. Any single spec. I have never seen this level of details published on BITOG ever. The people who actually need to know the spec (the blenders) know full well the details of Dexos.

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Require an oil with a transparent standard?
Sure.
Require an oil with an opaque standard and a logo the blender has to pay for?
Cash grab, pure and simple.
Nothing wrong with GM setting an oil spec.
Everything wrong with GM not publishing the spec and charging a royalty on every quart for the lame logo.
Mercedes doesn't do this, VAG doesn't do this and BMW doesn't do this.
Why should lowly GM?
I'm quite sure that any oil carrying the Dexos logo is a good oil.
The thing is, many others are as well and without some recognized spec, like A3/B4, buyers are left in the dark as to what is really required.
Pay GM or you can't have an oil meeting the spec?
Ludicrous!


Agree

And I wonder if in a roundabout way it violates that Moss Magnussen Act?

After all you are required to buy an oil that profits the car manufacturer.


Agree overall

They get around it by allowing other oil companies to license their product. So they are not forcing the consumer to by a specific brand or their brand. To them, the are offering the consumer a "choice" and that kinda gets around it. Still not in the spirit of the law IMO.

However, it is their burden proof to say you did not meet their specs. So, there is that loophole that as long as you use an oil that meets the specs of Dexos, then it is fine (even if it is not Dexos licensed) however, because they keep that spec secret, then it makes it a big murky mess that the consumer might not easily be able to know beforehand.

For example, "Supertech Syn" (our favorite non-Dexos debate brand) could potentially meet Dexos standards (It's NOACK is meets the Dexos standard btw) but without knowing those "proprietary" tests GM uses, we dont know for certain. So, logically, we can neither confirm nor deny that any non-dexos labeled oil meets Dexos spec. Because it is a license and has that "payment" attached to it, no-one knows if the non-labeled oils are less than spec or that the blender/oil just did not pay the fee.

Shame that GM "bought back" the government's stake because it would have been interesting to use FOIA to dig out the Dexos standards (but I doubt that would fly anyway)
_________________________
2012 Chevy Silverado 5.3L 4x4 PP 5w-30 w/ Fram TG
2010 Subaru Forester 2.5X M1 5w-30 w/ Fram Ultra

Top
#3295798 - 02/27/14 04:48 AM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: FutureDoc]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10996
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
I have been outspoken about Dexos... as it only helps GM bottom line and not the consumer.

I mentioned many months ago, on this topic, to not underestimate the power of the bean counters. GM isn't looking to get rich off of dexos1 royalties. Nonetheless, I can certainly see one or more bean counters insisting that a new, all encompassing specification that includes advertising and labels be self-funding.

And I don't begrudge them, completely, for not publishing everything about dexos1 requirements for free and in the open. We all know that "meets and exceeds" can be a reasonable alternative. Meeting and exceeding is a lot easier when someone gives the criteria away.

GM isn't an open source company. They're not in business to give intellectual property away for free.
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3295801 - 02/27/14 05:09 AM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Garak]
SteveSRT8 Online   content


Registered: 10/10/08
Posts: 14263
Loc: Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: Garak

GM isn't an open source company. They're not in business to give intellectual property away for free.


Good point, and very astute. The bean counters run car companies, the bigger ones even more so...
_________________________
"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix

Top
#3295812 - 02/27/14 05:45 AM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Solarent]
demarpaint Offline


Registered: 07/03/05
Posts: 20752
Loc: NY
I'm just curious, how does this compare to Mobil not meeting the MS6395 Chrysler spec? There's lots of talk about GM grabbing cash, management, the bean counters, etc. in this thread, it got me thinking about Chrysler and Mobil. Is it just sour grapes/politics, or is Mobil not up to the task in Chrysler applications? Dangling the warranty carrot in front of the nose of any new car owner is always something on many of our minds. Thanks.
_________________________
GOD Bless our Troops!


Top
#3295814 - 02/27/14 06:00 AM Re: Son of Dexos coming 2015 [Re: Garak]
fpracha Offline


Registered: 12/07/10
Posts: 473
Loc: MA
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
I have been outspoken about Dexos... as it only helps GM bottom line and not the consumer.
GM isn't looking to get rich off of dexos1 royalties. GM isn't an open source company. They're not in business to give intellectual property away for free.

+1. its true and why should any intellectual property be given away for free anyways...

Top
Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >