why does gm have high oil standards and not ford

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: BowNisPar
1. They make money off the licensing.
2. They make money by selling the stuff.
3. They make money by denying warranty claims.

There are plenty of reasons to dislike dexos certification. Financially, I doubt it's even half a drop in the bucket for GM. Engineers might have wanted more rigorous standards, and the accountants might have wanted the project to at least pay for itself.

Personally, I doubt that GM is selling much more oil at their dealerships than they did previous to dexos, except, perhaps, for dexos2 oils, which are substantially harder to find.


If you need one more reason to hate on GM, I guess Dexos can be that reason. I too doubt it's more than a one-time nominal fee. Personally I see it as a fairly rigorous spec that is not trivial to meet, and anything that forces oil companies to certify oil performance is, in the long run, a good thing. For the most part we have to take their word on everything, and it's nice to know that somebody is looking over their shoulder somewhere.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak

There are plenty of reasons to dislike dexos certification. Financially, I doubt it's even half a drop in the bucket for GM. Engineers might have wanted more rigorous standards, and the accountants might have wanted the project to at least pay for itself.

Personally, I doubt that GM is selling much more oil at their dealerships than they did previous to dexos, except, perhaps, for dexos2 oils, which are substantially harder to find.


I already know of at least one GM owner who had an engine fail under warranty and admitted using non-Dexos oil. Dealer denied it initially, then GM said to fix it anyway. So not all warranty claims are being denied. That's kind of silly to allege anyway.

NO ONE buys oil "cash and carry" at the stealership. They are ridiculously overpriced.

Personally I like having the peace of mind that my oil is approved and a zero hassle way to keep my GM fleet trucks running nearly forever. LOTS of Dexos 2 at Wally World...
 
The OM for my dad's truck says to use either a blend or full synthetic. They recomend MC oil of course. Not too sure what the Ford synthetic blend requirements are compared to what Dexos is though and which oil is more stout.

All I know is PP covers the specs for both the Ford and the Jeep so that's what they both get. Lol.
 
As for denying warranty for using non-dexos oil, how would the dealer know of it anyway unless the owner opened their fat mouth and told them? The legal standard by Federal regulation is that the OEM is responsible to prove the oil is what caused the malfunction if that is their claim, so let them determine what oil was used and if it did or did not meet the dexos spec. Just claim the oil meets the spec and let them determine if it doesn't.

I find this all rather amazing. In just over 40 years of auto ownership, and 3 decades of heavy commercial truck ownership and operation, I have yet to ever have a Dealer or OEM ask me about what oil I was running. At most, maybe the viscosity. I have had several engine warranty repairs over those years. And in all that time, I have never seen so many folks lose sleep over an oil spec like dexos. GM sure has a lot of folks all worked up over this. The commercial truck engine folks do not waste their time over this type of thing. They just spec something like CJ-4 in general, and usually a spec number, and give you a few choices in viscosity for the conditions and leave it at that. No official "approvals" and other stuff. Sure, they have their approved list if one goes online and searches it out, but they are not anal about it in any way. And when those commercial engines alone cost more than most folk's entire automobile, you would think they would show as much or more finickiness about this than GM does.

But some need something to get all worked up over. If it wasn't something like dexos, it would be something else.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
You may feel 'synthetic' is warranted for turbochargers but many mfrs (including Ford, GM, Hyundai/Kia etc) do not. Category API SN/ILSAC GF-5 was designed with turbo protection in mind.



I'm a turbo kind of guy. (I've been developing turbo systems and working on them since 1979) True synthetics are a must for most owners to prevent hot side shaft and seal "coking". 1500 degrees F turbine temperatures transfer directly into the shaft, and it's not directly cooled by anything other than oil. Remember, the housing is not where the "coke" builds up. Water cooled housings reduce temps quickly, better engineering on shafts and relocated seals help, but the facts remain, the hot side is amazingly hot. Much more than "old school" conventional oils can handle.

Yes, there are turbocharged engines that don't create much heat. There are also very large turbochargers that are incredibly tolerant of coking. They will operate seemingly forever without failure. Those are not the tiny, hard working, high boost, turbochargers on the "Ecoboost" engines, or any of the other modern cars.

There are also drivers of turbocharged vehicles who drive so modestly, turbocharger heat is rarely a problem. For the rest of us, synthetics make sense.
 
Last edited:
Makes sense? Yes. If going to the track or if recommended by the mfr. Many modern turbocharged vehicles today are family vehicles where the mfr specs can be met with a dexos blend or even some conventionals. Some of these with warranties of 100,000 miles and many of these drivers now well past that with 0 issues. I doubt the mfr would sabotage itself when a simple recommendation for 'synthetic oil' could have been inserted into the manual. So, although I too use synthetic in my turbo, I have no proof that today's avg (turbocharged) family vehicle will fail due to using a mfr spec'd oil. I also doubt the engineers have been castrated by the bean counters, contrary to popular belief on bitog.
 
Last edited:
Lol... not to the point of sabotaging a 100k mile warranty. Hence, 'castration'
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
Lol... not to the point of sabotaging a 100k mile warranty. Hence, 'castration'


Yes indeed. I can only imagine how tough it is to reconcile the endless demand for lower prices AND longer warranties.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
Makes sense? Yes. If going to the track or if recommended by the mfr. Many modern turbocharged vehicles today are family vehicles where the mfr specs can be met with a dexos blend or even some conventionals. Some of these with warranties of 100,000 miles and many of these drivers now well past that with 0 issues. I doubt the mfr would sabotage itself when a simple recommendation for 'synthetic oil' could have been inserted into the manual. So, although I too use synthetic in my turbo, I have no proof that today's avg (turbocharged) family vehicle will fail due to using a mfr spec'd oil. I also doubt the engineers have been castrated by the bean counters, contrary to popular belief on bitog.

Subaru may be the most vague, with a recommendation for a "synthetic 5W-30" for their turbo'ed engines, but without any particular names. Their non-turbo cars all call for 0W-20, and that currently implies a certain protection standard.
 
An older but interesting article concerning V6 Ecoboost/Police vehicles.

Durability and Reliability

No American police car has ever been powered by a supercharged or turbocharged engine. In the minds of many police fleet managers, the use of a turbo causes flashbacks to horror of Chrysler’s 2.2L turbo I4 from the 1980s. The mere mention raises all kinds of durability and maintenance questions.

Just as fuel injection and engine controller electronics have drastically improved in the past 30 years, so has turbocharging. And, turbos are not new on Ford passenger car engines. Ford of Australia has used turbos on its gasoline-powered Falcon sedans since 2002. Of course, Ford of Europe has used turbo diesels for ages. Forget the Chrysler 2.2L turbo engines. Turbo problems from the 1980s were solved in the 1990s, a generation ago.

The EcoBoost engine uses two Honeywell GT15 turbochargers with water-cooled bearings. These water-cooled and oil-cooled turbos are quite unlike the turbos from the 1980s that were cooled only by engine oil. The EcoBoost turbo bearings are water-cooled in the same coolant loop as the engine to bring turbo temperatures down.

The EcoBoost engineering design life is 10 years and 150,000 miles. This series of engines uses standard grades of oil; synthetic oil is not required. The EcoBoost engine uses the same 5W-20 engine oil as most Ford gasoline engines. The EcoBoost engine has the same 7,500-mile oil change intervals as other retail Ford engines. It runs on regular grade, 87 Octane fuel; mid-grade and premium are not required. The turbos do not need any separate, different or more frequent scheduled maintenance.

Introduced in 2010, the 3.5L V6 EcoBoost was recognized as one of Ward’s Ten Best Engines. The EcoBoost engine uses the base engine architecture from the Duratec 3.5L V-6, itself one of the previous Ward’s Ten Best Engines. Of course, to handle the extra torque, upgrades were made to the block, crankshaft, connecting rods and exhaust valves. The EcoBoost engine has about 75 new, different or redesigned components to improve reliability and durability compared to the naturally aspirated 3.5L V6. After all, it needs to handle an additional 100 hp!

Engine coolant is responsible for about 60 percent of the engine cooling, while engine oil handles about 40 percent of the cooling. Ford has a unique twist on this. The EcoBoost engine delivers a short spray of oil to the underside of each piston. Squirt jets deliver a 25 psi dose of oil on each piston stroke. This does two things. On a cold start, this helps to quickly warm the oil to operating temperatures, which lowers internal friction and improves fuel economy. Under normal operating conditions, of course, the oil squirt keeps the piston temperatures under cooler.

The EcoBoost engine will see plenty of retail use to get the bugs worked out before police use. The EcoBoost engine is already in retail vehicles like the Lincoln MKS, Ford Flex, Taurus SHO and just introduced for the F-150. Remember the EcoBoost engine has passed all of Ford’s durability standards for a retail vehicle. Remember, too, that some of these retail durability tests are run twice on Ford police package vehicles.

Turbo Durability Testing

The durability testing for the twin turbo, EcoBoost engine included 20 different dynamometer tests run at maximum engine speed and maximum turbo boost under a wide variety of coolant and oil temperatures. For example, cold start and immediately run at Wide Open Throttle. For example, run at Wide Open Throttle and suddenly shut down. In all, the EcoBoost engine has had 12,000 hours (500,000 miles) of dyno testing and the equivalent of 500,000 miles of on-track testing at Ford’s Romeo Proving Grounds, which totals 1 million miles of durability tests.

With the turbos from the 1980s, oil “coking” could occur in the turbo bearings. The oil was essentially baked in the hot bearings, especially the center bearing, when the engine was shut off. The result was coke, which is the solid residue formed on the bearing surface when oil breaks down due to extreme heat. This solid residue damaged bearings and early bearing failure. The bearing operating temperatures were simply too high for conventional oil and passenger car driving habits.

Of course, that was 30 years ago, making those old turbos as different from today’s turbos as the 1981 Ford LTD is from the 2011 Taurus…a 30-year leap in technology. The turbo problems of 25 years ago were solved 15 years ago. The EcoBoost engine does not have to be idled at all before shutting the engine off.

Cooled by Thermal Siphoning

The EcoBoost twin turbos are water cooled. Water cooling the bearings solved the problem. During normal operation, engine coolant is cycled through the center bearing. When the engine shuts off and the water pump stops, the coolant flow reverses and the EcoBoost uses thermal siphoning for water cooling. Coolant near the extremely hot bearing picks up heat, boils and flows away from the bearing water jacket. This pulls fresh, cooler coolant into the bearing water jacket, which picks up heat and cools the bearings. This cooling process continues silently until lower temperatures are reached, providing key-off protection for the turbo bearings.

To test this thermal siphoning process, Ford ran the EcoBoost engine at Wide Open Throttle and maximum boost for 10 minutes. Then the engine and all the cooling was abruptly shut down. The turbos were allowed to “bake” after this high-speed operation. This is exactly the conditions that would “coke” a center turbo bearing from the 1980s. They repeated the test 1,500 times without an oil change. A teardown of the turbo and inspection of the bearings validated the method of water cooling the turbo bearings.

The retail customer might operate the engine at peak power for just a few seconds, while in police use, the engine may run at peak power for a few minutes. The durability testing during Ford’s development was based on operating at peak power for hundreds of hours. The old standard used to be to test at Wide Open Throttle for a tank full of gas. Today’s durability and reliability standards are tougher. For example, a standard engine durability test was to operate the EcoBoost engine at Wide Open Throttle and at maximum turbo boost and at maximum rpm for 362 hours. That is the 24 Hours of LeMans for 15 days straight. The turbos themselves got a separate, hot-cold cycling durability test. For the thermal shock test, the turbos were warmed up to operating temperature (1740 deg F) and run at peak boost, peak power. Then every 10 minutes, the turbo alternated between peak power at maximum exhaust temperature and then at peak power at cold start temperatures. This test went on for 150 hours, about 1,000 hot-cold cycles. During the Road Cycle Durability Test, the EcoBoost engine was started cold then run at peak power and peak torque for an hour.

During the test, the coolant temperature ranged from 50 deg F to 200 deg F, i.e., normal operating temperatures. This cold start-maximum output test was done 1,000 times, for 1,000 hours of engine testing, which represents about 60,000 miles of driving.

In addition to the dynamometer and durability testing conducted at Romeo and Dearborn, Ford conducted high-altitude driving tests in Colorado, where more than 1,000 peaks are over 10,000 feet high. Then they ran extreme hot weather tests at the Arizona Proving Grounds and extreme-cold weather tests at Florida’s Elgin Air Force Base. Using a wide variety of fuels, the engine testing was performed at temperatures from minus 40 deg F to 110 deg F, and at altitudes up to 12,000 feet.


Published in Police Fleet Manager, Sep/Oct 2011

http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id=1091

As I said, older... but interesting.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: wemay
Engine coolant is responsible for about 60 percent of the engine cooling, while engine oil handles about 40 percent of the cooling. Ford has a unique twist on this. The EcoBoost engine delivers a short spray of oil to the underside of each piston. Squirt jets deliver a 25 psi dose of oil on each piston stroke. This does two things. On a cold start, this helps to quickly warm the oil to operating temperatures, which lowers internal friction and improves fuel economy. Under normal operating conditions, of course, the oil squirt keeps the piston temperatures under cooler.


Very interesting. I like the 60/40 split being explained, although now I'm curious what it is for other engines. I know my TDI has some sort of oil cooler located under the oil filter; uses a coolant loop. Makes me wonder how much cooling goes on in other engines.

However: "a 25psi dose"... Ok, 25psi probably makes a nice spray, but wouldn't quantity be necessary in order to make sure it wicks away heat? Seems like extraneous info that actually confuses the issue--had I read about an oil squirter on the piston bottom I would not have thought twice. But that it is at 25psi means... what?

Quote:
In all, the EcoBoost engine has had 12,000 hours (500,000 miles) of dyno testing and the equivalent of 500,000 miles of on-track testing at Ford’s Romeo Proving Grounds, which totals 1 million miles of durability tests.


Was that on one engine, 10 engines or 100 engines? 10 engines going to 50k is hardly impressive... let alone 100 managing 5k! Call me when the first batch of say 100 engines each manages 500k (not the best 100 samples out of a 10,000 engine test).

*

Don't get me wrong, the EB has proven itself, and the testing was good. I have nothing against the motor (other than cost). Just responding to points that I saw in the article.
 
Originally Posted By: ram_man
So I have a loaner Chevy cruze whIle my focus is having the paint issue fixed. The cruze is a nice little car. But why does gm have to have dexos approved oil and ford doesn't hAve an particular spec. My manual says anything api sn approved is fine. Are ford's ecoboost engines similar to this as they do not require a synthetic? Seems to me I'd want to use synthetic if I had a turbo engine.


From what I have seen on UOAs, it is because Ford engines are very easy on oil and GM engines are very hard on oil.
 
Gawd, save me from the sales promotion brochure stuff. Gotta hand it to Ford, their marketing is in a class by itself.

My 05 built N/A 6.1 V8 engine has oil squirters that CONTINUOUSLY bathe my pistons in oil. A very special oil pump with a different relief in it provides a huge excess of oil pressure. This feature is not exclusive to the Egoboost and is becoming more common every day.

The durability testing is really not even unusual. ALL mfgrs do radical things during R&D to try to insure their reliability, it's not just Ford...
 
Last edited:
The horror of 2.2L Turbo Chrysler's? They put them in everything under the sun that they sold at the time. And I don't remember them being particularly unreliable, compared to anything else out at the time. And I'm almost 100% positive the turbo in my '89 Shadow was water-cooled as well.

But you know, whatever. I'd still love to have a EcoBoost Taurus.
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Gawd, save me from the sales promotion brochure stuff. Gotta hand it to Ford, their marketing is in a class by itself.

My 05 built N/A 6.1 V8 engine has oil squirters that CONTINUOUSLY bathe my pistons in oil. A very special oil pump with a different relief in it provides a huge excess of oil pressure. This feature is not exclusive to the Egoboost and is becoming more common every day.

The durability testing is really not even unusual. ALL mfgrs do radical things during R&D to try to insure their reliability, it's not just Ford...


They do have impressive marketing tactics that seem to work. Remember them running an EcoBoost through Baja-type races? It was all the buzz on various truck forums at the time. The EB seems to be mostly hype in truck platforms (reasonably powerful, but the MPGs, especially when loaded, are similar to a V8's)

Your final point is the key. All manufacturers do intensive testing on their engines, but most don't wildly sensationalize it, film it, and show it as something special.
 
Well, to be fair, turbo's have the stigma of breaking. Deserved or not, many fear turbo motors. In order to win on the mpg wars and hp wars a turbo is quick/easy way (sorta) to win on both. To deal with public fears Ford knew they would have an uphill battle.
 
Originally Posted By: supton
Well, to be fair, turbo's have the stigma of breaking. Deserved or not, many fear turbo motors. In order to win on the mpg wars and hp wars a turbo is quick/easy way (sorta) to win on both. To deal with public fears Ford knew they would have an uphill battle.


Indeed. And the acceptance of the Eboosters is excellent, Ford has done well.

The fact is they are thirsty.

The new Mustang got 19 mpg in recent testing with a 2.3 liter motor boosted all the way to 310 hp.

If you don't use it the mileage will likely be good. But no matter the engine configuration, 300 hp costs a certain amount of fuel. Incidentally, the performance numbers were exactly the same as a V6 from last year.

We had 3 different EB's in our extended family. All have been traded, but they all got about 17 mpg in normal driving. Not too impressive at mileage, but great horsepower and torque...
 
Originally Posted By: supton
Well, to be fair, turbo's have the stigma of breaking. Deserved or not, many fear turbo motors. In order to win on the mpg wars and hp wars a turbo is quick/easy way (sorta) to win on both. To deal with public fears Ford knew they would have an uphill battle.


I find it interesting.... Turbocharge a gas engine and "that thing won't make 100k". Turbocharge a Diesel and "that thing will run forever".

I do think Ford overdid it with the MPG claims in the trucks. Sure, it's got good fuel economy when not in the turbo but when you use it it's about the same as the 5.0. But it has the power levels of the 6.2 and the V10 and it's a bit better on fuel economy than them.

All in all I'm satisfied with mine. Could use a few more MPG's though but who wouldn't?
 
GM in my area (and probably others) is offering a lifetime powertrain warranty.

You have to have dealer only dexos oil changes and 30k mile vehicle services to uphold the warranty. Also, the vehicles lifetime is defined as "Until one of the powertrain components becomes EOL."

Pretty smooth scheme they got going.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top