OEM Specs vs Oil Vendor Meeting Said Specs

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Tired Trucker, read the weasel words again...they do not claim to meet the spec.

They are "recommending" it for applications requiring the spec, don't say anywhere that they meet the spec...that's vastly different to a statement of "meets" the spec.

And you are still awaiting the detailed tech stuff that you were promised months ago in the other thread


+1 There are some things you cant fix and this is one of them. LOL

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Mathew_Boss
Originally Posted By: wemay
Update: I guess they logged my recent inquiry/concern and emailed this regarding the question of no longer showing 0w20 in the 'what oil for my car' current look up tool...


If your car manufacturer recommends a SAE 5W-20 ILSAC oil, we recommend either Mobil 1™ 5W-20 or Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy 0W-20. Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy 0W-20 will not void new-car warranties where an SAE 5W-20 oil is recommended. Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy 0W-20 can provide better fuel economy and better low-temperature performance than higher viscosity oils. Mobil 1™ Advanced Fuel Economy 0W-20 and Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy 0W-30 flow faster than 5W-20 and 5W-30 motor oils, respectively, reaching your engine's vital parts faster during startup.

I just didn't want to leave any loose ends out there regarding the topic. tig1 is correct.


I tried their 0W20 in my 2014 Fiesta with the 1.6L before they took the recommendation off their web site and now off their bottles, I had to change it at 6k miles... It was black as night and we were getting about 28mpg highway. I put PUP 5w20 in and it went right back up to 45mpg. I will not be using mobil 1 again. That cant be good for your car to loose that much fuel milage in that short of time and fix it by replacing the oil.


As others have noted, this is simply impossible. Also, change in oil colour has limited use. Did you use a blotter test? Did you have the oil analyzed to see how fit for continued use it was?

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Trav and I were having a spirited discussion a week or so ago about the use of M1 AFE/EP 0W-20 in my 2010 Ford F-150 and his suggestion that I was not following Ford’s recommendations/specifications through the use of a 0W-20 oil when Ford recommends/specifies a 5W-20 oil (that meets WSS-M2C930–A). He further suggested that I am trusting XOM to meet the Ford specification (WSS-M2C930–A) instead of simply using a 5W-20 that meets WSS-M2C930–A. For reference, M1 AFE/EP 0W-20 meets or exceeds Ford specification WSS-M2C930–A and WSS-M2C945–A.

We were hijacking the OP’s post and so I thought I would start a new post and the point of this post is not to debate Trav and my points of view (or who is right/wrong). It is to ask does Ford (or any OEM for that matter) certify that oil made by any oil vendor who states it meets OEM specification “X” actually test or certify the oil to see that it does? To my knowledge, no OEM does this—I would even question if Ford does this for Motorcraft oil (currently made by COP).

Thoughts? Do OEMs test the oil or simply leave it to the oil vendor?


A few years ago when I bought my 08 Liberty which spec's 5w20 only I contacted Chrysler corporate and posed the question about using 0W20 in it. I was told point blank to use 5W20 ONLY. Naturally being a Bitoger I had questions. I said what would happen if I had to bring it in for warranty work related to oil, eg: rod knock, etc. Their answer was I would have to show records of proper maintenance and proof that 5W20 oil was used, meeting their specs. The bottom line is this, they want 5w20 in the sump and will only warranty the vehicle for oil related issues if and only if 5w20 oil meeting their spec was used. Anything else would be between me and the oil company.

A warranty is a contract between 2 parties, the vehicle owner and the auto maker. They set the terms and conditions, not the owner, or the oil company. If you don't follow the terms and conditions you handle it or foot the bill if they don't.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Trav and I were having a spirited discussion a week or so ago about the use of M1 AFE/EP 0W-20 in my 2010 Ford F-150 and his suggestion that I was not following Ford’s recommendations/specifications through the use of a 0W-20 oil when Ford recommends/specifies a 5W-20 oil (that meets WSS-M2C930–A). He further suggested that I am trusting XOM to meet the Ford specification (WSS-M2C930–A) instead of simply using a 5W-20 that meets WSS-M2C930–A. For reference, M1 AFE/EP 0W-20 meets or exceeds Ford specification WSS-M2C930–A and WSS-M2C945–A.

We were hijacking the OP’s post and so I thought I would start a new post and the point of this post is not to debate Trav and my points of view (or who is right/wrong). It is to ask does Ford (or any OEM for that matter) certify that oil made by any oil vendor who states it meets OEM specification “X” actually test or certify the oil to see that it does? To my knowledge, no OEM does this—I would even question if Ford does this for Motorcraft oil (currently made by COP).

Thoughts? Do OEMs test the oil or simply leave it to the oil vendor?


A few years ago when I bought my 08 Liberty which spec's 5w20 only I contacted Chrysler corporate and posed the question about using 0W20 in it. I was told point blank to use 5W20 ONLY. Naturally being a Bitoger I had questions. I said what would happen if I had to bring it in for warranty work related to oil, eg: rod knock, etc. Their answer was I would have to show records of proper maintenance and proof that 5W20 oil was used, meeting their specs. The bottom line is this, they want 5w20 in the sump and will only warranty the vehicle for oil related issues if and only if 5w20 oil meeting their spec was used. Anything else would be between me and the oil company.

A warranty is a contract between 2 parties, the vehicle owner and the auto maker. They set the terms and conditions, not the owner, or the oil company. If you don't follow the terms and conditions you handle it or foot the bill if they don't.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
A warranty is a contract between 2 parties, the vehicle owner and the auto maker. They set the terms and conditions, not the owner, or the oil company. If you don't follow the terms and conditions you handle it or foot the bill if they don't.

I believe this is why lawyers are able to make such a lucrative living...

 

[TiredTrucker]

A company is not required to offer any warranty on anything, but once they do, they have to abide by all regulatory requirements in providing a warranty, implied or written. To that end, if an oil I use, in the same grade as they recommend, but not on their "approved' list, yet the motor oil producer says it meets or exceeds the OEM spec, the OEM is on the hook, per the Federal Trade Commission, to prove that what I used caused the issue that required the warranty work. No wiggle room, no fudging, no assuming. I just got off the FTC website and they spell it out pretty clear.

 

[Solarent]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Trav and I were having a spirited discussion a week or so ago about the use of M1 AFE/EP 0W-20 in my 2010 Ford F-150 and his suggestion that I was not following Ford’s recommendations/specifications through the use of a 0W-20 oil when Ford recommends/specifies a 5W-20 oil (that meets WSS-M2C930–A). He further suggested that I am trusting XOM to meet the Ford specification (WSS-M2C930–A) instead of simply using a 5W-20 that meets WSS-M2C930–A. For reference, M1 AFE/EP 0W-20 meets or exceeds Ford specification WSS-M2C930–A and WSS-M2C945–A.

We were hijacking the OP’s post and so I thought I would start a new post and the point of this post is not to debate Trav and my points of view (or who is right/wrong). It is to ask does Ford (or any OEM for that matter) certify that oil made by any oil vendor who states it meets OEM specification “X” actually test or certify the oil to see that it does? To my knowledge, no OEM does this—I would even question if Ford does this for Motorcraft oil (currently made by COP).

Thoughts? Do OEMs test the oil or simply leave it to the oil vendor?


Here is some good insight into how this works:

Oil Additive companies (Lubrizol, Infineum, Afton etc) have entire divisions dedicated to working with OEM's on the development of new lubrication technologies and specifications. Generally the company that helps develop the spec gets a "leg up" on the competition by creating the package and associated sample formulas which they then market to their blenders. Usually the OEM spec is released and then other companies can compare their testing results with the posted spec or submit a package of tests for approval to the OEM as JAG described.

The resultant formulas are then typically describe as:

Approved for - these are the ones containing the DI pack developed in tandem with the OEM or sometimes those which have received some sort of formal review and approval by the OEM (like those who use Dexos)

Meets or Exceeds - this description is most often used by products who can prove they meet the specs as published. These probably weren't reviewed by the OEM but can be used with confidence.

Suitable for Use - these products typically have the features required but maybe don't meet some minor test in the published spec, or maybe uses an ingredient that wasn't in the original approved formula but is a proven replacement (ie a bright stock replacement additive vs using actual bright stock)

When a blender (major or independent) makes these claims on their products it is often because the additive manufacturer provides a list of specifications that using their package is either automatically approved for or is suitable for (ie API SN or some of the Ford Specs you referred to.)

 

[wemay]

Excellent information! Thank you.

 

[Garak]

Great summary, Solarent. It's interesting to note that Imperial Oil and Petro-Canada do tend to be rather careful about using the wording you pointed out, particularly on the data sheets for their HDEOs. It's very helpful, and eliminates a lot of guessing.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
yet the motor oil producer says it meets or exceeds the OEM spec, the OEM is on the hook, per the Federal Trade Commission, to prove that what I used caused the issue that required the warranty work.


How ?

How is that fair ?

I could put "recommended for" anything on Shannow brew, and you are saying DD have to honour MY RECOMMENDATION ???

 

[Solarent]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Great summary, Solarent. It's interesting to note that Imperial Oil and Petro-Canada do tend to be rather careful about using the wording you pointed out, particularly on the data sheets for their HDEOs. It's very helpful, and eliminates a lot of guessing.


Yes some companies are really good about that, others are not. If you read Lubes N Greases Magazine Tom Glenn (from the PQIA) often writes about how there are no legislated standards for these kinds of languages and claims...its up to the oil marketer to use the accepted terminology properly. Smaller blenders also often buy bulk oil from a larger company and repackage it, sometimes as the product gets further and further from the original source the claims can get a little muddy.

 

[Solarent]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
yet the motor oil producer says it meets or exceeds the OEM spec, the OEM is on the hook, per the Federal Trade Commission, to prove that what I used caused the issue that required the warranty work.


How ?

How is that fair ?

I could put "recommended for" anything on Shannow brew, and you are saying DD have to honour MY RECOMMENDATION ???


Generally not many cases go that far because in the name of customer service a compromise is usually reached. But it is up to the manufacturer to prove what caused the defect. If it does go that far, and the customer used a product in good faith that claimed to meet the specifications then the manufacturer must honor the warranty for the customer. Then the manufacturer goes after the oil marketer for making illigitimate claims.

Odds are if you made a Shannow blend, and said it met certain specifications when it really didn't, there would be a lot of finger pointing, and the customer may be caught in the middle. The manufacturer would have to prove the defect was caused by inferior oil and then you would have to prove your blend met the performance claims you made. When you couldn't do that, you as the blender would be on the hook in the end.

These cases can be really hard to prove, and honestly are few and far between. This is because engine oil that is changed regularly generally doesn't cause warranty issues, and like I said in the name of customer service (from the dealership side) and a need to get the car running again (from the vehicle owners side) compromises are made and the work gets done.

This is why the work the PQIA is doing is so important, it helps keep blenders accountable in an industry where it is possible to fly under the radar with bad products. Fortunately, most of the industry players - even the ILMA blenders have enough integrity to only put out products that meet the current specs and are generally good about their labelling practices.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: Solarent
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Trav and I were having a spirited discussion...
Here is some good insight into how this works...

Thanks for this input and it clarifies many of the thoughts I had regarding the topic!

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
A warranty is a contract between 2 parties, the vehicle owner and the auto maker. They set the terms and conditions, not the owner, or the oil company. If you don't follow the terms and conditions you handle it or foot the bill if they don't.

I believe this is why lawyers are able to make such a lucrative living...


LOL and why they'll always have work if they're good.

 

[Shannow]

Thanks Solarent, for both posts.

 

[Garak]

A good example, Shannow, of best practices would be the Imperial Oil and Petro-Canada stuff I mentioned. They'll say meets/exceeds when it comes to ACEA specifications, since they are really self-policed. They'll show as approvals and certifications for actual builder approvals. They'll have the API donut and the like as needed. They'll show "recommended for" when it comes to old, outdated API and builder specs.

Compare this rather unfortunate, muddled example to this and this.

 

[TiredTrucker]

And that is why I have no problem using the Schaeffer oil I use in my Silverado pickups. They have been in the game longer than anyone else and are not going to play fast and loose with claims. They say it exceeds the Dexos1 spec and I am comfortable with that. They just haven't bothered to get on the "approved" list, but then, they are not a typical retail oil that one buys off the shelf so they don't have to cater to the market that would sit around and fret over approvals.