Originally Posted By: tig1
As Mobil said, the Chrtsler spec takes two years to field test the MS-6395 Chrysler requirement. All of these silly Euro, Asian, and engine builder specs must be a massive headache for engine oil producers.
I think XOM is just doing the smiling answer when they say that. Even some smaller companies' oils meet the Chrysler spec and Mobil conventional does, too.
XOM and Chrysler are clearly sore at each other. Chrysler being passed from manufacturer to manufacturer and obtaining a hodge podge of nonsensical oil specifications will be a perfect match for SOPUS and their preference to create phantom data sheets for non-existent products over the actual desire to ship product.
Look at the certifications on M1 0w-40 or even normal M1 5w-30. M1 0w-40 has everything and the kitchen sink. 5w-30 has ACEA specifications that few "regular" synthetics meet; heck, the previous version had some rather obscure Ford/Jaguar specs that are impossible to find. If XOM isn't meeting a specification, there's one reason for it and one reason only. They have absolutely no intention to obtain that certification and couldn't be bothered. I don't blame them one bit.
You look at any Chryslers manufactured in the last few years, and you see them calling for everything from an API type 10w-30, to a Benz spec, an almost imaginary version of PU, or a Fiat spec. What a Charlie Foxtrot. And people wonder why GM came out with dexos?
Like I said in another thread, in five years from now when Fiat's had enough of Chrysler, Tata Motors will take over, and Chryslers will start calling for SE rated monogrades. Perhaps they'll even introduce the three-wheeled, two-stroke buckboard to North America. They can call it a Plymouth.