A word of caution regarding Valvoline Maxlife ATF

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Messages
46,513
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by dnewton3
Typically that's why we would rely on good intel from a website. If you have a warranty, why not prominently post it?
Yup, the example I posted from Mobil's website earlier in the thread shows, IMHO, how this is properly done.
 
Messages
1,151
Location
USA
Originally Posted by Olas
Castrol dont offer a warranty on their gear lubes.
Wrong they DO offer a written warranty on their Transmax transmission fluids. Same with Mobil. Refer to the second page of this thread to see the Castrol warranty.
 
Messages
252
Location
Illinois
Mobil makes a dexron VI fluid, which would be appropriate for mercon lv applications. It's a semi synthetic if I recall correctly. Oddly it doesn't carry the Ford license as most dexron VI multi use fluids either carry the license or just recommend that it meets those specs.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Messages
46,513
Location
Ontario, Canada
Messages
1,462
Location
CA
Originally Posted by dnewton3
And there's no warranty posted on the company website. But .... apparently there is a written limited warranty. Only after you play the round-n-round game of circular stupidity will you sort of get an acknowledgement that there is a written warranty, maybe. But then they'll blame Napa for writing the document ... Yeah - as if I'm supposed to believe that Napa lawyers are stupid enough to create a fraudulent document implicating written warranty upon another company. ..... If you have a warranty, why not prominently post it? ....... And yet, there is no warranty on Valvoline's website I can find for this product.
The warranty document on Napa's website was created in 2012. The fact that the document can only be found on Napa's site and not on Valvoline's site suggests what you were told twice by Valvoline is true. There is no warranty now even if there once was. It's understandable if the customer service people, who may not have been working there when there was a warranty in place or have been correctly trained that there is no warranty, couldn't explain the warranty on Napa's website. I get you were confused by the document on Napa's website but you had two people from Valvoline themselves give you the correct information and it seems you were inclined to not believe them so placed more belief in an old document on Napa's website than was warranted (no pun intended).
 
Messages
13,250
Location
Indiana
It's a one size fits all fluid. I could have told you there would have been no warranty. Say I bought some Castrol ATF+4 for my Jeep and did a fluid change only for the tranny to fail a few hundred miles later. Would Castrol warranty this? Nope. Even if they did offer some sort of warranty, the hassle of getting a lawyer involved and them cooperating is slim to not warranty or not.. same with oil filters. Also, what are you doing buying Maxlife for something with any sort of warranty? Get the real fluid. Not to sound like you, but don't overthink this.
 

4WD

Messages
17,471
Location
Texas
Originally Posted by Jetsfan421
Mobil makes a dexron VI fluid, which would be appropriate for mercon lv applications. It's a semi synthetic if I recall correctly. Oddly it doesn't carry the Ford license as most dexron VI multi use fluids either carry the license or just recommend that it meets those specs.
The six pack of AC Delco I just used had the familiar Mobil bottle shape
 
Messages
8,163
Location
MI
So, what does a person do with this information? Do you shun Valvoline products on principle? Motor oil, gear lube, ATF, grease?? Or, do you trust that Valvoline is selling products that meet or exceed the specifications? People trust non API Amsoil oil. Gear lubes have no API certification program, so you only have trust to rely on any manufacturer. Many people diy oil changes with aftermarket filters during the warranty period knowing that it is o.k., but might be much more difficult if a engine warranty issue develops. Point is, we still do it. Remember, any lubricant warranty only covers the quality of their formulation. Just like oil filters, one would have to prove the oil defective to cover a mechanical failure. Not to be confused with the various warranties companies offer for using their engine oil at every OCI. I.E., .... https://www.pennzoil.com/en_us/warranty.html#iframe=L2xvZ2luLw While I dislike the deceptive nature that Valvoline is taking here, if you base your decisions on principle you will really limit the number of manufacturers you have available to purchase from. I don't have the backbone to do this unless it is a HUGE violation of principle. After one bad car experience, many people sign off ever buying that brand again. Yet, nearly every manufacturer has serious skeletons in their closet if you are honest with your investigation. So again, I ask what do we do with this information?
 
Messages
1,151
Location
USA
Originally Posted by doitmyself
So again, I ask what do we do with this information?
Buy a transmission fluid with a clearly written warranty. That's the bottom line, if the company is willing to write a warranty that actually means something it means they trust the quality of the product they are offering to the consumer.
 
Messages
13,194
Location
Maricopa Arizona
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by doitmyself
So again, I ask what do we do with this information?
Buy a transmission fluid with a clearly written warranty. That's the bottom line, if the company is willing to write a warranty that actually means something it means they trust the quality of the product they are offering to the consumer.
The extent of each warranty is the fluid will not cause failure.
 
Messages
14,673
Location
The Old North State
Originally Posted by doitmyself
...So again, I ask what do we do with this information?
Since you asked, as I noted very early on this discussion changes nothing for me in the applications I use it on. And apparently after all said and done the OP has now stated his impression.... "Good product. Bad customer service.." (Then adding typical of many corporations). I can attest to the former with significant anecdotal experience ML MV. No experience with the latter. I'd add if I was concerned with warranty first ie., warranty the priority I'd likely only use the OEM fluid, period. In fact, for CYA purposes frequently advise or at least note that those under vehicle warranty do so. Outside of vehicle warranty, another matter and personal preference and common sense apply. Pragmatically speaking and repetitious at this point, good luck proving a trans failure caused by and collecting from any of the ATF manufacturers in that event, including oem. But if an explicitly worded/printed warranty makes one feel better about the ATF, go for it. So the oft used adage applies, to each thier own.
 
Messages
6,684
Location
Scruffy City
I never got a reply to my inquiry along the same lines (as was requested). It is IMO not that rare for a corporation to disclaim warranties of any kind and still service the product and take care of defects. In such cases if they have a written document it is not called a Warranty or Guarantee but something else like service agreement or customer service policy. They do this to circumvent the requirements of a warranty and give them latitude in decision making. The problem of course for the consumer is that it gives them latitude in decision making. There are a number of Firearms companies that handle it this way and generally take care of the customer. Back to the fluid, this IMO becomes more important when a company such as Valvoline is stating that a product is "suitable for" vs the product having a legitimate certification or license. What happens if you should elect to use this "suitable for" lubricant where an approval is needed, subsequently have a failure and the manufacturer of the equipment denies warranty because an approved lubricant was not used? What is Valvoline (or anyone else for that matter) going to do for you? You can say MM precludes the equipment manufacturer from doing that without proving the lubricant was the issue and you'd be mostly right, but who's going to fight that fight for you? It should also be noted that MM would preclude Harley Davidson from denying powertrain coverage and voiding coverage simply because a non EPA compliant muffler or tune is installed, yet the EPA requires just that of them, so don't think your government takes MM that seriously.
 
Messages
5,723
Location
Ohio
Originally Posted by CharlieBauer
As far as Napa goes, here is an interesting twist: http://s7d9.scene7.com/is/content/GenuinePartsCompany/104405764pdf?$PDF$ Created in 2018 and refers to Valvoline warranting "all private-label NAPA lubricants manufactured by Valvoline"
Valvoline is just playing a numbers game with this. They know that the odds of their fluid causing damage is slim to none and further, proving it did is even harder. That lets them "warranty" their private-labeled fluids and not be too concerned. It is also a selling point to encourage stores to come to Valvoline for private-labeled products. That said, no one can turn around and say that Valvoline-branded fluid now has a warranty.
 
Messages
11,214
Location
MA
Originally Posted by doitmyself
So, what does a person do with this information?
Use only fluids that are approved by the manufacturer. That way both the manufacturer and the fluid maker agree that it's the correct fluid for that particular application. In this case you just have the fluid maker saying it's the correct fluid, but not the manufacturer. If you just want to save a few bucks and don't care because maybe you're dumping the thing in a few months, then go ahead and use it. I used some Valvoline Mercon V which had the same disclaimer, just suitable for applications where Mercon V was required but it wasn't really Mercon V. I didn't really care as I just used it for power steering fluid and it was on close out for $2 a quart. Real Supertech Mercon V was over $4 a quart. Got rid of the car a couple years later.
 
Top