API Scrutinizes GM GEOS
- Thread starter Pablo
- Start date
- Status
I think that it stinks.
The Europeans, with their OEM approvals, and warranty requirements was the wrong path.
Your particular engine design has cam wear issues, or sludges ... design that feature out of the oil, or provide the specialist oil for free, rather than recalling the engines.
(The long life BMW/Merc stuff I feel differently about, because the average user could do shorter OCIs on more mainstream products, and the extended OCI could be an API standard without a great deal of worry)
Now GM wants to make its own standard, charge everybody for buying an oil that meets the standard...
They can stick it.
It's not "improving the breed"
The Europeans, with their OEM approvals, and warranty requirements was the wrong path.
Your particular engine design has cam wear issues, or sludges ... design that feature out of the oil, or provide the specialist oil for free, rather than recalling the engines.
(The long life BMW/Merc stuff I feel differently about, because the average user could do shorter OCIs on more mainstream products, and the extended OCI could be an API standard without a great deal of worry)
Now GM wants to make its own standard, charge everybody for buying an oil that meets the standard...
They can stick it.
It's not "improving the breed"
Well GM's new oil now has a spiffy trademark name- dexos and here are the specifics from the latest lube report.
Details on Dexos
Details on Dexos
Interesting, thanks for the link.
1. Licensing fees will be high.
2. Some tests are proprietary
3. Use of Group III/PAO to get there.
I wonder if Mobil 1 will remain factory fill for GM? I also wonder how the small guys will claim dexos if some of the tests are proprietary.
Amsoil may have to start forking out more money for approvals. The API fees are not that expensive, so now they will be faced with an even higher licensing cost.
1. Licensing fees will be high.
2. Some tests are proprietary
3. Use of Group III/PAO to get there.
I wonder if Mobil 1 will remain factory fill for GM? I also wonder how the small guys will claim dexos if some of the tests are proprietary.
Amsoil may have to start forking out more money for approvals. The API fees are not that expensive, so now they will be faced with an even higher licensing cost.
The proprietary testing is going to be very interesting because I bet that the extra testing isn't going to be inexpensive. I personally don't see Amsoil going there yet, but they had better start looking into this standard and figuring out how they can carve out a definitive niche. With GF5 and now Dexos around the corner things will get pretty interesting in the domestic market. I'd also think that Mobil is going to have to get well positioned from a cost perspective to remain factory fill...some others will certainly be gunning for that position.
I am really sick and tired of each car company cooking up its own lubricant (and coolant) specifications. This problem is getting worse, not better as each year goes on.
This is the important point about "dexos":
a royalty of 36 cents on every gallon of dexos they sell
GM is of course noting that dexos oils also meet GF-4, so any independent shop need only stock dexos and they will be covered
. How nice of GM.
This is the important point about "dexos":
a royalty of 36 cents on every gallon of dexos they sell
GM is of course noting that dexos oils also meet GF-4, so any independent shop need only stock dexos and they will be covered
. How nice of GM.From my understanding of the dexos-1 criteria, certain AMSOIL products may already meet or exceed the requirements. This is all about monopolizing the lubricant market for GM dealers. And since they won't get all the oil sales directly, they will require steep testing and royalty costs from anyone else-enough so that many service providers will drop GM oil changes. This amounts to legalized extortion. It would be best if the FTC would require that anyone creating a new spec for themselves have to make the test stand and the sequencing tests available to other blenders at actual cost as well as disallowing royalties. This is very reminiscient of Allison's TES-295 spec for transmission fluid. In this case, the cost for test hardware and sequencing was so exhorbitant that no other blenders attempted licensing. AMSOIL reverse engineered the product. Even Mobil arranged a large volume buy of Transynd from Castrol(who makes it for Allison) and threw their own label on it. Of course they don't make much on the product, but at least they could keep some market share. I would expect reverse engineering of GM's own dexos-1 to determine basestocks, additives and their amounts. Then, blenders would independently verify that their product met the spec and would warranty the products themselves. In order for GM to require use of a proprietary licensed oil to maintain warranty coverage, they would have to apply for a waiver(which no one has ever done)from the FTC and make it available for free to customers for the duration of the warranty. This does not fit in with their profit targets, so I doubt they will go that far. Service writers will attempt to mislead and scare owners regarding the issue(no change there)however.
Last edited:
The oil bottlers can just play the "meets or exceeds" without the licensing, like some other company's mentioned in this thread do now.
Hi,
FowVay - I like your interpretation of this matter. It does look like GM could simply have uprated their current GM???? Approval standards and processes and left it at that!
I am a firm believer in engine Manufacturer standards and an Approval & Lising regime that is transparent ond open. We can thank CAT and the US MiL standards that commenced in the 1930s (CAT) for setting the Oil Industry alight. These organisations pulled the API out of its comfy "la la land" and commenced the road to today's regimes. In the car world for instance the original Mini is the only reason we have a20W-50 lubricant!
Engine and component Manufacturers are the ones who know what their complex designs really need to achieve their design durability criteria. This was confirmed to me recently by Daimler AG at Unterturkheim.
We can even buy simple cheap cars today with a life expectancy measured in decades and hundreds of thousnads of miles - and with low running cost on the way!
It is not so long ago that engine life was around 30-50k to first rebuild! Diff and gearboxes barely lasted much further!
Good lubricant standards are a component of this
I think GM has a supplementary profit motive here - most other Manufacturers don't to my knowledge
FowVay - I like your interpretation of this matter. It does look like GM could simply have uprated their current GM???? Approval standards and processes and left it at that!
I am a firm believer in engine Manufacturer standards and an Approval & Lising regime that is transparent ond open. We can thank CAT and the US MiL standards that commenced in the 1930s (CAT) for setting the Oil Industry alight. These organisations pulled the API out of its comfy "la la land" and commenced the road to today's regimes. In the car world for instance the original Mini is the only reason we have a20W-50 lubricant!
Engine and component Manufacturers are the ones who know what their complex designs really need to achieve their design durability criteria. This was confirmed to me recently by Daimler AG at Unterturkheim.
We can even buy simple cheap cars today with a life expectancy measured in decades and hundreds of thousnads of miles - and with low running cost on the way!
It is not so long ago that engine life was around 30-50k to first rebuild! Diff and gearboxes barely lasted much further!
Good lubricant standards are a component of this
I think GM has a supplementary profit motive here - most other Manufacturers don't to my knowledge
Anyway, how many owners are even aware that GM has current oil specs that apply to GM vehicles sold in the US?
More than likely, any quality name brand oil would be capable of meeting this new spec.
Also, the owner may use whatever he pleases and his warranty remains intact unless GM can show that the engine would have been fine had a GM licensed oil been used.
Remember, too, that we aren't really talking about one poor little owner vs mighty GM. We are talikng about a plaintiff's bar that would love to file a class action lawsuit should GM engage in a wave of warranty denials based upon vehicle owners' use of a non licensed oil.
More than likely, any quality name brand oil would be capable of meeting this new spec.
Also, the owner may use whatever he pleases and his warranty remains intact unless GM can show that the engine would have been fine had a GM licensed oil been used.
Remember, too, that we aren't really talking about one poor little owner vs mighty GM. We are talikng about a plaintiff's bar that would love to file a class action lawsuit should GM engage in a wave of warranty denials based upon vehicle owners' use of a non licensed oil.
- Status
