Welp, I just checked Fram’s Website and I still see the wording that UD has been complaining about. It’s still there, and somewhere around two weeks after the “oversight”.... even the USPS can deliver mail in this time, yet an electronic change that can happen instantaneously... doesn’t. That feels intentional to me. So, here’s my take in no specific order (or preferential treatment):
1. There HAS to be some reason Fram changed the wording. Most likely due to the same cost cutting methods that MG is being accused of. If you’ve got a phenomenal product that is better than your competitors, you USE that specific data instead of hiding behind generalities and vagueness. It’s how you get bench racers off their butts and buying your product vs. the competitor.
2. At this point, I have zero faith in an Amazon review by an alleged person. I could post as Perry Mason or Donald Trump, but some other clown already beat me to that email address. If this claim showed up in Machinery Lubrication, or WSJ, or just about any other forum except a product review on a commercial sales site (with no possible way to vet the source), I may give it more weight.
3. The whole intention of this site, as I’ve come to know and love it, is based on data from actual testing and confirmation, not blindly accepting claims without merit. UD is pushing this tact and is kinda being ridiculed for challenging the claims regardless of the manufacturer. He’s looking for DaTA from the manufacturer which will help him quantify the results he observes during his use of that product to make a personal evaluation of its value as it relates TO HIM. I’ve always tried to provide data as well over opinions and have compiled over 100k of data on my vehicle which has provided my frame of reference.
4. If MG were making blatantly false claims that were easily disproven, they would have already been sued by now. Either by another filter manufacturer trying to protect their brand and position in the market, or by consumers who relied on MG’s representations and suffered engine damage or other harm. If LinkedIn paid millions from a class-action lawsuit for sending a couple too many emails, I have no doubt MG would have been sued into debtor’s prison by now if their claims were disproveable using claimed specs/standards/otherwise. Litigation domination is the name of the game- some little nobody recently tried to sue the company I work for for around $150 MILLION for copyright infringement... when our company employee had already filed for and received his own patent for the process we use. Also remember the lawsuit that Castrol WON over Mobil about what “synthetic” oil actually is...?
