Royal Purple now dexos1 certified, no Amsoil???!!
- Thread starter stchman
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Snoman002
Compliance doesn't mean approved, correct. However it does mean in the real world it works just as well.
Anybody claiming dexos should prove it, or let an independent 3rd party (like GM, or the certified lab they used) to state it, show the paperwork.
Otherwise, its a kinda, sorta, maybe.... product claim by marketing people.
Compliance doesn't mean approved, correct. However it does mean in the real world it works just as well.
Anybody claiming dexos should prove it, or let an independent 3rd party (like GM, or the certified lab they used) to state it, show the paperwork.
Otherwise, its a kinda, sorta, maybe.... product claim by marketing people.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Anytime GM wants to pay and test Schaeffer' oil that exceeds their own specs, have at it.
Marketing people do not formulate Schaeffer's products to exceed manufacturer specs and excell in machines beyond OEM specs.
OK sure, but it was you that posted the text implying it was dexos licensed, which it is not.
Anytime GM wants to pay and test Schaeffer' oil that exceeds their own specs, have at it.
Marketing people do not formulate Schaeffer's products to exceed manufacturer specs and excell in machines beyond OEM specs.
OK sure, but it was you that posted the text implying it was dexos licensed, which it is not.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
My post clearly says,compliant.
Why yes of course it does. You posted the marketing statement to a question about certification in an attempt to obfuscate the truth of the matter.
You would have gotten a lot more mileage out of your post had you clearly explained what "compliant" meant, a lot of people would not have a problem running such an oil based on the seller's reputation - as do many people with Amsoil. But that's not what you meant in your post, nor implied.
My post clearly says,compliant.
Why yes of course it does. You posted the marketing statement to a question about certification in an attempt to obfuscate the truth of the matter.
You would have gotten a lot more mileage out of your post had you clearly explained what "compliant" meant, a lot of people would not have a problem running such an oil based on the seller's reputation - as do many people with Amsoil. But that's not what you meant in your post, nor implied.
Originally Posted By: Snoman002
Compliance doesn't mean approved, correct. However it does mean in the real world it works just as well.
Not really. Compliant and certified are 2 very different words with different meanings.
So I can claim compliance on anything. Just trust me
Certified means guaranteed.
Now which would you pay for.
Compliance doesn't mean approved, correct. However it does mean in the real world it works just as well.
Not really. Compliant and certified are 2 very different words with different meanings.
So I can claim compliance on anything. Just trust me
Certified means guaranteed.
Now which would you pay for.
MolaKule
Staff member
Quote:
Supreme 9000 Full Synthetic SAE 5W-30 meets and exceeds the following specifications and manufacturers’ requirements:
MIL-PRF-46152E; CID A-A- 52039B, API Service Classification SN, Resource Conserving; ILSAC GF-5; Ford WSS-M2C946-A (SAE 5W-30); Ford WSS-M2C930-A; Ford WSS-M2C929A (SAE 5W-30); General Motors dexos-1™ compliant; General Motors 6094M; Chrysler MS-6395Q; Toyota and Honda Service Fill Specifications, Honda/Acura HTO-06
If Shaeffer's had simply left out the word "compliant," or used another word, I think they might have avoided some confusion and debate.
Here is how I might have worded it:
Supreme 9000 Full Synthetic SAE 5W-30 meets and exceeds the following specifications and manufacturers’ requirements:
MIL-PRF-46152E; CID A-A- 52039B, API Service Classification SN, Resource Conserving; ILSAC GF-5; Ford WSS-M2C946-A (SAE 5W-30); Ford WSS-M2C930-A; Ford WSS-M2C929A (SAE 5W-30); Comparable to General Motors dexos-1™; General Motors 6094M; Chrysler MS-6395Q; Toyota and Honda Service Fill Specifications, Honda/Acura HTO-06
Supreme 9000 Full Synthetic SAE 5W-30 meets and exceeds the following specifications and manufacturers’ requirements:
MIL-PRF-46152E; CID A-A- 52039B, API Service Classification SN, Resource Conserving; ILSAC GF-5; Ford WSS-M2C946-A (SAE 5W-30); Ford WSS-M2C930-A; Ford WSS-M2C929A (SAE 5W-30); General Motors dexos-1™ compliant; General Motors 6094M; Chrysler MS-6395Q; Toyota and Honda Service Fill Specifications, Honda/Acura HTO-06
If Shaeffer's had simply left out the word "compliant," or used another word, I think they might have avoided some confusion and debate.
Here is how I might have worded it:
Supreme 9000 Full Synthetic SAE 5W-30 meets and exceeds the following specifications and manufacturers’ requirements:
MIL-PRF-46152E; CID A-A- 52039B, API Service Classification SN, Resource Conserving; ILSAC GF-5; Ford WSS-M2C946-A (SAE 5W-30); Ford WSS-M2C930-A; Ford WSS-M2C929A (SAE 5W-30); Comparable to General Motors dexos-1™; General Motors 6094M; Chrysler MS-6395Q; Toyota and Honda Service Fill Specifications, Honda/Acura HTO-06
Last edited:
MolaKule
Staff member
Amsoil does say why they meet or exceed the Dexos specification:
5W-30 (ASL): API SN (Resource Conserving), SM…; ILSAC GF-5, GF-4…;
ACEA A5/B5, A1/B1; Honda HTO-06; Ford WSS-M2C946-A, WSS-M2C929-A;
Chrysler MS-6395; GM dexos1™ (supersedes LL-A-025, 6094M and 4718M) Fortified with detergents that exceed dexos1™ sulfated ash specifications.
5W-30 (ASL): API SN (Resource Conserving), SM…; ILSAC GF-5, GF-4…;
ACEA A5/B5, A1/B1; Honda HTO-06; Ford WSS-M2C946-A, WSS-M2C929-A;
Chrysler MS-6395; GM dexos1™ (supersedes LL-A-025, 6094M and 4718M) Fortified with detergents that exceed dexos1™ sulfated ash specifications.
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Schaeffer hasn't jumped on the dexos bandwagon either. I figure that isn't a bad move for the oldest lubricants company in N. America. I also figure they don't need to prove anything to GM.
Schaeffer Oil
9003D SUPREME 9000 SAE 5W-30
FULL SYNTHETIC ENGINE OIL
API SN, RESOURCE CONSERVING, ILSAC GF-5 GM dexos-1™ Compliant
I can claim my kitchen canola oil is 'GM dexos-1™ Compliant' too, but unless its on the list at http://www.centerforqa.com/gm/dexos1-brands , then nope. Does Schaeffer have any test results to share with us that proves dexos1 compliance? GM says those tests don't exist and or Schaeffer refuses to pay royalty fees to GM.
Yes you can, but as in the previous post I don't know your companies reputation.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Schaeffer hasn't jumped on the dexos bandwagon either. I figure that isn't a bad move for the oldest lubricants company in N. America. I also figure they don't need to prove anything to GM.
Schaeffer Oil
9003D SUPREME 9000 SAE 5W-30
FULL SYNTHETIC ENGINE OIL
API SN, RESOURCE CONSERVING, ILSAC GF-5 GM dexos-1™ Compliant
I can claim my kitchen canola oil is 'GM dexos-1™ Compliant' too, but unless its on the list at http://www.centerforqa.com/gm/dexos1-brands , then nope. Does Schaeffer have any test results to share with us that proves dexos1 compliance? GM says those tests don't exist and or Schaeffer refuses to pay royalty fees to GM.
Yes you can, but as in the previous post I don't know your companies reputation.
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
Anybody claiming dexos should prove it, or let an independent 3rd party (like GM, or the certified lab they used) to state it, show the paperwork.
Why would GM certify something when those responsible for that something don't want to obtain a dexos license in the first place?
Anybody claiming dexos should prove it, or let an independent 3rd party (like GM, or the certified lab they used) to state it, show the paperwork.
Why would GM certify something when those responsible for that something don't want to obtain a dexos license in the first place?
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Amsoil does say why they meet or exceed the Dexos specification:
5W-30 (ASL): API SN (Resource Conserving), SM…; ILSAC GF-5, GF-4…;
ACEA A5/B5, A1/B1; Honda HTO-06; Ford WSS-M2C946-A, WSS-M2C929-A;
Chrysler MS-6395; GM dexos1™ (supersedes LL-A-025, 6094M and 4718M) Fortified with detergents that exceed dexos1™ sulfated ash specifications.
We had a long multi-thread discussion about this in the UOA section a few months ago. Amsoil uses an add pack in the XL and SS lines with a sufated ash content of ~1.6% which is above the DEXOS limit of 1%. The OE line is the only one that doesn't exceed this limit.
So for all intents and purposes, Amsoil can claim to meet (although they use the more abiguious term "recommended for applications requiring XXX spec") DEXOS 1 specification, but if they ever actually paid for them to be tested, GM would never accept the XL and SS lines simply because their SA content is too high.
In the real world we all agree it wouldn't matter as both the XL and SS come in significantly under the 13% NOACK so SA content is irrelevant.
Amsoil does say why they meet or exceed the Dexos specification:
5W-30 (ASL): API SN (Resource Conserving), SM…; ILSAC GF-5, GF-4…;
ACEA A5/B5, A1/B1; Honda HTO-06; Ford WSS-M2C946-A, WSS-M2C929-A;
Chrysler MS-6395; GM dexos1™ (supersedes LL-A-025, 6094M and 4718M) Fortified with detergents that exceed dexos1™ sulfated ash specifications.
We had a long multi-thread discussion about this in the UOA section a few months ago. Amsoil uses an add pack in the XL and SS lines with a sufated ash content of ~1.6% which is above the DEXOS limit of 1%. The OE line is the only one that doesn't exceed this limit.
So for all intents and purposes, Amsoil can claim to meet (although they use the more abiguious term "recommended for applications requiring XXX spec") DEXOS 1 specification, but if they ever actually paid for them to be tested, GM would never accept the XL and SS lines simply because their SA content is too high.
In the real world we all agree it wouldn't matter as both the XL and SS come in significantly under the 13% NOACK so SA content is irrelevant.
Last edited:
I prefer seeing "recommended for" when they're talking about a specification that's obsolete. Imperial Oil (our XOM) and Petro-Canada do it all the time when talking about older API categories for gassers and diesels.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
My post clearly says,compliant.
Nothing against Schaffer's but there's a big difference between compliant and certified.
My post clearly says,compliant.
Nothing against Schaffer's but there's a big difference between compliant and certified.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: salesrep
My post clearly says,compliant.
Nothing against Schaeffer's but there's a big difference between compliant and certified.
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines. Compliant means that Schaeffer's Manufacturing states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
My post clearly says,compliant.
Nothing against Schaeffer's but there's a big difference between compliant and certified.
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines. Compliant means that Schaeffer's Manufacturing states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: salesrep
My post clearly says,compliant.
Nothing against Schaeffer's but there's a big difference between compliant and certified.
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines. Compliant means that Schaeffer's Manufacturing states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
And then there is licensed, which is the operative word when it comes to dexos. The oils on this page are the ones that are licensed, the ones not on that list are not.
Once again you attempt to obfuscate when you would be better off with a clear explanation, and let people decide if the manufacturer's reputation is good enough or not. I tend to believe it is, but you aren't helping by your constant weasel words.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: salesrep
My post clearly says,compliant.
Nothing against Schaeffer's but there's a big difference between compliant and certified.
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines. Compliant means that Schaeffer's Manufacturing states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
And then there is licensed, which is the operative word when it comes to dexos. The oils on this page are the ones that are licensed, the ones not on that list are not.
Once again you attempt to obfuscate when you would be better off with a clear explanation, and let people decide if the manufacturer's reputation is good enough or not. I tend to believe it is, but you aren't helping by your constant weasel words.
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines. Compliant means that Schaeffer's Manufacturing states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
I have no doubt that due to the longevity of the company's history and their experience formulating lubricants, Schaeffer Oil produces quality lubricants that meet or exceed OEM specs.
The same goes for Amsoil and others.
I still think the problem here is the use of the word "compliant." I am nitpicking here but "compliant" seems somewhat meaningless, and in the least, too general, with too many possible meanings, many implied and unspecific.
Quote:
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
Does this mean that Schaeffer Oil holds a certificate in writing from GM that states this oil (Schaeffer Oil 9000 XWXX) meets the exact performance specifications (via proof through testing) of Dexos 1? I am still unsure what this statement means.
Quote:
Compliant means that Schaeffer's [Oil] states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
Again the word "compliant" seems to confuse the issue. Simply stating it "meets or exceeds" the specification would seem to have been sufficient.
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines. Compliant means that Schaeffer's Manufacturing states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
I have no doubt that due to the longevity of the company's history and their experience formulating lubricants, Schaeffer Oil produces quality lubricants that meet or exceed OEM specs.
The same goes for Amsoil and others.
I still think the problem here is the use of the word "compliant." I am nitpicking here but "compliant" seems somewhat meaningless, and in the least, too general, with too many possible meanings, many implied and unspecific.
Quote:
Certified means the manufacturer, GM in this case, certifies that this engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
Does this mean that Schaeffer Oil holds a certificate in writing from GM that states this oil (Schaeffer Oil 9000 XWXX) meets the exact performance specifications (via proof through testing) of Dexos 1? I am still unsure what this statement means.
Quote:
Compliant means that Schaeffer's [Oil] states that their engine oil is compliant with the specifications GM has established for their engines.
Again the word "compliant" seems to confuse the issue. Simply stating it "meets or exceeds" the specification would seem to have been sufficient.
Last edited:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in nearly every case, when an oil says they are SN GF-5 for example, then ILSAC & API hold some kind of proof from an independent certified lab.
The point is: If you're going to claim dexos, and nobody has the paperwork and signoffs outside Schaeffer (or Amsoil), then you shouldn't be able to claim it. Its all about trust and verify, thats all.
The point is: If you're going to claim dexos, and nobody has the paperwork and signoffs outside Schaeffer (or Amsoil), then you shouldn't be able to claim it. Its all about trust and verify, thats all.
- Status
Similar threads
