The damage doesn't have to be related for either a dealer or mfg rep to try to blame it on your unconventional oil choice IF they sample or notice somehow. People were being accused of all sorts of stuff back in 2001 when BMW had the rod bearing recall with the S54. Same thing with early S85 and S65 failures. Plenty of engines have design flaws and I can understand if someone, particularly with an expensive high performance engine, does not want to leave any room for blame to be shifted. Toyota / Subaru were out there denying warranty claims for obvious RTV in the oil pickup on minor technicalities. I agree that the odds are remote that anyone is going to notice beyond if there is oil in the engine or not, but it has happened.Yes again, damage. Which makes sense.
Are you going to pay for repairs when the warranty is denied?No owner’s manual nor warranty book says that grade nor license voids the warranty. We had a long thread on this a while back and no one posted language that shows it does. Using an oil that damages the engine will void the warranty however.
People keep saying it does but it doesn’t make it true. Using unlicensed Amsoil or HPL oils does not void the warranty unless the product damages the engine.
Tell me the answer. Post language from an owner’s manual that says grade or license is a warranty requirement. It’s not there.
I think he believes that the dealerships are all nice and cozy and will not look for any reason to deny a warranty.Are you going to pay for repairs when the warranty is denied?
Doesn't even have to be oil related repairs. You use something else, you voided the WHOLE warranty.
You nailed it!
Yes sorry, had been a long day and got some details mixed w/r to the Redline. Apologies; that’s why we like dataDidn’t your chart show Amsoil and HPL both having 500kg Four Ball Weld results?
You all can make side arguments and say what you want, but my point still stands and is correct.Are you going to pay for repairs when the warranty is denied?
Doesn't even have to be oil related repairs. You use something else, you voided the WHOLE warranty.
MM Act only says they can't make a buyer use the manufacturers products for maintenance.
Another side point. But I will say that my local VW dealership had no problem under warranty using 504 00 oil in my Tiguan rather than 508 00, per my request. No dire warnings and no drama.I think he believes that the dealerships are all nice and cozy and will not look for any reason to deny a warranty.
So you mean to tell me those people paid for the “manufacturer approved/recommended/required” oil and likely dealer maintenance fees and STILL had engine failures? Sounds like pretty good grounds to have an arbitrator or judge overturn a warranty denial since the OM oil didn’t deliver, either…The damage doesn't have to be related for either a dealer or mfg rep to try to blame it on your unconventional oil choice IF they sample or notice somehow. People were being accused of all sorts of stuff back in 2001 when BMW had the rod bearing recall with the S54. Same thing with early S85 and S65 failures. Plenty of engines have design flaws and I can understand if someone, particularly with an expensive high performance engine, does not want to leave any room for blame to be shifted. Toyota / Subaru were out there denying warranty claims for obvious RTV in the oil pickup on minor technicalities. I agree that the odds are remote that anyone is going to notice beyond if there is oil in the engine or not, but it has happened.
Not sure about every case, but in BMWs case they stopped doing that once it was investigated and in the S54 case there was a recall. For Toyota not sure, they surely know of the problem now and hopefully aren't continuing to blame aggressive driving for Subaru's inability to keep loose RTV out of the oil pickup. My overall point is that it's wise to avoid giving dealers and manufacturers any reason for denying a claim, because the people assessing it are often not capable of critical thought.So you mean to tell me those people paid for the “manufacturer approved/recommended/required” oil and likely dealer maintenance fees and STILL had engine failures? Sounds like pretty good grounds to have an arbitrator or judge overturn a warranty denial since the OM oil didn’t deliver, either…
So I have seen nothing about NOACK numbers for HPL, either on their site or this one. Is there a chart published somewhere with the different weights and respective NOACK? Of course there is a chart on their site with other numbers and specs, but no NOACK. They clearly state "LOW" NOACK, I would like to compare them to some others before I drop 1000 in oil.
WOW that is stellar, at least relative to others. Do you know any documentation that you could send me a link to?They use TGA instead of Noack. They don't test Noack as it's a bit pointless given the base oils they use. Volatility just isn't a concern. They did run Noack on their PCMO 10W-20 just for the heck of it, and it was 3.4%.
I think I saw that one too. The bottling one?Was trying to post a link to a FB post by HPL that was pretty cool...it won't work so...if you do IG/FB, like/follow HPL...they are quite active.
The Mobil product page still states “Provides exceptional cleaning power for your engine” for Mobil 1 0w-40 FS.Because if it did, they'd advertise it like Mobil does/didThey are careful not to advertise that, and I think @The Critic has likely hit on why that is.
Cleaning requires different chemistry than keeping things clean. You can have a pretty neutral base oil blend and a healthy detergent package and keep things very clean (which is what Shell is claiming). On the other hand, to actually remove existing deposits you need to use:
- Solvent (obviously not going to work as part of a full formulated engine oil)
- Polar additive/base (this is what HPL uses, AutoRX...etc)
Bases capable of removing existing deposits are AN's and esters, both of which are expensive. AN's have the added challenge of having very low VI's, which means you need to blend them with PAO typically to get a 0W-xx Winter grade. Mobil's original "Tri-Syn" formula was PAO + esters and AN's. When they introduced Group III, they stepped away from that single approach and started mixing it up based on cost and performance targets, so you'd get oils like M1 EP 0W-20 with a majority PAO base and then probably just a splash of ester to meet the solvency, while its sister product in 5W-20 would be totally Group III with no PAO and likely little to no AN or ester content.
Their 0W-40, when it was claimed to clean (it doesn't claim that anymore from what I've seen) likely had either AN's, esters, or both in it.
As @The Critic noted, introducing cleaning creates potential for serious problems like plugging up filters because Joe Average isn't going to be short-changing the filter in anticipation of rapid loading due to cleaning taking place. Also, the detergent and dispersant package has limited holding capacity and an oil that's cleaning is going to hit that threshold much quicker than one that isn't. Ergo, there is risk associated with making an oil capable of removing existing deposits.