Synpower doesn't meet min spec for Chryslers

[OilGuy]

Originally Posted By: Valvman
Chrysler only reviews data and issues formal approval for this specification if they purchase the product from the supplier for factory fill use or re-brand under the MOPAR name. Valvoline chooses not to participate in this line of business but maintains that our oil meets all the requirements for Chrysler engines.


IF this is the case, Valv is apparently very familiar with working with Chrysler due to the fact that their conventional is listed with MS-6395. Your logic doesn't make sense.

 

[Valvman]

In the case of our conventional oil, we claim it meets the performance level of MS-6395M. It however is not listed by Chrysler becasue we do not participate in the factory or service fill business. Comparable Synpower products meet all the claims that our conventional oils meet but we have chosen not to list every specification.

 

[strombony]

Why have you chosen not to list them all? What's to hide? Would it not be to your advantage to list them? Valvoline is reputable company, so why would you NOT want to list all the specs? There has to be more a reason than "we have chosen not to".

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: strombony
Why have you chosen not to list them all? What's to hide? Would it not be to your advantage to list them? Valvoline is reputable company, so why would you NOT want to list all the specs? There has to be more a reason than "we have chosen not to".


Qualification test and license fee, and the labor to do it.

 

[OilGuy]

They (and others) pay to test their oils in many, many other smaller volume opportunity OEM specs (e.g. European, etc.). Chrysler is one of the Detroit 3 (formerly Big 3) - a rather large pool of cars.

 

[meep]

08 Grand Chero 3.7L

In one place the manual recommends a quality 5w-20 SM rated oil that's MS-6395.

In another place it requires the recommendations.

Kinda whacky... I had to read carefully. Wonder what's so special about MS-6395.

Car has an OLM with max OCI of 6k miles, 3k severe service.

M

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Unless the car of interest is a unique Chrysler that has a special need,


2.7 sludger?

 

[OilGuy]

Here is a service bulletin from 2005 I found online - applies to the whole line of vehicles outside those where they use Mobil 1 and require a different, tougher spec.
http://www.wkjeeps.com/tsb/tsb_wk_0901304.pdf

 

[JDD]

Chrysler products have specs?

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: JDD
Chrysler products have specs?


Yes, but apparently either they didn't follow them or the specs aren't tight enough.

I assume there are enough Chrysler on the road, and enough sales of Valvoline in US, that if there is a problem, people should see it by now, or it is so minor that it is smaller than noise in statistic.

 

[PT1]

Originally Posted By: sciphi
Sort of explains why I'm not a huge fan of Synpower. In all likelihood it will meet the Chrysler spec, but it's another reason why to use Pennz Platinum or another syn that does meet the spec.


Also explains why I am not a big DCX fan as their engines won't go past 150k anyway....

 

[e55amgbenz007]

I plan to run two oci's of the Synpower that I picked up on the 0.99$ sale after the Amsoil XL is exhausted. This will be used in an 07 Nitro with the 3.7 that is under a lifetime powertrain warranty. I am a bit leary to use it in that Chrysler will surely scrutinize this if any engine related component fails. I'm going to do it anyway. There is no way that the Synpower is vastly inferior with regards to any other synthetic.

 

[moribundman]

Maybe I missed it when rushing through this thread, but about what is MS-6395M?

 

[OilGuy]

MS-6395 is the spec Chrysler owners manuals says to use (complimented with an API certification)

 

[HawkeyeScott]

I have a Pacifica and put Synpower in a few weeks ago. I just assumed since it's a high-end oil, it met that requirement. I also assumed that since its competitors meet the requirement, it would too.

It makes absolute sense to me that if Valvoline's low-end conventional meets the requirement, then so too would it's high-end synthetic. But it seems absurd to not go ahead and do the necessary testing, certification, whatever, to make sure consumers know this.

Now realizing this, I have to play it safe and assume this oil is somehow deficient for this requirement. Therefore, I will drain the Synpower from the Pacifica and re-fill with something (perhaps Valvoline conventional) that does meet the MS-6395 spec.

Talk about bass ackwards!

 

[demarpaint]

PP as well as YB meets the Chrysler MS-6395 Spec.

 

[77GrandPrix]

I have no doubt that Synpower meets the requirements of MS-6395. If it were me, I would email Valvoline and ask if it meets MS-6395. If they respond that it does, just keep the email or request documentation from them stating that Synpower meets MS-6395. It would be a shame to dump that oil if not necessary.

 

[Mustang2008Z]

Here is something to think about when it comes to Chrysler:

Here is an extract from the State of California Website about Daimler-Chrysler:

DaimlerChrysler

DaimlerChrysler plants use quality, rerefined oils. These oils meet the same standards for performance and composition as their virgin counterparts. The Transmission Plant in Kokomo, Indiana, the Stamping Plant in Twinsburg, Ohio and the Engine Plant in Kenosha, Wisconsin have all instituted cost-saving programs that use rerefined oils. The program is expected to save the company around $500,000 the first year and $3 million the second year.

 

[HawkeyeScott]

I should have mentioned that I would drain the Synpower, jug it up and then drop in the Jeep next O.C. The Synpower only has 1400 miles on it.

I too am sure the Synpower would meet the spec. I just don't want to give Chrysler an opportunity to decline any future warranty work. I will get in touch with Valvoline though. Thanks.

 

[HawkeyeScott]

(I should have mentioned that I would drain the Synpower, jug it up and then drop in the Jeep next O.C. The Synpower only has 1400 miles on it.)

I did just call the 800-TEAM-VAL hotline. A nice fella assured me that any requirement the conventional oil meets, the synthetic meets. But he told me he didn't have access to anything in writing he could email me.

I wonder if it's so obvious that a dealership would even question it. If they see the vehicle has only had synthetic, then how in the world could they say you didn't use good enough oil?! But I also consider dealers one step above lawyers - and in many cases - worse.