What's The Difference? Approvals vs. Specs vs. Requirements

[GSCJR]

FROM CHRYSLER OM:

We recommend you use API Certified SAE 5W-20 Engine Oil, meeting the requirements of FCA Material Standard MS-6395 such as Mopar, Pennzoil, and Shell Helix. Refer to your engine oil filler cap for correct SAE grade. Mopar SAE 5W-30 engine oil approved to FCA Material Standard MS-6395 may be used when SAE 5W-20 engine oil meeting MS-6395 is not available.

FROM FORD OM:

We recommend Motorcraft motor oil for your vehicle. If Motorcraft oil is not available, use motor oils of the recommended viscosity grade that meet API SN requirements and display the API Certification Mark for gasoline engines. Do not use oil labeled with API SN service category unless the label also displays the API certification mark. An oil that displays this symbol conforms to current engine, emission system and fuel economy performance standards of the International Lubricants Specification Advisory Council (ILSAC). Recommended motor oil (Canada): WSS-M2C946-A Motorcraft SAE 5W-30 Super Premium Motor Oil.

A recent thread (post #4) got me thinking, which is it? Additional examples above

 

[MrCoyote]

I’ve also wondered the same. I have a Ford that requires the newest 5w-30 spec of WSS-M2C961-A1, but the manual states to use an oil that meets the API SP requirement if the Ford Motorcraft oil isn’t available. So does that API SP oil need to have the Ford specification? Guess it doesn’t apply to me since I’m using a Euro 5W40 anyway… just always confused me if the oil needs to list the spec, or if any API SP oil will do as long as it’s of the recommended viscosity for “warranty purposes”

 

[Hall]

An automaker can "approve" someone else's oil (or their own oil).

An oil maker can claim or say that their product meets specs or requirements that an automaker publishes. This is self-approval or self-certifying though.

"Recommend"ed in the words of an oil maker is another form of self-approval. I will say that a lot of people (here and elsewhere) completely confuse the meanings of recommended and required.

 

[UG_Passat]

FROM CHRYSLER OM:

We recommend you use API Certified SAE 5W-20 Engine Oil, meeting the requirements of FCA Material Standard MS-6395 such as Mopar, Pennzoil, and Shell Helix. Refer to your engine oil filler cap for correct SAE grade. Mopar SAE 5W-30 engine oil approved to FCA Material Standard MS-6395 may be used when SAE 5W-20 engine oil meeting MS-6395 is not available.

FROM FORD OM:

We recommend Motorcraft motor oil for your vehicle. If Motorcraft oil is not available, use motor oils of the recommended viscosity grade that meet API SN requirements and display the API Certification Mark for gasoline engines. Do not use oil labeled with API SN service category unless the label also displays the API certification mark. An oil that displays this symbol conforms to current engine, emission system and fuel economy performance standards of the International Lubricants Specification Advisory Council (ILSAC). Recommended motor oil (Canada): WSS-M2C946-A Motorcraft SAE 5W-30 Super Premium Motor Oil.

A recent thread (post #4) got me thinking, which is it? Additional examples above

Back to your title: Requirement = Specification(s) and approval means certification.

Some oil companies use the "Recommended for" language is which not indicative as certified, but close enough for their marketing.

ACEA specs are self-approval. API and Manufacturer's specs an oil company have to pay for certification. So, "Recommended for" or "Meets or Exceeds" is their marketing language around it.

Example:

HPL Euro 0w20 claims to meet or exceed various specs that require a minimum HTHS of 3.5 MPa. This is just false advertising, as the Euro 0w20 HTHS is around 2.6 MPa. But, it's the marketing language for those that don't know better.

 

[HouseTiger]

What I read from my Chrysler and Jeep OM:

We recommend you use API Certified SAE 5W-20 Engine Oil, meeting the requirements of FCA Material Standard MS-6395 such as Mopar, Pennzoil, and Shell Helix. Refer to your engine oil filler cap for correct SAE grade. Mopar SAE 5W-30 engine oil approved to FCA Material Standard MS-6395 may be used when SAE 5W-20 engine oil meeting MS-6395 is not available.

What I see:

"The Government mandates that we push SAE 5W-20 so we can meet the current CAFE ratings and not incur fines amounting to wazoo bucks; however, it'll be just dandy if you use SAE 5W-30. We recommend Mopar brand oil and lubricants because we're in a long term agreement with Shell Oil to make our stuff that'll cost 20% more than Shell's products at Walmart."

 

[GSCJR]

So does that API SP oil need to have the Ford specification?

Exactly Is it one or the other? Or both? Euro oils are easier, I just look for the spec, but with the domestics it seems like a lot of double talk.

Furthermore, the MS-6395 is easy to meet from what I've learned, that even a conventional/blend will do; same with the Ford spec. a blend will do.

EDIT: I guess Dexos1 was the same too, a blend would do the trick, but that's not the point of this thread.

 

[OVERKILL]

HPL Euro 0w20 claims to meet or exceed various specs that require a minimum HTHS of 3.5 MPa. This is just false advertising, as the Euro 0w20 HTHS is around 2.6 MPa. But, it's the marketing language for those that don't know better.

Since I'm the one who asked for this oil to be blended I'm going to quote the part from the page you intentionally cut out:

Stating it claims to meet those specs is disingenuous, as it CLEARLY states that the 0W-20 just uses the same additive chemistry and the specification does NOT ALLOW for the 0W-20 grade.

 

[wwillson]

Back to your title: Requirement = Specification(s) and approval means certification.

Some oil companies use the "Recommended for" language is which not indicative as certified, but close enough for their marketing.

ACEA specs are self-approval. API and Manufacturer's specs an oil company have to pay for certification. So, "Recommended for" or "Meets or Exceeds" is their marketing language around it.

Example:
View attachment 148238

HPL Euro 0w20 claims to meet or exceed various specs that require a minimum HTHS of 3.5 MPa. This is just false advertising, as the Euro 0w20 HTHS is around 2.6 MPa. But, it's the marketing language for those that don't know better.

I took a screenshot that includes the footnote about 0w-20:

 

[Skippy722]

Back to your title: Requirement = Specification(s) and approval means certification.

Some oil companies use the "Recommended for" language is which not indicative as certified, but close enough for their marketing.

ACEA specs are self-approval. API and Manufacturer's specs an oil company have to pay for certification. So, "Recommended for" or "Meets or Exceeds" is their marketing language around it.

Example:
View attachment 148238

HPL Euro 0w20 claims to meet or exceed various specs that require a minimum HTHS of 3.5 MPa. This is just false advertising, as the Euro 0w20 HTHS is around 2.6 MPa. But, it's the marketing language for those that don't know better.

They’re pretty clear about which viscosities “meets or exceeds” which specifications. For 0w20 they have all the appropriate specs listed.

 

[UG_Passat]

They’re pretty clear about which viscosities “meets or exceeds” which specifications. For 0w20 they have all the appropriate specs listed.

Again, how does a HTHS of 2.6 MPa meet or exceed specs that call for a minimum of 3.5 MPa?

 

[bhvrdr]

Some are very clear...


My alfa romeo

Some of my other cars have recommendations for specs like Dexos R and vw404.

Then I select an oil that has the correct API certification with the donut on the label in the case of the alfa that requires it. In the case of the Corvette I choose an oil from the manufacturers list of Dexos R approved oils. Otherwise you could get confused by an oil company that claims to be "appropriate for cars calling for..." the specification but doesn't actually have the certification.

Example....

But yet here you could accidentally think this oil is certified...

So I always go from the manufacturer list of approved oils.

As an example Audi also has a full list.

 

[kschachn]

Some are very clear...


My alfa romeo

View attachment 148307



Some of my other cars have recommendations for specs like Dexos R and vw404.

Then I select an oil that has the correct API certification with the donut on the label in the case of the alfa that requires it. In the case of the Corvette I choose an oil from the manufacturers list of Dexos R approved oils. Otherwise you could get confused by an oil company that claims to be "appropriate for cars calling for..." the specification but doesn't actually have the certification.

Example....

View attachment 148308



But yet here you could accidentally think this oil is certified...

View attachment 148311





So I always go from the manufacturer list of approved oils.

As an example Audi also has a full list.

Still no grade is tied to the warranty as such, only an oil that can cause damage. The little secret is that no license, no grade and even no approval is required to maintain warranty only an oil that does not cause damage.

 

[Skippy722]

Again, how does a HTHS of 2.6 MPa meet or exceed specs that call for a minimum of 3.5 MPa?

Which of those call for a HTHS of 3.5? ACEA 5 specs 2.6 to 2.9. VW 508 00/509 00 and Porsche C 20 both spec 0w20.

 

[kschachn]

Which of those call for a HTHS of 3.5? ACEA 5 specs 2.6 to 2.9. VW 508 00/509 00 and Porsche C 20 both spec 0w20.

Actually they “spec” a minimum HT/HS. Some approvals then give allowable grades but not all. The requirement is for HT/HS as that is the defining technical basis.

Allowable grades when a minimum or maximum HT/HS is specified is rather silly but that’s mostly marketing.

 

[bhvrdr]

Still no grade is tied to the warranty as such, only an oil that can cause damage. The little secret is that no license, no grade and even no approval is required to maintain warranty only an oil that does not cause damage.

Oh it is for the alfa and the c8 and my Durango and by nature of the certification both my Audis that each spec vw504 and vw508 ..and many cars I've owned.

But in the case of using an oil not recommended by the manufacturer who built the car and you have an engine failure you will have a manufacturer regional rep request records of all services. This is a very common first step.

As an example on the alfa not only did they request all service receipts but also took pictures of all 4 tire treads (for the abuse clause) and the engine, exhaust, etc proving no performance parts on the car and of course a spec vs actual ECU scan.


Getting back to the oil. If there is any possible interpretation by the regional tech that the engine failure was lubrication related (it may not have been) you may experience a warranty claim denial. I've seen this dozens of times.


At that point it would be up to you to hire an attorney to write a letter for you (likely a complete waste of your money) or you take the manufacturer to court to convince a judge that your expert witness who says it was not lubrication related is more believable than the OEM expert witnesses. This generally results in you not only having to pay for the engine but also around 3 to 5 grand in legal fees.

 

[kschachn]

Oh it is for the alfa and the c8 and my Durango and by nature of the certification both my Audis that each spec vw504 and vw508 ..and many cars I've owned.

How many times have we been over this already? You’ve never posted any language from any of your owners manuals or warranty booklets that show a specific approval or a grade (or anything such as that) is tied to the warranty.

The reason you haven’t ever posted this is because it doesn’t exist. Warranty is tied to damage and that’s it. Not one of those snippets you’ve posted with the red circles has ever shown anything different.

 

[bhvrdr]

How many times have we been over this already? You’ve never posted any language from any of your owners manuals or warranty booklets that show a specific approval or a grade (or anything such as that) is tied to the warranty.

The reason you haven’t ever posted this is because it doesn’t exist. Warranty is tied to damage and that’s it. Not one of those snippets you’ve posted with the red circles has ever shown anything different.

Warranties are tied to warranty claims. As I explained above exactly what happens when a warranty claim is submitted. Yes you are correct if you don't incur engine damage you probably don't have to worry about a warranty claim as it would be fraudulent to submit one if you had no damage.


In the event of a warranty claim the service history will be requested by the manufacturer and the parts used and service performed will be compared against the manufacturer recommendations and the time and mileage requirements.

 

[kschachn]

But in the case of using an oil not recommended by the manufacturer who built the car and you have an engine failure you will have a manufacturer regional rep request records of all services. This is a very common first step.

As an example on the alfa not only did they request all service receipts but also took pictures of all 4 tire treads (for the abuse clause) and the engine, exhaust, etc proving no performance parts on the car and of course a spec vs actual ECU scan.


Getting back to the oil. If there is any possible interpretation by the regional tech that the engine failure was lubrication related (it may not have been) you may experience a warranty claim denial. I've seen this dozens of times.


At that point it would be up to you to hire an attorney to write a letter for you (likely a complete waste of your money) or you take the manufacturer to court to convince a judge that your expert witness who says it was not lubrication related is more believable than the OEM expert witnesses. This generally results in you not only having to pay for the engine but also around 3 to 5 grand in legal fees.

Baseless fear mongering for which you have no proof whatsoever.

Perhaps I should have told my VW dealer this when they used 504 00 oil instead of 508 00 on my Tiguan? Which, in fact actually protected my warranty.

 

[kschachn]

Warranties are tied to warranty claims. As I explained above exactly what happens when a warranty claim is submitted. Yes you are correct if you don't incur engine damage you probably don't have to worry about a warranty claim as it would be fraudulent to submit one if you had no damage.


In the event of a warranty claim the service history will be requested by the manufacturer and the parts used and service performed will be compared against the manufacturer recommendations and the time and mileage requirements.

I wouldn’t advocate ignorant deviation from the manual recommendations such as an oil with an inadequate HT/HS.

 

[bhvrdr]

Baseless fear mongering for which you have no proof whatsoever.

Perhaps I should have told my VW dealer this when they used 504 00 oil instead of 508 00 on my Tiguan? Which, in fact actually protected my warranty.

Please advise what you perceive as baseless or I can't really engage in meaningful conversation.

It is 100 percent factual that engine replacements are almost always approved by the regional tech from the manufacturer. I assume you concede that certainly dealerships don't approve them.

Fact 2 is in an engine replacement it is almost certain the manufacturer will require a record of all required maintenances. I assume you are not arguing that?


So apparently you are arguing that a regional tech would not decline a warranty claim if you used a non recommend oil is that correct?


Do you have any evidence to support that odd conclusion?

I know if I want to deviate from requirements I always email the manufacturer and they will tell you if it impacts the warranty. Do you have something like that in writing that they would be approving claims for you if you use a non recommended oil?