I have never heard such ridiculous arguments. Are you telling me that if GM published the Dexos spec that Walmart has published enough performance info on their Supertech oils to allow you to judge if it meets the spec or not? You have got to be kidding. Please post a single example of an oil company that has published all of their performance specs for a single oil showing they meet a spec. Any single spec. I have never seen this level of details published on BITOG ever. The people who actually need to know the spec (the blenders) know full well the details of Dexos.
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Require an oil with a transparent standard?
Sure.
Require an oil with an opaque standard and a logo the blender has to pay for?
Cash grab, pure and simple.
Nothing wrong with GM setting an oil spec.
Everything wrong with GM not publishing the spec and charging a royalty on every quart for the lame logo.
Mercedes doesn't do this, VAG doesn't do this and BMW doesn't do this.
Why should lowly GM?
I'm quite sure that any oil carrying the Dexos logo is a good oil.
The thing is, many others are as well and without some recognized spec, like A3/B4, buyers are left in the dark as to what is really required.
Pay GM or you can't have an oil meeting the spec?
Ludicrous!
Agree
And I wonder if in a roundabout way it violates that Moss Magnussen Act?
After all you are required to buy an oil that profits the car manufacturer.
Agree overall
They get around it by allowing other oil companies to license their product. So they are not forcing the consumer to by a specific brand or their brand. To them, the are offering the consumer a "choice" and that kinda gets around it. Still not in the spirit of the law IMO.
However, it is their burden proof to say you did not meet their specs. So, there is that loophole that as long as you use an oil that meets the specs of Dexos, then it is fine (even if it is not Dexos licensed) however, because they keep that spec secret, then it makes it a big murky mess that the consumer might not easily be able to know beforehand.
For example, "Supertech Syn" (our favorite non-Dexos debate brand) could potentially meet Dexos standards (It's NOACK is meets the Dexos standard btw) but without knowing those "proprietary" tests GM uses, we dont know for certain. So, logically, we can neither confirm nor deny that any non-dexos labeled oil meets Dexos spec. Because it is a license and has that "payment" attached to it, no-one knows if the non-labeled oils are less than spec or that the blender/oil just did not pay the fee.
Shame that GM "bought back" the government's stake because it would have been interesting to use FOIA to dig out the Dexos standards (but I doubt that would fly anyway)
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Require an oil with a transparent standard?
Sure.
Require an oil with an opaque standard and a logo the blender has to pay for?
Cash grab, pure and simple.
Nothing wrong with GM setting an oil spec.
Everything wrong with GM not publishing the spec and charging a royalty on every quart for the lame logo.
Mercedes doesn't do this, VAG doesn't do this and BMW doesn't do this.
Why should lowly GM?
I'm quite sure that any oil carrying the Dexos logo is a good oil.
The thing is, many others are as well and without some recognized spec, like A3/B4, buyers are left in the dark as to what is really required.
Pay GM or you can't have an oil meeting the spec?
Ludicrous!
Agree
And I wonder if in a roundabout way it violates that Moss Magnussen Act?
After all you are required to buy an oil that profits the car manufacturer.
Agree overall
They get around it by allowing other oil companies to license their product. So they are not forcing the consumer to by a specific brand or their brand. To them, the are offering the consumer a "choice" and that kinda gets around it. Still not in the spirit of the law IMO.
However, it is their burden proof to say you did not meet their specs. So, there is that loophole that as long as you use an oil that meets the specs of Dexos, then it is fine (even if it is not Dexos licensed) however, because they keep that spec secret, then it makes it a big murky mess that the consumer might not easily be able to know beforehand.
For example, "Supertech Syn" (our favorite non-Dexos debate brand) could potentially meet Dexos standards (It's NOACK is meets the Dexos standard btw) but without knowing those "proprietary" tests GM uses, we dont know for certain. So, logically, we can neither confirm nor deny that any non-dexos labeled oil meets Dexos spec. Because it is a license and has that "payment" attached to it, no-one knows if the non-labeled oils are less than spec or that the blender/oil just did not pay the fee.
Shame that GM "bought back" the government's stake because it would have been interesting to use FOIA to dig out the Dexos standards (but I doubt that would fly anyway)