Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

As soon as the DexosD approval shows up on the GM's approvals site, and the logo shows up on the bottle, I'll believe them.

Posted
10 hours ago, redwngr said:

As soon as the DexosD approval shows up on the GM's approvals site, and the logo shows up on the bottle, I'll believe them.

^What he said^

Posted (edited)

Amsoil has claimed to meet or exceed Dexos standards for a long time, however, they are not a certified dexos oil.

 

Amsoil claims to have put their oil through the dexos certification test conducted by an independent laboratory and met or exceeded the dexos certification testing requirements but they aren't willing to pay GM for certification.

 

I am not a boutique oil fan. I've never been convinced of any substantial benefit of using a boutique oil for the user who changes their oil at recommended intervals. It's just a way to charge higher prices and separate buyers from their money.

 

Now in defense of boutique oils, GM's current requirement is that the oil meets the dexos specification not that it be dexos certified or GM approved. That said, being a dexos certified oil removes any argument as to whether the oil meets the GM/dexos standard. Which, is why most GM owners buy dexos certified oil.

 

I personally think Amsoil is making a mistake buy not paying for the dexos certification. I think being dexos certified would increase their sales exponentially but apparently they disagree.

 

JMHO

No expertise implied or expressed

Edited by RWTJR
Posted

I never considered using a motor oil that I couldn't get off the shelf for over 50 years. Old school 3 K mile OCI's. But I have to say I used Amsoils ATV oil in my Honda Rincon and was amazed at the difference. Quieter and improved shifts. 

Amsoils OE line is 100% synthetic and if off the shelf oil keeps going up in price maybe my next choice.

Posted

 

11 hours ago, redwngr said:

As soon as the DexosD approval shows up on the GM's approvals site, and the logo shows up on the bottle, I'll believe them.

https://www.lubesngreases.com/lubereport-americas/gm-releases-dexos1-gen-3-details/

The Synthetics Are Coming - ExxonMobil Chemical

 

Here's the thing kids. AMSOIL SS can't be licensed BECAUSE it contains POA and ESTER. You might have to type in that second line in purple into your browser to get the PDF. I'm not going to link it through my PC. There is a delay in licensing for DEXOS2GEN3 right now because the REQUIRED base oils can't meet the GEN3 specs. Implied in the first link by mention of the 12.5% NOACK limit which can be done standing on your head eating a sandwich with Group IV and V products or Group III+ and POA. Not even Group III+ is currently on the DEXOS base oil exchange list. Ain't that a laugh? 

 

AMSOILS's claim is that this oil meets all PERFORMANCE requirements not licensing requirements. The DEXOS spec has a base oil exchange limitation. WHY? :dunno:  I could guess but.......I won't. It just doesn't meet the performance spec...it blows it out of the water. 

 

This does not prevent AMSOIL or any other boutique blender from making a conforming oil and RED LINE does already but you won't find their best base oils in it either. 

 

Until GM gives in.....the AMSOIL SS is out. (Haven't looked at their OEM line so no comment) I'm betting on AMSOIL because the new standards are not doable with the current base oil limitations IN 16W AND 20W grades.  GM is about to be hung with the rope it brought  and kicked by the horse it rides. 

 

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

This is a really interesting PDF. First off note who authored it? The same people the make the AC-Delco oils. I focused in the last post on the base oils but this one on the varnish and sludge specs. Note that there is a plea to the additive suppliers to reformulate their dispersants and detergents to limit sulfonated ash. Something that would not be required to meet the new lower deposit specs IF Group IV and V base oils were allowed in the exchange. Why is there such resistance to the base oil method of FIXING the problems of deposits? 

 

$$$COST$$$

 

Mobil/EXXON went to war with Castrol over this base oil nonsense some decades ago to lower cost while keeping the terms FULL SYNTHETIC on their bottle and in doing so reaped billions $$$$ in profits from the buying public. 

 

They could solve this by keeping the old spec and and FIXING the ring issues but.....$$$$$$$$$$$

 

GM and Mobil/EXXON sleep in the same bed and control the DEXOS specifications making billions on licensing AND by use of lower cost lower preforming base stocks. They own the game. 

 

IF this DEXOS spec was worth the paper it is written on then motors by the thousands would not have suffered the 'ring collapse' that is caused by deposits. Do the boutique PAO/POE blends motors suffer these issues. ? 

 

Even Mobil/EXXON knows it can't keep this up forever without a change in base oil exchange and neither can GM so...........electric it is . The classic MONKEY TRAP. :crackup:

 

 

 

Edited by Grumpy Bear
  • Like 1
Posted

To keep it simple...... I think a 100% synthetic oil would out perform most oil.

 

  • Like 1
  • 2 months later...
Posted

Personally, 1.6 million miles in TDI's with Amsoil. 635,000 on one. Those little engines operate at very high (piston crown/top ring temps) and I towed long distance as well. 
Similar longevity in my powersports products. 
Dexos is a marketing ruse.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • 1 month later...
Posted (edited)

...................................................................................

[quote]While the GM dexos and Dexron specifications play the important role of setting a minimum-quality standard, it also limits the flexibility needed to create the highest level of protection. AMSOIL uses these standards as an initial benchmark, then moves beyond them to provide motor oil and transmission fluid with superior performance and protection. GM also collects royalties on the license. Subscribing to the program would limit our ability to produce the most innovative products on the market. The additional costs would also require price increases. Rather than paying royalties and passing the cost on to consumers, we back our products with our warranty.. We have ample test data to support our claims.[/quote]

Edited by elcamino
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted
21 hours ago, macodi said:

Amsoil in the game.

Amsoil.JPG

 

On 1/13/2021 at 10:03 PM, redwngr said:

As soon as the DexosD approval shows up on the GM's approvals site, and the logo shows up on the bottle, I'll believe them.

 

And??

 

:omg:

Posted

As stated above, AMSOIL uses these standards as benchmarks and improves on that.  AMSOIL warranty covers their products.  Why pay for a certification and then turn around again and pay it every time they improve their formulations? A waste of money and it keeps cost down of the products to the consumer.

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, redwngr said:

Still doesn't say it has the approval, just says that's where they would use it. 

 

The Dexos approvals site has been updated.

Link to the page for DeosD approvals

https://www.gmdexos.com/brands/dexosd/index.html 

 

 

Actually it says;

 

Use in applications that require any of the following specifications: GM dexos D, 

 

How much translation does this require?

 

Let me see if I understand this correctly. AMSOIL chemist say it meets the spec, GM says they haven't PAID us so they can't get our blessing. You're saying the blessing changes the oil? 

 

Questron, Mileage 365 Lubricants, Sgt. P, Super Green Smokless Motor Oil.....https://pqia.org/passenger-car-motor-oil/

 

A sampling of some oil blenders I could see you having this issue with. This isn't that... I could see the reluctance if I were blending in my basement and selling on the Internet. 

But AMSOIL?

Really?

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,782
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    ShowMeShooter1332
    Newest Member
    ShowMeShooter1332
    Joined
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 7,877 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I was around and remember that era very well, so I'm calling b/s on that statement. If they were that bad no police department or taxi company would've bought a single one ... but they were used in both services (and fire) for DECADES. They were bulletproof and proven. Even the early 21st century ones weren't too bad! The early models were legendary.   Mine is proof, but people like atlas are blinded by agenda and refuse to believe facts right before their very eyes.   Even decades after they were built, a new generation started driving them, posting all their builds and shenanigans on Grandmarq.net and Crownvic.net. The failures would show up then, since they all were deep past 100k-150k miles by that point, and younger drivers tend to be a little aggressive, especially with vehicles than can lay a one-tire fire for as long as you hold your foot in it. They've more than proven themselves over the decades.   The only thing that'll really take them out is road salt. The bodies and sheet metal were garbage. A victim of the cheapout FoMoCo and GM have been partaking in before then, and since.   Today it's the stuff that counts - the undercarriage that rots away first!    GMs Caprice was no slouch either. Reliable as a stone ax - the opposite of what they build now.    
    • Let me know how your vehicles do in 10 years. You don't know ******, kid. 😂    There's a reason that Panther platform was used as police, fire, and taxi service for DECADES ... long before you were born, apparently.
    • If your connector also has a big lever to get the connector on and off, you don't want to force the lever either way, as it becomes a bigger problem if you bust the lever or the mechanism it works.
    • It's just useful to disconnect the battery to prevent odd shorting out when unplugging/plugging stuff together.  I also  touch the two cable ends together (after disonnecting) to drain the small amount of stored battery energy in various modules.   I believe the main system where you need to be more concerned with, so you need to do the above and then wait some time, iss when you are working on the air bag system, to prevent inadvertent firing of the air bags.   The in-cab switches are just that, plain switches, it's generally not a problem to swap them in/out.  For my '12, I'll get an error message on the dash if I power up the truck w them unplugged, but that's it (power up= turn the ignition on).   The ITBC located above the spare tire is a computer that manages the trailer brake system.  That is probably more important to have the battery disconnected.  It does have to be programmed to the truck, either before or after it's installed, for it to work.  For my '12, I had a very hard time reinstalling the main connector to it (IDK if yours is the same or not), it turned out the silicon seal was jamming up, preventing it from going on all the way.  I finally got it fully installed by lubing the seal with a bit of dielectric grease, then it slid on and latched in place easily.
    • JR ! I just got the truck back from the Dealership today . The technician did a cold remote start on the truck this morning and it made the noise . It was determined that it was a starter issue and replaced it under warranty . Of course   it did not make the sound after a new starter was put in because the truck was not cold . We will we see what happens tomorrow morning when I start the truck cold  . Keep tuned !   Oh I found a video on YouTube of a cold start and it did the same thing your truck and mine do , I will see if I can find it and post it up
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...