"There is laboratory knowledge and then there is field knowledge." Yep, and Mazda and the oil and additive companies have more lab and field knowlege than anyone else, including Mazdatrix who admits they don't know the answer, nor have the resources to find out, yet sell and recommend synthetic oil for rotary Mazdas.
Pennzoil, Valvoline and other oil companies recommend their synthetic oils for Mazda Rotaries. You can go to their websites and look up their specific auto recommendations.
I have a lot of respect for people who admit that they don't know the answer. I find them to be more likely "seekers of truth" who are never satisfied with the results they examine, and are not quick to label them as "final".
This is a good scientific principle, IMO. Companies like Toyota and VW might have benefitted from listening more closely to some of those amateurs out there who discovered engine sludge issues that the factory was apparently clueless about.
Toyota and VW were never clueless about the sludge issues. They knew about them immediately with the first claim. It just took them a while to verify the reasons behind them with oil and parts analysis and were slow to react without pressure from consumer groups and class action suits. Of course, better synthetic oils and shorter oil changes were the short term solution, with engine redesign for the long term. This is one of the reasons I use the best chemical synthetic oils. They hold up much better, much longer, and have a much better warranty.
Standard industry protocol. As soon as the vehicles come into the dealership for repairs under warranty, the vehicle manufacturer is contacted as they have to approve the warrantied repairs. Used oil samples are taken and tested, parts are sent in for analysis. The chemists and engineers scientifically determine the problem and solution. Feel free to discuss with VW and Toyota.
As soon as the vehicles come into the dealership for repairs under warranty, the vehicle manufacturer is contacted as they have to approve the warrantied repairs.
Toyota denied all warranty claims related to sludge assuming it was the consumer who failed to change their oil based on the recommended schedule. If they assumed it was the consumers fault why would they perform any oil analysis? Even if they did, all the results would show was that the oil failed and not a bad design on Toyota's part. Similar to the failure of an oil filter which goes into bypass mode way too soon. Who's going to prove that?
How could they just assume that every single case was due not changing oil? Surely some of those who had this problem had had their oil changed regularly by a Toyota dealer?
OTOH, if in fact none of those who had this problem had any proof that oil had been changed in accordance with the manufacturer's schedule, then how does anyone now know that there was a problem with the engine design?
Toyota would have to prove the oil failed with a used oil analysis and caused the damage and was not a part or design failure. Then the responsibility would fall on the oil company or the consumer. If the oil did not fail, then Toyota would have to pay. They would also have to prove filter failure. I believe Toyota eventually paid or reimbursed all waranty claims, but did not admit fault, and now recommend synthetic oil and shorter oil change intervals for those sludge prone engines and even extended the factory warranty.
I find it amazing how you can constantly sling factoids around as if they are actual fact; amazing, tiresome and extremely annoying (but not at all out of character for an Amsoil drone). FWIW, I used to work for MB-USA in both New Jersey (U.S. Headquarters) as well as in Stuttgart, and I can tell you with considerable authority that one, ten, or even one-hundred reports of a seemingly similar problem does not make a trend significant enough to alert the manufacturer to the presence of a potential design problem.
As for what Toyota would have to prove in the above scenario, you've really got that wrong as well (what else is new). In cases like the sludging issue (or any other lubrication related issue for that matter), they can simply refuse to cover the claim and force you to either pony up for the cash to get the engine fixed, or go without your car. True, you could use the legal system to seek relief, however, that usually takes a long time with no guarantees of success. Right or wrong, like it or don't, believe it or not, manufacturers work from that position of strength all of the time.
Kurt, I use synthetic in my Forester, so I will keep an eye on consumption and report from time to time. I have put 1,500 miles on the Forester since switching to synthetic; so far there is no noticeable drop in oil level.
I also used synthetic on my prior two Outbacks, but did not have them long enough to note any long-term consumption. On the '08 Outback, I added a pint after 5,000 miles. I added none on the '07, but only put about 4,000 miles on it after switching to synthetic.
Of note, I have no leaks in the 1998 Caravan I switched to synthetic at 173,000 miles (and now has 40,000 miles on the stuff) and add a quart about once every 3,000 miles. The same story applies to my 1998 Escort, which was switched to synthetic at 108,000 miles (currently has 126,500). I did not own either vehicle long before switching to the synthetic, so I cannot compare to "conventional oil," but neither of these consumption rates seem abnormal, though the lack of any external leaks on the Caravan with over 200,000 miles may be a little out-of-the-ordinary.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I stand behind everything I said. If you can provide facts instead of name calling, please do. The US and Canada have strong consumer laws and this is why Toyota eventually had to pay. I retired from Shell Oil after 28 years and have had my own oil business for 5 years and we take every claim seriously and investigate thoroughly. Exactly why it is important to use the best synthetic oil with the best warranty for your protection.
I agree with you on that one, about the manufacturer's tactics. However, I suspect that the manufacturer is, behind the scenes, researching the root cause of the problem to determine the actual cause - especially if there are multiple reports. Whether or not they admit to it or not, well, that is a matter of what has the greater impact on their bottom line.
For example, Subaru still has not admitted to the head gasket design issue with their 1996-1998 2.5L engines. All of us who are familiar with said MYs know the flaw to exist as surely as it does for the '99 to '02 MYs of that engine. Subaru does too.... they just do not admit fault, and therein lies the difference.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I switched our 1994 Grand Caravan (3.3L V6) to Mobil 1 5W-30 from Valvoline 5W-30 dino at 38K. At 162K, a minor leak in the front bank head gasket developed. I tore the top end down, and replaced both head gaskets, took the heads into a machine shop for inspection (all OK, including valve stem seals), and reassembled. I also removed the pan for inspection. No sludge anywhere, and absolutely no engine oil leaks prior to the head gasket failure after running synthetic for 124K miles. The Caravan did have a front pump leak on the 4-speed AT, but the transmission was original and was not rebuilt or replaced through when I sold it at 168K. Also, while I had the heads off, you could still see the factory honing marks in the cylinder bores. OCI was every 4K miles with Mobil 1.
I've torn down high mileage engines running on regular oil with similar results, so I don't know as I would ascribe the internal cleanliness or lack of wear to the engine solely to the use of synthetic oil. It may be a factor, but things like maintenance interval, quality of non-synthetic oil, driving habits and conditions, are all major players here.
And of course, the design of the engine and the quality of internal components.
There are so many factors to consider!
I think the downfall of those Toyota and VW engines was the operating conditions more than anything else, although I can't prove it. It's the only cause that seems to take into account all the variables--why some engines were affected and most were not.
"In cases like the sludging issue (or any other lubrication related issue for that matter), they can simply refuse to cover the claim and force you to either pony up for the cash to get the engine fixed, or go without your car."
It is a bit more involved than that. First of all, only the manufacturer can refuse to cover the claim, not the dealership. Second of all, the refusal has to be in writing as for the reason the claim is denied, and they have to prove that the oil failed and was not caused by their parts, workmanship or design. Third of all, the oil manufacturer would get involved if the vehicle manufacturer said the oil failed, and if responsible, would pay for repairs if covered by their warranty.
AMSOIL (as did Shell) normally handles these situations with a few phone calls, oil and parts analysis, and in the interim pays repairs, car rental, etc., until the cause of failure is determined. AMSOIL oil has never failed in approved applications for 37 years and will seek reimbursement from the auto manufacturer. Easy.
Okay, but all the while the owner of the car is sans transportation, and that is often a hardship the owner will not abide. I suspect the more typical route is:
Owner: "My car broke. It is only a year old! Fix it!" Dealer (after car is already torn apart): "We've determined this will not be covered under warranty." Owner: "What?! That's ridiculous! I have to have my car!" Dealer: "Okay, we can fix it, but it will cost this much." Owner: *Grumble, grumble, grumble* "Fix it, but I am going to make the manufacturer pay for it." Manufacturer: *Drag heels, trade insults, delay.*
At this point, the owner loses steam, gets caught up with other life events, and slowly moves on. It is here that the manufacturer wins. If they never actually have to admit fault then it is all left as speculation... the old "he said, she said" scenario.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I think you're right about that. I am not familiar with the VW issue, but with the Toyota engines, it seemed to be related to operating conditions. But, that did not mean the owners were not maintaining the engines to factory recommendations, only that under given conditions, those recommendations were insufficient to prevent the condition from arising. I would call that a "sludge-prone" engine.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Well sure---unless every engine from every manufacturer behaved the same way (which they didn't) then you'd have to ultimately put the blame on engine design, not the oil.
Think about the Corvair---GM insisted that if you had the correct tire pressure, done exactly to spec, then the car wouldn't flip. Well, that level of sensitivity is just not appropriate for everyday driving; morever, it wasn't specified as a critical safety item in the owner's manual.
Obviously something about some of those Toyota engines, given certain conditions, just broke down the oil all to hell. And your neighbor's Honda? Nada.
RE: Warranty claims against an oil company -- you'd have a better chance of flying to the moon in a balloon then getting an oil company to pay for your engine.
I concur Shifty. I have a 25-year old "classic" SAAB 900 8-valve that's used Valvoline 10W30 dino since day one, and it's still clean as a whistle. Change oil every 3K or 3 months whichever comes first.
A majority (well, maybe not a majority, but a large number) of those of us on Edmunds are enthusiasts, and generally take care of our vehicles properly. The same can't be said of the general populace.
I once had an electrical engineer ask me a number of years ago how often I changed oil. I told him, and he said "That often! I never change my oil, I just top it up." So much for the confluence of intelligence and common sense...
Well, that level of sensitivity is just not appropriate for everyday driving; morever, it wasn't specified as a critical safety item in the owner's manual.
Hmmm, isn't that the same thing that Toyota is saying with their mats? Oh wait, it's actually the consumer that should be saying that about those mats. I mean life and the possibilty of death if you use two mats versus one?
Sorry about the off topic post and I do agree about that level of sensitivity for everyday driving.
I am not familiar with the VW issue, but with the Toyota engines, it seemed to be related to operating conditions. But, that did not mean the owners were not maintaining the engines to factory recommendations, only that under given conditions, those recommendations were insufficient to prevent the condition from arising.
Does anyone know what Toyota (or VW or any other mfr of sludge prone engines) actually did in the case of a customer who brought their car to the dealer for regular, on schedule, oil changes but still had a sludge problem? Or would the cars have been out of warranty by the time the problem actually showed up?
"Okay, but all the while the owner of the car is sans transportation, and that is often a hardship the owner will not abide. I suspect the more typical route is:
Owner: "My car broke. It is only a year old! Fix it!" Dealer (after car is already torn apart): "We've determined this will not be covered under warranty." "Owner: "What?! That's ridiculous! I have to have my car!" Dealer: "Okay, we can fix it, but it will cost this much." Owner: *Grumble, grumble, grumble* "Fix it, but I am going to make the manufacturer pay for it." Manufacturer: *Drag heels, trade insults, delay.*
At this point, the owner loses steam, gets caught up with other life events, and slowly moves on. It is here that the manufacturer wins. If they never actually have to admit fault then it is all left as speculation... the old "he said, she said" scenario""
The dealer can not deny warranty coverage. Only the manufacturer can and the reason has to be stated in writing. And they have to prove the reason it is being denied. If they prove it was a failure of the oil, then the oil manufacturer should be contacted to provide coverage under their warranty. Shell and AMSOIL (and likely most others) have both done this. They then have the option of getting reimbursed by the vehicle manufacturer if they prove the oil was not at fault.
Toyota and other manufacturers have paid repairs when initially denied. GM paid for half the repairs on my then 7 year old minivan which was out of warranty for an intake manifold coolant leak, and then recently settled a class action law suit to pay for thousands of others.
RE: Warranty claims against an oil company -- you'd have a better chance of flying to the moon in a balloon then getting an oil company to pay for your engine.
What do you base your statement on?
You may be right with some oil companies.
I worked for Shell Oil for 28 years and my own business selling AMSOIL for 5 years and both of these companies have paid numerous claims promptly. They often get reimbursed from the vehicle manufacturers if the oil did not cause the problem. The Shell/Pennzoil/Quarker State warranties cover 15 parts up to 4 months/4 thousand miles, the AMSOIL warranty covers all lubricated parts up to 12 months/50,000 miles depending on the oil and driving conditions. I feel it is important to shop for the best oil warranty coverage, just in case. It is also a strong indication of the quality of oil they make.
I have read, on other forums outside of Edmunds, that VW has handled sludged (or, more accurately in VW's case, "coked") engines in a variety of ways. If the engne isn't too far gone, they've replaced critical parts like the oil lines to the turbo and the oil pan pickup. Maybe it was the oil pump, too, I can't recall exactly. They ran mulitple oil changes and pronounced it "good."
Small sump, hot turbo, and use of non-synth oil was not a good combo for the 1.8T in the Passat. Personally, I've only run M1 0w-40 and Valvoline Synpower 5w-40, with no problems to date, in my '03. After reading the following, and doing some research on the web, I realized that 5w-40 only came in "synth." Even back in 2003, I know that my dealer would do a synthetic oil change on the 1.8T only if the owner specified "synthetic." I continued to read about owners findingout that their dealers weren't using the correct oil several years after the mandate came out about using synth meeting at least VW Spec 502.00. It's really disheartening.
I can't wait to see what the longevity will be with the new Ford Ecoboot engines that are supposed to be spread across Ford's product line in the next couple of years. Either they've got the bugs worked out and will spec a synth oil and provide a decent-sized sump, or Ford's current rising star will implode within 5 years.
I would genuinely like to see or hear one proven documented claim of an oil company replacing an engine under warranty, and I'd also like to see or hear about what hoops the owner had to go through to get it.
Whenever I think of an owner writing a letter to an oil company claiming that their engine blew up due to defective oil, I picture in my mind a WW II bomber running to a thick wall of flak--- I don't picture the oil company reading the letter and saying "oh, okay".
Obviously any such claim would have to be documented with an engine tear-down, photos, testimony from an expert, threats of a lawsuit and god knows what else.
I'm not saying it's not possible, but in 40 years of messing with cars, the last thing I'd think is that it would be easy or promptly done.
How could a consumer possibly prove such a thing without a formidable array of evidence? (read "expensive").
Okay, here's what you have to do to file a claim (actual sample--different oil companies may vary somewhat).
In the event of a claim against X INC., the procedure below must be completely followed.
a. Where the original warranty from the equipment manufacturer is still in effect, the customer shall file a war- ranty claim with the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) in accordance with the OEM warranty procedure.
b. Customer shall retain failed parts for inspection by X-OIL INC. unless given to the OEM.
c. Customer shall also, within 30 days of failure, notify X INC. and provide the following:
(a.) An eight (8) ounce representative oil sample taken from the failed equipment and put into a clean, dry container.
(b.) Documentation including make, model, and year of equipment, total accumulated miles and/or hours, and duty cycle or service environment.
(c.) Equipment or vehicle maintenance history documentation including miles or hours at the time of X INC lubricant installation, general equipment repairs, and oil analysis results if available.
(d.) Proof of purchase for X lubricant.
(e.) Batch number from oil container or Certificate of Analysis (if available).
d. Mail the above sample and information to:
X INC., (mailing address)
e. In cases where the OEM warranty is still in effect and that warranty coverage is denied based on the use of an X INC lubricant, the customer shall immediately notify X INC. and provide a written copy of the OEM warranty denial.
f. X INC. may, at its option, notify its insurance carrier of the claim.
g. X INC. or its insurance carrier may conduct an investigation that includes, but is not limited to, an inspection of the failed parts, a review of the operating conditions, and a thorough review of the information requested above. The customer agrees to cooperate with such investigation.
h. If X INC. or its insurance carrier pays a claim, an attempt may be made to recover amounts paid from the OEM. If this occurs, the customer may be asked to provide further information pertaining to the failure and to cooperate with X INC. or its insurer in the recovery process
Actually an initial phone call to the oil company at the time of the engine tear down may be about all that is required. Many times this is all that is needed by the consumer. The oil company and the auto dealer/manufacturer will have a discussion and the rest may not be needed. If needed, they can take care of most of the rest. And usually repairs and payment is prompt and hassle free.
I certainly don't have that for any of the oils sitting in my garage and especially for the oil that's in my two leSabres. I may have sent the original receipts in for rebates. I certainly don't keep carbons after the rebate comes, if I keep them that long. The name brand SM oil was purchased over a year ago.
Maybe, maybe not. Some companies have good records if you order direct from them and can pull up the information. Many credit card companies and stores can also pull up the information for proof of purchase.
And many times, the oil analysis can confirm the oil type and brand you purchased.
I've never heard of that being a warranty issue.
You can't expect an oil company to provide warranty coverage if you or they can't provide a smidgen of proof as to whose oil it is, can you?
It seems pretty reasonable to me if you want them to cover thousands of dollars in repairs.
Well, regardless, I sincerely hope that very few people ever have to put the process to the test. My post yesterday was obviously hypothetical, but illustrated the point that this can be a very time-consuming, stressful, and (for the owner) convoluted process with no certain outcome.
Going back to the post that included the view of the VW oil requirements, I was interested to note that it stated "one or more of the following" for the oil requirements. The first point noted the VW specs, and the second, the API. So, what is the difference? Are they different certifications for the same oil, or more than that?
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
""Going back to the post that included the view of the VW oil requirements, I was interested to note that it stated "one or more of the following" for the oil requirements. The first point noted the VW specs, and the second, the API. So, what is the difference? Are they different certifications for the same oil, or more than that?"
In the US and Canada, the American Petroleum Institute sets oil specifications. Composed mainly of oil company representatives. In Europe, the vehicle manufacturers set their own specs. When in doubt, contact the vehicle manufacturer and the oil manufacturer. In the US and Canada, highly refined crude oils are allowed to be called synthetics. In Europe, only chemical synthetics are allowed to be called synthetics. So in the US and Canada, if you want to make sure your are getting a chemical synthetic, it will normally say PAO or esters, if not, then you are likely getting a crude oil petroleum synthetic.
I would not call requiring proof of purchase a "gotcha". I can understand not having receipts, if you change your own oil but most people do not do that. I know I do have receipts from every oil change on all our vehicles...even the 1997.
However, I would not normally think "must have been bad oil", if I had an engine blow up. How would I decide that this was the cause? Long ago I did have an engine destroy itself, with 77,000 miles, the idea that maybe the oil caused this never crossed my mind.
"However, I would not normally think "must have been bad oil", if I had an engine blow up. How would I decide that this was the cause? Long ago I did have an engine destroy itself, with 77,000 miles, the idea that maybe the oil caused this never crossed my mind."
That is why discussions like this are helpful just to let you know warranties are available, and most are different, so it pays to check. Many times oil failure is evident by sludge. Or the dealer suspects it and used oil analysis is often performed to determine if the oil failed. Any time a lubricated part fails, I think it is wise to have an oil analysis performed to help determine the cause. And I have them performed before my vehicle goes out of warranty to see if there are any mechanical issues that might be addressed while under vehicle warranty. Coolant and fuel leaks into the engine and other problems can be found.
And API has tested API Certified oils off the shelf and found quite a few that didn't pass the certification tests, and failed bad enough to likely cause engine problems.
If it was a certain American premium chemical synthetic oil recommended for the application, and the vehicle manufacturer refuses to cover it because they state in writing that the oil failed, it's been done before with other customers. Then the oil company was reimbursed later by the vehicle manufacturer when it was proven to be a part or design failure and not an oil failure.
DEALER: "Nothing. We're denying warranty because he has no records of service, only a receipt from Kragen for 5 quarts of your oil."
OIL COMPANY: "Oh, okay. Put in a new engine. We'll pay for it." "
Not exactly. More like:
DEALER: The engine is sludged up and I have a letter from the vehicle manufacturer stating it will not be covered under warranty due to the oil failing.
It then is up to the oil company to determine whether they can offer repairs under their oil warranty. That is why I recommend checking out the oil companies warranties and if they have any warranty complaints listed with the BBB as they differ quite a bit.
DEALER: "Nothing. We're denying warranty because he has no records of service, only a receipt from Kragen for 5 quarts of your oil."
Also a dealer cannot deny warranty because of no records of service. Only the vehicle manufacture can deny warranty coverage and would have to state in writing why the lack of service records was the reason for the parts failure and would also have to prove that the oil failed.
I think on a sludged up engine it is a given that the oil failed --and it is pretty common knowledge that a factory warranty means a factory warranty.
By the same token, no store or dealer selling oil can back a warranty. Kragen is not going to put a new engine in for you, nor is an oil distributor.
Basicallly, if your engine fails, you're on your own to prove your case. The factory can (and usually does) tell you to either prove your case with extensive evidence or go pound sand.
And frankly, if I were the factory, that's probably what I'd require as well.
"I think on a sludged up engine it is a given that the oil failed --and it is pretty common knowledge that a factory warranty means a factory warranty.
By the same token, no store or dealer selling oil can back a warranty. Kragen is not going to put a new engine in for you, nor is an oil distributor.
Basicallly, if your engine fails, you're on your own to prove your case. The factory can (and usually does) tell you to either prove your case with extensive evidence or go pound sand.
And frankly, if I were the factory, that's probably what I'd require as well."
Actually, many factory warranties have paid for thousands of sludged up engine repairs because the engines were prone to sludge even when following the manufacturers recommended oils and oil change intervals. I'd provide a detailed list of years, makes, models, extended warranty information, etc., but I've been told by the host not to provide links to the AMSOIL website even if it is technical data. The vehicle manufacturers that did provide sludged up engine repairs are: Toyota, VW, Audi, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Lexus, and Saab.
Of course Kragen is not going to pay for the engine if the oil failed. It would be the oil company, if their warranty covers it.
And if the engine fails under warranty, the vehicle manufacturer or the oil company has to prove why it is not covered in writing. The burden of proof is on the company, not the consumer.
The burden of proof is on the company, not the consumer.
No, that is the way it *should* be. In my experience, it is actually the other way around. :sick:
Frankly, companies typically do a better job covering their rears in these situations than the average consumer. Combine that with them holding all the cards, and, unless the consumer has a sympathetic representative (either at a dealership or at the manufacturer), it is likely a long and challenging uphill battle. Again, it is all about the bottom line. If there is any room for doubt, it is likely to be exploited. Huge companies typically do not care about the individual consumer - they care about their reputation.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
The factories paid all right--- after a bloody, take-no-prisoners, hand-to-hand combat and a massive consumer jihad on the Internet against Toyota and VW. It is the American consumer and his doggedness that deserves credit for having those engines warrantied. And the media pitched in.
I was initially as guilty as the automakers on this one. I was leaning toward blaming careless owners and sensationalist journalism.
But you know, as the facts kept rolling in, I came to realize I was wrong and the consumers were right.
Sometimes automakers step up to the plate and sometimes they don't,
With engine sludge, they definitely did not until a gun was put to their heads.
And alas---- I myself have yet to see (or even hear of) a case of an oil company paying a warranty on a sludge complaint after the factory refused to. There may be one out there, but I've never seen it. I'd really like to have someone come on board who has had this experience successfully concluded.
Bottom line for me is this: If you want to avoid trouble, use the best quality oils and filters, and if you're really keen for it, oil analysis. And either do it yourself or watch them like a hawk when they do it. I've never lost an engine in one of my cars.
YOU are your best warranty. Do not expect some large entity to bail you out when you snap your fingers.
A SOBERING THOUGHT: On many used cars 5 to 10 years old, loss of the engine totals the car out. It's a write-off. Value of a 2000 Passat 1.8T with a blown engine? Close to nothing.
Comments
Yeah, only because your last post or two with Amsoil content has been deleted. :P
This is a good scientific principle, IMO. Companies like Toyota and VW might have benefitted from listening more closely to some of those amateurs out there who discovered engine sludge issues that the factory was apparently clueless about.
And you know this because???
They sure took a horrible beating on the Internet. It was a monstrous PR disaster.
I don't think they had a clue myself---this goof probably cost Toyota tens of millions of dollars. (and maybe First Place, eh?)
Toyota denied all warranty claims related to sludge assuming it was the consumer who failed to change their oil based on the recommended schedule. If they assumed it was the consumers fault why would they perform any oil analysis? Even if they did, all the results would show was that the oil failed and not a bad design on Toyota's part. Similar to the failure of an oil filter which goes into bypass mode way too soon. Who's going to prove that?
OTOH, if in fact none of those who had this problem had any proof that oil had been changed in accordance with the manufacturer's schedule, then how does anyone now know that there was a problem with the engine design?
As for what Toyota would have to prove in the above scenario, you've really got that wrong as well (what else is new). In cases like the sludging issue (or any other lubrication related issue for that matter), they can simply refuse to cover the claim and force you to either pony up for the cash to get the engine fixed, or go without your car. True, you could use the legal system to seek relief, however, that usually takes a long time with no guarantees of success. Right or wrong, like it or don't, believe it or not, manufacturers work from that position of strength all of the time.
I also used synthetic on my prior two Outbacks, but did not have them long enough to note any long-term consumption. On the '08 Outback, I added a pint after 5,000 miles. I added none on the '07, but only put about 4,000 miles on it after switching to synthetic.
Of note, I have no leaks in the 1998 Caravan I switched to synthetic at 173,000 miles (and now has 40,000 miles on the stuff) and add a quart about once every 3,000 miles. The same story applies to my 1998 Escort, which was switched to synthetic at 108,000 miles (currently has 126,500). I did not own either vehicle long before switching to the synthetic, so I cannot compare to "conventional oil," but neither of these consumption rates seem abnormal, though the lack of any external leaks on the Caravan with over 200,000 miles may be a little out-of-the-ordinary.
For example, Subaru still has not admitted to the head gasket design issue with their 1996-1998 2.5L engines. All of us who are familiar with said MYs know the flaw to exist as surely as it does for the '99 to '02 MYs of that engine. Subaru does too.... they just do not admit fault, and therein lies the difference.
And of course, the design of the engine and the quality of internal components.
There are so many factors to consider!
I think the downfall of those Toyota and VW engines was the operating conditions more than anything else, although I can't prove it. It's the only cause that seems to take into account all the variables--why some engines were affected and most were not.
It is a bit more involved than that. First of all, only the manufacturer can refuse to cover the claim, not the dealership. Second of all, the refusal has to be in writing as for the reason the claim is denied, and they have to prove that the oil failed and was not caused by their parts, workmanship or design. Third of all, the oil manufacturer would get involved if the vehicle manufacturer said the oil failed, and if responsible, would pay for repairs if covered by their warranty.
AMSOIL (as did Shell) normally handles these situations with a few phone calls, oil and parts analysis, and in the interim pays repairs, car rental, etc., until the cause of failure is determined. AMSOIL oil has never failed in approved applications for 37 years and will seek reimbursement from the auto manufacturer. Easy.
Owner: "My car broke. It is only a year old! Fix it!"
Dealer (after car is already torn apart): "We've determined this will not be covered under warranty."
Owner: "What?! That's ridiculous! I have to have my car!"
Dealer: "Okay, we can fix it, but it will cost this much."
Owner: *Grumble, grumble, grumble* "Fix it, but I am going to make the manufacturer pay for it."
Manufacturer: *Drag heels, trade insults, delay.*
At this point, the owner loses steam, gets caught up with other life events, and slowly moves on. It is here that the manufacturer wins. If they never actually have to admit fault then it is all left as speculation... the old "he said, she said" scenario.
Think about the Corvair---GM insisted that if you had the correct tire pressure, done exactly to spec, then the car wouldn't flip. Well, that level of sensitivity is just not appropriate for everyday driving; morever, it wasn't specified as a critical safety item in the owner's manual.
Obviously something about some of those Toyota engines, given certain conditions, just broke down the oil all to hell. And your neighbor's Honda? Nada.
RE: Warranty claims against an oil company -- you'd have a better chance of flying to the moon in a balloon then getting an oil company to pay for your engine.
A majority (well, maybe not a majority, but a large number) of those of us on Edmunds are enthusiasts, and generally take care of our vehicles properly. The same can't be said of the general populace.
I once had an electrical engineer ask me a number of years ago how often I changed oil. I told him, and he said "That often! I never change my oil, I just top it up." So much for the confluence of intelligence and common sense...
Hmmm, isn't that the same thing that Toyota is saying with their mats? Oh wait, it's actually the consumer that should be saying that about those mats. I mean life and the possibilty of death if you use two mats versus one?
Sorry about the off topic post and I do agree about that level of sensitivity for everyday driving.
Does anyone know what Toyota (or VW or any other mfr of sludge prone engines) actually did in the case of a customer who brought their car to the dealer for regular, on schedule, oil changes but still had a sludge problem? Or would the cars have been out of warranty by the time the problem actually showed up?
Owner: "My car broke. It is only a year old! Fix it!"
Dealer (after car is already torn apart): "We've determined this will not be covered under warranty."
"Owner: "What?! That's ridiculous! I have to have my car!"
Dealer: "Okay, we can fix it, but it will cost this much."
Owner: *Grumble, grumble, grumble* "Fix it, but I am going to make the manufacturer pay for it."
Manufacturer: *Drag heels, trade insults, delay.*
At this point, the owner loses steam, gets caught up with other life events, and slowly moves on. It is here that the manufacturer wins. If they never actually have to admit fault then it is all left as speculation... the old "he said, she said" scenario""
The dealer can not deny warranty coverage. Only the manufacturer can and the reason has to be stated in writing. And they have to prove the reason it is being denied. If they prove it was a failure of the oil, then the oil manufacturer should be contacted to provide coverage under their warranty. Shell and AMSOIL (and likely most others) have both done this. They then have the option of getting reimbursed by the vehicle manufacturer if they prove the oil was not at fault.
Toyota and other manufacturers have paid repairs when initially denied. GM paid for half the repairs on my then 7 year old minivan which was out of warranty for an intake manifold coolant leak, and then recently settled a class action law suit to pay for thousands of others.
What do you base your statement on?
You may be right with some oil companies.
I worked for Shell Oil for 28 years and my own business selling AMSOIL for 5 years and both of these companies have paid numerous claims promptly. They often get reimbursed from the vehicle manufacturers if the oil did not cause the problem. The Shell/Pennzoil/Quarker State warranties cover 15 parts up to 4 months/4 thousand miles, the AMSOIL warranty covers all lubricated parts up to 12 months/50,000 miles depending on the oil and driving conditions. I feel it is important to shop for the best oil warranty coverage, just in case. It is also a strong indication of the quality of oil they make.
Small sump, hot turbo, and use of non-synth oil was not a good combo for the 1.8T in the Passat. Personally, I've only run M1 0w-40 and Valvoline Synpower 5w-40, with no problems to date, in my '03. After reading the following, and doing some research on the web, I realized that 5w-40 only came in "synth." Even back in 2003, I know that my dealer would do a synthetic oil change on the 1.8T only if the owner specified "synthetic." I continued to read about owners findingout that their dealers weren't using the correct oil several years after the mandate came out about using synth meeting at least VW Spec 502.00. It's really disheartening.
I can't wait to see what the longevity will be with the new Ford Ecoboot engines that are supposed to be spread across Ford's product line in the next couple of years. Either they've got the bugs worked out and will spec a synth oil and provide a decent-sized sump, or Ford's current rising star will implode within 5 years.
Whenever I think of an owner writing a letter to an oil company claiming that their engine blew up due to defective oil, I picture in my mind a WW II bomber running to a thick wall of flak--- I don't picture the oil company reading the letter and saying "oh, okay".
Obviously any such claim would have to be documented with an engine tear-down, photos, testimony from an expert, threats of a lawsuit and god knows what else.
I'm not saying it's not possible, but in 40 years of messing with cars, the last thing I'd think is that it would be easy or promptly done.
How could a consumer possibly prove such a thing without a formidable array of evidence? (read "expensive").
In the event of a claim against X INC., the procedure below must be completely followed.
a. Where the original warranty from the equipment manufacturer is still in effect, the customer shall file a war-
ranty claim with the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) in accordance with the OEM warranty procedure.
b. Customer shall retain failed parts for inspection by X-OIL INC. unless given to the OEM.
c. Customer shall also, within 30 days of failure, notify X INC. and provide the following:
(a.) An eight (8) ounce representative oil sample taken from the failed equipment and put into a clean, dry
container.
(b.) Documentation including make, model, and year of equipment, total accumulated miles and/or hours,
and duty cycle or service environment.
(c.) Equipment or vehicle maintenance history documentation including miles or hours at the time of
X INC lubricant installation, general equipment repairs, and oil analysis results if available.
(d.) Proof of purchase for X lubricant.
(e.) Batch number from oil container or Certificate of Analysis (if available).
d. Mail the above sample and information to:
X INC.,
(mailing address)
e. In cases where the OEM warranty is still in effect and that warranty coverage is denied based on the use of
an X INC lubricant, the customer shall immediately notify X INC. and provide a written copy of the
OEM warranty denial.
f. X INC. may, at its option, notify its insurance carrier of the claim.
g. X INC. or its insurance carrier may conduct an investigation that includes, but is not limited to, an
inspection of the failed parts, a review of the operating conditions, and a thorough review of the information
requested above. The customer agrees to cooperate with such investigation.
h. If X INC. or its insurance carrier pays a claim, an attempt may be made to recover amounts paid
from the OEM. If this occurs, the customer may be asked to provide further information pertaining to the
failure and to cooperate with X INC. or its insurer in the recovery process
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------
So that's what you have to do to start the warranty process.
I certainly don't have that for any of the oils sitting in my garage and especially for the oil that's in my two leSabres. I may have sent the original receipts in for rebates. I certainly don't keep carbons after the rebate comes, if I keep them that long. The name brand SM oil was purchased over a year ago.
So right there's a gottcha.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
And many times, the oil analysis can confirm the oil type and brand you purchased.
I've never heard of that being a warranty issue.
You can't expect an oil company to provide warranty coverage if you or they can't provide a smidgen of proof as to whose oil it is, can you?
It seems pretty reasonable to me if you want them to cover thousands of dollars in repairs.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Going back to the post that included the view of the VW oil requirements, I was interested to note that it stated "one or more of the following" for the oil requirements. The first point noted the VW specs, and the second, the API. So, what is the difference? Are they different certifications for the same oil, or more than that?
Exactly. Likely one of the reasons they would like a sample.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In the US and Canada, the American Petroleum Institute sets oil specifications. Composed mainly of oil company representatives. In Europe, the vehicle manufacturers set their own specs. When in doubt, contact the vehicle manufacturer and the oil manufacturer. In the US and Canada, highly refined crude oils are allowed to be called synthetics. In Europe, only chemical synthetics are allowed to be called synthetics. So in the US and Canada, if you want to make sure your are getting a chemical synthetic, it will normally say PAO or esters, if not, then you are likely getting a crude oil petroleum synthetic.
However, I would not normally think "must have been bad oil", if I had an engine blow up. How would I decide that this was the cause? Long ago I did have an engine destroy itself, with 77,000 miles, the idea that maybe the oil caused this never crossed my mind.
That is why discussions like this are helpful just to let you know warranties are available, and most are different, so it pays to check. Many times oil failure is evident by sludge. Or the dealer suspects it and used oil analysis is often performed to determine if the oil failed. Any time a lubricated part fails, I think it is wise to have an oil analysis performed to help determine the cause. And I have them performed before my vehicle goes out of warranty to see if there are any mechanical issues that might be addressed while under vehicle warranty. Coolant and fuel leaks into the engine and other problems can be found.
And API has tested API Certified oils off the shelf and found quite a few that didn't pass the certification tests, and failed bad enough to likely cause engine problems.
DEALER: "Yeah, the engine is all sludged up."
OIL COMPANY: "So what are you going to do"
DEALER: "Nothing. We're denying warranty because he has no records of service, only a receipt from Kragen for 5 quarts of your oil."
OIL COMPANY: "Oh, okay. Put in a new engine. We'll pay for it."
"DEALER: "Yeah, the engine is all sludged up."
OIL COMPANY: "So what are you going to do"
DEALER: "Nothing. We're denying warranty because he has no records of service, only a receipt from Kragen for 5 quarts of your oil."
OIL COMPANY: "Oh, okay. Put in a new engine. We'll pay for it." "
Not exactly. More like:
DEALER: The engine is sludged up and I have a letter from the vehicle manufacturer stating it will not be covered under warranty due to the oil failing.
It then is up to the oil company to determine whether they can offer repairs under their oil warranty. That is why I recommend checking out the oil companies warranties and if they have any warranty complaints listed with the BBB as they differ quite a bit.
Also a dealer cannot deny warranty because of no records of service. Only the vehicle manufacture can deny warranty coverage and would have to state in writing why the lack of service records was the reason for the parts failure and would also have to prove that the oil failed.
By the same token, no store or dealer selling oil can back a warranty. Kragen is not going to put a new engine in for you, nor is an oil distributor.
Basicallly, if your engine fails, you're on your own to prove your case. The factory can (and usually does) tell you to either prove your case with extensive evidence or go pound sand.
And frankly, if I were the factory, that's probably what I'd require as well.
By the same token, no store or dealer selling oil can back a warranty. Kragen is not going to put a new engine in for you, nor is an oil distributor.
Basicallly, if your engine fails, you're on your own to prove your case. The factory can (and usually does) tell you to either prove your case with extensive evidence or go pound sand.
And frankly, if I were the factory, that's probably what I'd require as well."
Actually, many factory warranties have paid for thousands of sludged up engine repairs because the engines were prone to sludge even when following the manufacturers recommended oils and oil change intervals. I'd provide a detailed list of years, makes, models, extended warranty information, etc., but I've been told by the host not to provide links to the AMSOIL website even if it is technical data. The vehicle manufacturers that did provide sludged up engine repairs are: Toyota, VW, Audi, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Lexus, and Saab.
Of course Kragen is not going to pay for the engine if the oil failed. It would be the oil company, if their warranty covers it.
And if the engine fails under warranty, the vehicle manufacturer or the oil company has to prove why it is not covered in writing. The burden of proof is on the company, not the consumer.
No, that is the way it *should* be. In my experience, it is actually the other way around. :sick:
Frankly, companies typically do a better job covering their rears in these situations than the average consumer. Combine that with them holding all the cards, and, unless the consumer has a sympathetic representative (either at a dealership or at the manufacturer), it is likely a long and challenging uphill battle. Again, it is all about the bottom line. If there is any room for doubt, it is likely to be exploited. Huge companies typically do not care about the individual consumer - they care about their reputation.
The factories paid all right--- after a bloody, take-no-prisoners, hand-to-hand combat and a massive consumer jihad on the Internet against Toyota and VW. It is the American consumer and his doggedness that deserves credit for having those engines warrantied. And the media pitched in.
I was initially as guilty as the automakers on this one. I was leaning toward blaming careless owners and sensationalist journalism.
But you know, as the facts kept rolling in, I came to realize I was wrong and the consumers were right.
Sometimes automakers step up to the plate and sometimes they don't,
With engine sludge, they definitely did not until a gun was put to their heads.
And alas---- I myself have yet to see (or even hear of) a case of an oil company paying a warranty on a sludge complaint after the factory refused to. There may be one out there, but I've never seen it. I'd really like to have someone come on board who has had this experience successfully concluded.
Bottom line for me is this: If you want to avoid trouble, use the best quality oils and filters, and if you're really keen for it, oil analysis. And either do it yourself or watch them like a hawk when they do it. I've never lost an engine in one of my cars.
YOU are your best warranty. Do not expect some large entity to bail you out when you snap your fingers.
A SOBERING THOUGHT: On many used cars 5 to 10 years old, loss of the engine totals the car out. It's a write-off. Value of a 2000 Passat 1.8T with a blown engine? Close to nothing.