VLS Continued from page 57
not unapproved additives. Surely it is down to both the additive and base oil companies when working together to support an OEM approval programme to ensure that the formulation is adhered to by all those who wish to claim an approval. This can’t be that difficult to achieve. Failure to continue to purchase the approved components should simply mean that support for that approval is withdrawn and the relevant OEM advised that the blender is no longer capable of blending the approved formulation utilising the unique oil code.
This I feel is something that needs to be policed by the OEMs, but they will need firm guidance and support from both the additive and base oil providers. I am therefore writing to you to ask you for your support in asking the OEMs to audit approved finished lubricant formulations to check that the correct and approved components are being used by the blender and at the correct treat rates.
Case Bulletin
VLS 010195 – Silverhook 5W30 Supreme Plus On 13th October 2023 the case was accepted by VLS.
VLS received a complaint concerning the above product for which it was alleged that the product was making erroneous claims: Ford, BMW, Dexos, etc. with no supporting manufacturers specifications or numbers. The Complainant also alleged that it unlikely that all the bespoke additive packs for each of these specifications could be included in one oil.
VLS reviewed and upheld the complaint for the following reasons:
GM Dexos’ is not a specification. There are four dexos specifications and within these different generations exist. This claim therefore needs clarification.
The exact requirements vary by model for some of the OEM brands listed (BMW, Ford, Nissan, KIA, Toyota), these should be clarified.
All the listed VW specifications cannot be met by the same oil, in addition the sulphated ash requirements of ACEA C2/C3 are not compatible with the VW 502.00/505.00 claim.
API SP is an incompatible claim with VW 58 LUBE MAGAZINE NO.181 JUNE 2024
502.00/505.00, due to the mutually exclusive phosphorous limits.
VLS is not aware of a proven technology that can support PSA B71 2290 and API SP with the claim against VW 504.00/507.00, can this be evidenced through the Candidate Data Package?
A claim is made for Honda HTO_06, this is a test not a specification and therefore not appropriate as a claim.
In response to the complaint, the Lubricant Marketer asked for some information that VLS was working to for the VW 504.00/507.00 requirements. VLS referred the Lubricant Marketer to their technology provider for the information they requested.
In response to the complaint the Lubricant Marketer stated that the specification for VW 504.00/507.00 has changed in 2020 due to issues with low spark pre-ignition, VAG engines - FSI, TSI and GDI. Latest VW 504.00/507.00 can be API SP.
VLS considers that the complaint has not been fully resolved by the Lubricant Marketer and has concluded its investigation. VLS will conduct a six-month review in line with its stated process and if the product is found to be non-compliant at this stage, it will be reported as such to Trading Standards.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68
