Does synthetic oil void your warrenty
12-11-2008, 11:46 AM
#26
The dispatcher is like a 60 year old man that is just nasty, you would think being that he was in the army and so was I there would be that army respect...not with this douch. He's out to screw me and he even told me this exact quote he said was Bill do you have a mother? WTF does that have to do with anything Baron? yeah why? Good I'll talk to her because I hate talking with you. Im a 28 year old vet You'll Fu**ing talk to me, this is my car under my name.. No I'll talk to the owner of the dealership Bill... at this point in the conversation I lost my cool. I will probably get kick off the site if I repeat what I said but it involved me riping out his glass eye
Can Anybody scan a copy of the 06+ owner's manual page up about the oil ?
a Manufacture cannot say "you cannot use this because we said so", they have to have scientific proof that certain stuff will cause failure. It is to my understanding that all Synthetic oil (rather its true Group IV/V or fake like III) has past all ratings it needs.
Fine, Forget about Synthetic thing. You can't even use anything other than 5w20 ??? 5w20 is a freaking joke itself.
Thats really bullshit.
At this rate, and the way MNAO deal with things. Rotary engine will NEVER get popular. I have a feeling that Mazda going to be the next Ford. (probably being too close to Ford for too long?)
Last edited by nycgps; 12-11-2008 at 11:49 AM.
12-11-2008, 12:38 PM
#31
Zoom Zoom....
Looking at the MSDS for Castrol GTX 5W-20, it doesn't say anything about synthetic... all it says is: "Base Oil - highly Refined"
http://datasheets.bp.com/ussds/amersdsf.nsf/0/1F5373603474895386257362006A1F0C/$file/017193US-Lubes%20Americas-BP%20(Wayne,%20NJ%20US).pdf
12-11-2008, 01:10 PM
#39
Zoom Zoom....
This is for Canada, but I'd bet the US is about the same....
On the basic question of warranty applicability, on Pg. 14 of my warranty manual, under "Your Responsibilities - Maintenance" it says: "You are responsible for operating and maintaining your Mazda vehicle in accordance with the instructions and maintenance schedule described in your Owner's Manual"
On Page 12, under "What is Not Covered" "Damage due to Lack of Maintenance or the use of Wrong Fuel, Oil or Lubricants": ...."the use of other than the specified fuel, oil or other lubricants recommended in your Owner's Manual"
***********
This seems pretty cut and dried. If you choose to use an oil other than what is recommended, then they are stating that damage resulting therefrom is not covered under the warranty.
But we all knew that, didn't we?
Canada has a similar law to your Moss Magnussen (sp?) act, that prevents manufacturers for specifying brand names to use, but I don't think that a lawyer would get very far when the manufacturer clearly states to use (a) and you use (b) - because you just know better.
The question is whether you can prove that an oil specifically not recommended by the engine manufacturer did not contribute in some way to the engine damage... Cost of proving this in a superior court (experts, metallurgical analysis, etc. would far exceed the cost of 20 new engines). However, Mazda might allow a quiet default judgment in small claims court to save money.
On the basic question of warranty applicability, on Pg. 14 of my warranty manual, under "Your Responsibilities - Maintenance" it says: "You are responsible for operating and maintaining your Mazda vehicle in accordance with the instructions and maintenance schedule described in your Owner's Manual"
On Page 12, under "What is Not Covered" "Damage due to Lack of Maintenance or the use of Wrong Fuel, Oil or Lubricants": ...."the use of other than the specified fuel, oil or other lubricants recommended in your Owner's Manual"
***********
This seems pretty cut and dried. If you choose to use an oil other than what is recommended, then they are stating that damage resulting therefrom is not covered under the warranty.
But we all knew that, didn't we?
Canada has a similar law to your Moss Magnussen (sp?) act, that prevents manufacturers for specifying brand names to use, but I don't think that a lawyer would get very far when the manufacturer clearly states to use (a) and you use (b) - because you just know better.
The question is whether you can prove that an oil specifically not recommended by the engine manufacturer did not contribute in some way to the engine damage... Cost of proving this in a superior court (experts, metallurgical analysis, etc. would far exceed the cost of 20 new engines). However, Mazda might allow a quiet default judgment in small claims court to save money.
12-11-2008, 01:16 PM
#40
^^ I think its more like
if I use something thats not API rated and my motor fuxks up. its my fault. right ?
but if I use something thats API rated with SL or better. what kind of BS they can pull ? I mean the 5w20 crap is "recommened" they never said anything like "oh use something other than 5w20 will fuxk ur motor up"
when this goes to court, BOTH side has to prove that "xxx oil is (not) the cause of failure because ... "
if I use something thats not API rated and my motor fuxks up. its my fault. right ?
but if I use something thats API rated with SL or better. what kind of BS they can pull ? I mean the 5w20 crap is "recommened" they never said anything like "oh use something other than 5w20 will fuxk ur motor up"
when this goes to court, BOTH side has to prove that "xxx oil is (not) the cause of failure because ... "
12-11-2008, 03:26 PM
#42
Lubricious
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 3,425
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
The question is whether you can prove that an oil specifically not recommended by the engine manufacturer did not contribute in some way to the engine damage... Cost of proving this in a superior court (experts, metallurgical analysis, etc. would far exceed the cost of 20 new engines). However, Mazda might allow a quiet default judgment in small claims court to save money.
Personally, I think all a plaintiff would need to do would be to submit copies of various RX-8 owners' manuals from different years and markets. The contradictions are enough to show there is no reasonable basis for warranty denial. To claim otherwise, Mazda would be handing over the key to an family-size can of whoop ***. A.k.a, class-action lawsuit.
12-11-2008, 03:49 PM
#44
Zoom Zoom....
Hi Nubo.
I think the engine damage we are all talking about is the (particularly Apex) seals reduced sealing due to carbon buildup in the housing or under the seals. I haven't heard of many catastrophic metal failures.
I didn't say it was not possible to prove (or defend)... just that the cost of going to a 'real' court starts at about $30k and goes up from there. Class actions can cost in the million$.
It is these legal costs that form the rationale for consumer-protection legislation, like your US & our Canadian Acts.
I see from the US paperwork that the "Caution" box is not there. I'm not sure what to make of this?
My manual says quite clearly (above): "Use SAE 5W-20 engine oil".
If I use their specified oil weight and grade, Mazda agrees (and I expect them) to warranty my engine against oil-related failures. If I chose not to, then I am on my own. Simple.
I think the engine damage we are all talking about is the (particularly Apex) seals reduced sealing due to carbon buildup in the housing or under the seals. I haven't heard of many catastrophic metal failures.
I didn't say it was not possible to prove (or defend)... just that the cost of going to a 'real' court starts at about $30k and goes up from there. Class actions can cost in the million$.
It is these legal costs that form the rationale for consumer-protection legislation, like your US & our Canadian Acts.
I see from the US paperwork that the "Caution" box is not there. I'm not sure what to make of this?
My manual says quite clearly (above): "Use SAE 5W-20 engine oil".
If I use their specified oil weight and grade, Mazda agrees (and I expect them) to warranty my engine against oil-related failures. If I chose not to, then I am on my own. Simple.
12-11-2008, 08:28 PM
#46
Hi Nubo.
I think the engine damage we are all talking about is the (particularly Apex) seals reduced sealing due to carbon buildup in the housing or under the seals. I haven't heard of many catastrophic metal failures.
I didn't say it was not possible to prove (or defend)... just that the cost of going to a 'real' court starts at about $30k and goes up from there. Class actions can cost in the million$.
It is these legal costs that form the rationale for consumer-protection legislation, like your US & our Canadian Acts.
I see from the US paperwork that the "Caution" box is not there. I'm not sure what to make of this?
My manual says quite clearly (above): "Use SAE 5W-20 engine oil".
If I use their specified oil weight and grade, Mazda agrees (and I expect them) to warranty my engine against oil-related failures. If I chose not to, then I am on my own. Simple.
I think the engine damage we are all talking about is the (particularly Apex) seals reduced sealing due to carbon buildup in the housing or under the seals. I haven't heard of many catastrophic metal failures.
I didn't say it was not possible to prove (or defend)... just that the cost of going to a 'real' court starts at about $30k and goes up from there. Class actions can cost in the million$.
It is these legal costs that form the rationale for consumer-protection legislation, like your US & our Canadian Acts.
I see from the US paperwork that the "Caution" box is not there. I'm not sure what to make of this?
My manual says quite clearly (above): "Use SAE 5W-20 engine oil".
If I use their specified oil weight and grade, Mazda agrees (and I expect them) to warranty my engine against oil-related failures. If I chose not to, then I am on my own. Simple.
Yeah u're using 5w30 (lets just say), But, How did it cause any damage? They need to at least explain it. Not just "oh, yeah u're using something we dont like, get lost"
Also, in your manual, notice the line above the "Use 5w20 oil". It saids "Recommended" oil. NOT "Required". I gotta say it again and again. 2 words. 2 meaning. and they're not close. simple.
AND, its not that hard to get maybe 50 or 100 people to send their "proof" that they use 5w20 + Dino oil but still getting engine failure.
One more thing, Mazda said they didn't test Synthetic oil for Rotary engines right? then ask them to explain what the fuxk is this ?
They said they didnt test Synthetic right? So What is this Full Synthetic, 0w30, PAO Based product ? and it has the same SAE/API rating. So. What is this all about ?
Seriously, I have a feeling these Synthetic = bad for Rotary myth only exist in Market OTHER than Japan. MNAO, stop being a freaking dumbass.
Last edited by nycgps; 12-11-2008 at 08:37 PM.
12-11-2008, 09:25 PM
#47
Administrator
you have to understand that for some things the different regional parts of mazda act like seperate companies. in europe there has not been testing of specific synthetics to allow any and actually sent letters to owners saying "dont use synthetic" . Mazda Australia did that as well and got hit swith allot of questions about the oil they were importing for the dealerships. In Japan they have tested THAT synthetic and allow/promote it. The US hasnt done either and Canada has followed the Euro protocol
12-11-2008, 09:42 PM
#48
you have to understand that for some things the different regional parts of mazda act like seperate companies. in europe there has not been testing of specific synthetics to allow any and actually sent letters to owners saying "dont use synthetic" . Mazda Australia did that as well and got hit swith allot of questions about the oil they were importing for the dealerships. In Japan they have tested THAT synthetic and allow/promote it. The US hasnt done either and Canada has followed the Euro protocol
I think MNAO is running by a bunch of dumbasses who always thought that "if you never do it, things will never go wrong"
Am i correct ?
12-11-2008, 09:58 PM
#49
Zoom Zoom....
There are two seperate questions here....
1) what is best for the engine? (sohn adapter, premix, 10w-40 full. synth)
2) what will Mazda warantee? (whatever it says in the manual for your region)
Now, NYCGPS is absolutely right: the Mazda dealer has no way of knowing what oil you've been running; the reman plant isn't going to communicate back to Mazda and send guys to your door to collect money off you for an engine they've replaced.
The original poster stated that the dealer service department knows he has been running synthetic. That dealer has said they will not perform warranty work on his car. My advice is still that he should approach another dealer, or Mazda before he gives up.
1) what is best for the engine? (sohn adapter, premix, 10w-40 full. synth)
2) what will Mazda warantee? (whatever it says in the manual for your region)
Now, NYCGPS is absolutely right: the Mazda dealer has no way of knowing what oil you've been running; the reman plant isn't going to communicate back to Mazda and send guys to your door to collect money off you for an engine they've replaced.
The original poster stated that the dealer service department knows he has been running synthetic. That dealer has said they will not perform warranty work on his car. My advice is still that he should approach another dealer, or Mazda before he gives up.
12-11-2008, 10:01 PM
#50
Lubricious
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 3,425
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
That's why I say Mazda has a tough situation if they try to deny warranty because of someone using a synthetic oil, or a different viscosity oil. If they say "your engine died because you use 5w30", and we can look at 2 owners manuals from different countries -- one recommends 5w30, the other 5w20. So following the logic of their denial, oil viscosity is critical and deviating will cause failure. And since they now have stated in court that failure to use 5w20 oil will cause engine failure, then anyone in countries where Mazda says to use 5w30 now has grounds to sue because Mazda knowingly instructed them to use oil that causes engine failure. Similar situation with synthetic -- If Mazda in Europe and Canada "knows" synthetic causes failure, then failing to note it in US manuals is glaring. Since Mazda contradicts themselves in their customer documentation, making a definitive statement in court is a dangerous thing for them. It would be a lot smarter for them to simply settle a case than to bring their schizophrenic maintenance recommendations into the spotlight.