"Vehicle Specific" Antifreeze/Coolant vs the Generic

Last Updated:

May 17th, 2023 2:47 pm

Tags:

the
generic

SCORE
+1
1
0

Reply to ThreadReply

Search this thread

Search this thread

Nov 9th, 2021 8:23 pm

CanadianConsumerYEG: Deal Addict; Aug 30, 2020; 3454 posts; 6471 upvotes; YEG/YYZ

Nov 9th, 2021 8:23 pm

100Pacer wrote: ↑
@CanadianConsumerYEG I cancelled my appt at the mechanic after we received a possible exposure email from the kids’ school and I picked them up early. I rescheduled my appt and when I visit their shop I’ll take some pics of their shelves.

Kk cool bro, how convenient. I went down to my garage and did your work for you, thoughts?

So not only does Recochem not make Mazda's FL22 OEM coolant, the company that does (Vulsay) doesn't sell it directly nor even offers an "Asian Blue" blend, and only sells directly "FloPerm" brand universal commercial grade coolant in bulk.

Sure, there is probably an aftermarket coolant that is close enough, if you study the chemical makeup. But why not spend the extra few $ and know 100% that it's compatible? It's like those universal ATF... Come on.

Images

+1

Nov 9th, 2021 9:03 pm

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 9th, 2021 9:03 pm

CanadianConsumerYEG wrote: ↑ Kk cool bro, how convenient. I went down to my garage and did your work for you, thoughts?

So not only does Recochem not make Mazda's FL22 OEM coolant, the company that does (Vulsay) doesn't sell it directly nor even offers an "Asian Blue" blend, and only sells directly "FloPerm" brand universal commercial grade coolant in bulk.

Sure, there is probably an aftermarket coolant that is close enough, if you study the chemical makeup. But why not spend the extra few $ and know 100% that it's compatible? It's like those universal ATF... Come on.

I would never be allowed to take pictures but I can assure you that the Brampton Chrysler plant receives 1,000L totes of bulk coolant blended by Recochem…the same formulation they private label for Mopar line and the same formulation they private label for the OEM line…the exact same blend in all 3 scenarios.
When a global packager does North of $500 million in sales annually rest assured their in-house chemists know their stuff.

As for Vulsay…God help them. Ever since being purchased by Safety Kleen it’s no secret their formulation uses recycled glycol. Matter of fact they aren’t even trying to hide it lol: eliminating the FloPerm label in the short term in favour of Safety Kleen’s Performance Plus label. I’m sure Mazda doesn’t mind the recycled glycol if the price is right. And you’re wrong: their FloPerm line is mostly marketed to automotive wholesalers and buying groups. It’s readily available but it’s garbage and doesn’t compete with Recochem’s quality.

Anyway…you’re convinced the lowest-cost packager blends a superior product for Mazda and if you’re down in the garage using this stuff all the power to you. Doesn’t alter the fact a global market leader in packaging is both private labeling and selling the exact same formulation because they can. The OEM label is 100% the same.

I have nothing further to debate but will still upload pics when I have the opportunity.

+3

Nov 9th, 2021 9:56 pm

ES_Revenge: Deal Expert; Mar 23, 2004; 35607 posts; 19022 upvotes

Nov 9th, 2021 9:56 pm

CanadianConsumerYEG wrote: ↑ Sure, there is probably an aftermarket coolant that is close enough, if you study the chemical makeup. But why not spend the extra few $ and know 100% that it's compatible? It's like those universal ATF... Come on.

LOL what? If it meets the spec, it meets the spec. Typically speaking you don't find automotive fluids that state they meet given manufacturers' spec(s) as printed on the bottle, that are somehow not suitable for the job.

Are you telling me you only buy Mazda brand motor oil (which may not even exist) because "aftermarket" brands like Mobil, Castrol, Pennzoil, etc. are only "close enough" to genuine authentic bestest evar Mazda stuff?

You come on.

Guess you also need to buy only Mazda brand washer fluid and blinker fluid too, eh?

Apart from OP's mentione of Presone's "all makes, all models" stuff, I don't think we're recommending using "universal" anything; saying to use the right fluid, meeting the right specs, from any reputable manufacturer is not the same as saying use stuff from the dollar store with fake specs and things printed in Engrish on the label.

No longer posting on RFD. Will answer PMs from time to time, if anyone needs help/advice/etc.

+4

Nov 10th, 2021 12:50 pm

CanadianLurker: Deal Fanatic; Sep 9, 2012; 7002 posts; 6133 upvotes; Oakville, ON

Nov 10th, 2021 12:50 pm

So what I’ve come to glean over the years and from this thread is the following:

— OEM from dealer guarantees compatibility but won’t necessarily be the “best stuff” while also being pricier than aftermarket supplies

— Aftermarket generics that cover more than 1 vehicle maker may have minor compatibility issues and should probably only be used for a desperate top-up or on an older vehicle on its last legs

— Aftermarket specific vehicle ones can be cheaper and will be compatible but may or may not be better quality than OEM

— the holy grail of aftermarket fluids is a vehicle specific one for guaranteed compatibility + performs better than OEM + is cheaper than the dealer

Until such time as someone can show and prove that there’s a holy grail when I need some fluid I’ll stick with OEM from the dealer for the peace of mind that it’ll work over the long term and I can move on without trying to chase the holy grail for a few $s savings ‘cuz this particular fluid market is rather opaque/confusing..,,

+3

Nov 12th, 2021 10:54 pm

CanadianConsumerYEG: Deal Addict; Aug 30, 2020; 3454 posts; 6471 upvotes; YEG/YYZ

Nov 12th, 2021 10:54 pm

100Pacer wrote: ↑ I would never be allowed to take pictures but I can assure you that the Brampton Chrysler plant receives 1,000L totes of bulk coolant blended by Recochem…the same formulation they private label for Mopar line and the same formulation they private label for the OEM line…the exact same blend in all 3 scenarios.
When a global packager does North of $500 million in sales annually rest assured their in-house chemists know their stuff.

As for Vulsay…God help them. Ever since being purchased by Safety Kleen it’s no secret their formulation uses recycled glycol. Matter of fact they aren’t even trying to hide it lol: eliminating the FloPerm label in the short term in favour of Safety Kleen’s Performance Plus label. I’m sure Mazda doesn’t mind the recycled glycol if the price is right. And you’re wrong: their FloPerm line is mostly marketed to automotive wholesalers and buying groups. It’s readily available but it’s garbage and doesn’t compete with Recochem’s quality.

Anyway…you’re convinced the lowest-cost packager blends a superior product for Mazda and if you’re down in the garage using this stuff all the power to you. Doesn’t alter the fact a global market leader in packaging is both private labeling and selling the exact same formulation because they can. The OEM label is 100% the same.

I have nothing further to debate but will still upload pics when I have the opportunity.

So, not only does Mazda contract Vulsay to make their coolant, so does Toyota.

You're seriously telling me that 2 major auto manufacturers contracted Vulsay to make their formula, and Vulsay is making an inferior product? You seriously believe that what Toyota's parts counter sells is worse than what you can buy off the shelf at crappy tire, while Toyota is known for their reliability? You still haven't given any concrete proof to your claims while I have disproved yours.

*

Images

Last edited by MrDisco on Nov 14th, 2021 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: rude

+1

Nov 13th, 2021 7:26 am

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 13th, 2021 7:26 am

CanadianConsumerYEG wrote: ↑ So, not only does Mazda contract Vulsay to make their coolant, so does Toyota.

You're seriously telling me that 2 major auto manufacturers contracted Vulsay to make their formula, and Vulsay is making an inferior product? You seriously believe that what Toyota's parts counter sells is worse than what you can buy off the shelf at crappy tire, while Toyota is known for their reliability? You still haven't given any concrete proof to your claims while I have disproved yours.

*

When your Mazda or Toyota rolled off the assembly line, whether overseas or in North America, the bulk engine coolant poured in wasn’t the partially recycled glycol blended by the lowest cost packager using an inferior product. As I said there’s a reason the Brampton Chrysler plant pours bulk engine coolant from 1,000L totes blended by Recochem - Recochem has never been and never will be the lowest cost packager. Ask yourself: why is Chrysler contracting Recochem to blend engine coolant initially poured into vehicles rolling off their assembly line? And why is Chrysler not the only one doing so?

Take a look at a jug of Flo-Perm Universal Long-Life engine coolant (red formulation) - the label states the product meets both your Toyota’s specifications, Mazda’s specifications, hell it even claims to meet Heavy Duty diesel applications…which begs the question why doesn’t Vulsay from their tiny little operation run by Safety Kleen providing their recycled glycol and cutting corners where ever possible take a page out of the Recochem and American blender’s marketing books and simply label the product All Make All Models? Same can be said for the Flo-Perm Global Universal product? Why don’t they corner the automotive and wholesale jobber market with their cheaper product by marketing it as All Makes All Models?

I’ll tell you why: regulations, specifications, claims, warranties, false advertising…there’s a very fine line you can walk with claims such as “approved against”, “meets requirements”, and “approved for/by” before someone makes the effort to sue. And in this market where the vast majority want cheap, cheap, cheap, good luck suing Vulsay for any claim that Toyota or Mazda product blended with recycled glycol that previously was exposed to contaminants caused any sort of issue to your equipment or vehicle. Oh almost forgot…Vulsay also claims that Long-Life also meets Dexcool spec. Interesting that AC Delco will use nothing except their proprietary Dexcool blend in Canada…surely they’re aware of Vulsay’s capabilities?

TL/DR Vulsay runs 3 production lines, Recochem runs 30. When your blending capacity is limited and your higher margin comes from private labelling truckloads of Howe’s diesel fuel conditioner you don’t invest in technology. When a global leader like Recochem (with various modern plants) is a marketing company first and foremost they have the blending capacity and business sense to recognize “hey, we can approach one of our largest customers with an exclusive line: OEM brand coolant…the same coolant we blend for the OEM in bulk and ship to their assembly lines. You’ve disproved nothing…when it matters for the vehicle manufacturer what pours in it’s Recochem virgin blend, when it’s a jug for your 5 or 10 year drain job it’s Vulsay’s recycled glycol awarded to the lowest cost packager. Having the expertise and infrastructure in place allows said blender the capability to then make stupid money selling the same OEM blend at Canadian Tire.

And the same Recochem blended engine coolant in that Dodge Charger rolling off the assembly line in Brampton is the same Recochem blended engine coolant private labeled for Mopar packaged by Recochem available for sale at the Chrysler dealer.

Yes I’m suggesting when Vulsay’s little dinky 3 tank farm contains the same recycled glycol running into the same 1 or 2 production lines and when it’s just a matter of adding a baby teaspoon to 50,000L of recycled glycol to turn it into whichever colour Mazda or Toyota wants packaged that you dispose of that Vulsay product and go pick up a jug of OEM premixed product for your next drain and fill.

You’ve convinced yourself the Vulsay product is superior because Toyota signed on with the lowest price packager. I have no intention of arguing opinions but you say I’ve lost credibility…I think I’ve shared some facts and information you didn’t hear down in the garage. You’ve shared frustration but I suppose I get it: you’ve come to realize you’ve been pouring $hit into your vehicle. It’s not too late…make it a flush and drain DIY down in your garage and Canadian Tire opens soon. Send me a scan of your bill and I will even cover the cost of the OEM label coolant for you. Good luck.

Last edited by MrDisco on Nov 14th, 2021 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: quoted post was edited

+1

Nov 13th, 2021 10:23 am

iflyplanes: Deal Addict; Feb 9, 2013; 2093 posts; 2447 upvotes; Ottawa

Nov 13th, 2021 10:23 am

100Pacer wrote: ↑ When your Mazda or Toyota rolled off the assembly line, whether overseas or in North America, the bulk engine coolant poured in wasn’t the partially recycled glycol blended by the lowest cost packager using an inferior product. As I said there’s a reason the Brampton Chrysler plant pours bulk engine coolant from 1,000L totes blended by Recochem - Recochem has never been and never will be the lowest cost packager. Ask yourself: why is Chrysler contracting Recochem to blend engine coolant initially poured into vehicles rolling off their assembly line? And why is Chrysler not the only one doing so?

Take a look at a jug of Flo-Perm Universal Long-Life engine coolant (red formulation) - the label states the product meets both your Toyota’s specifications, Mazda’s specifications, hell it even claims to meet Heavy Duty diesel applications…which begs the question why doesn’t Vulsay from their tiny little operation run by Safety Kleen providing their recycled glycol and cutting corners where ever possible take a page out of the Recochem and American blender’s marketing books and simply label the product All Make All Models? Same can be said for the Flo-Perm Global Universal product? Why don’t they corner the automotive and wholesale jobber market with their cheaper product by marketing it as All Makes All Models?

I’ll tell you why: regulations, specifications, claims, warranties, false advertising…there’s a very fine line you can walk with claims such as “approved against”, “meets requirements”, and “approved for/by” before someone makes the effort to sue. And in this market where the vast majority want cheap, cheap, cheap, good luck suing Vulsay for any claim that Toyota or Mazda product blended with recycled glycol that previously was exposed to contaminants caused any sort of issue to your equipment or vehicle. Oh almost forgot…Vulsay also claims that Long-Life also meets Dexcool spec. Interesting that AC Delco will use nothing except their proprietary Dexcool blend in Canada…surely they’re aware of Vulsay’s capabilities?

TL/DR Vulsay runs 3 production lines, Recochem runs 30. When your blending capacity is limited and your higher margin comes from private labelling truckloads of Howe’s diesel fuel conditioner you don’t invest in technology. When a global leader like Recochem (with various modern plants) is a marketing company first and foremost they have the blending capacity and business sense to recognize “hey, we can approach one of our largest customers with an exclusive line: OEM brand coolant…the same coolant we blend for the OEM in bulk and ship to their assembly lines. You’ve disproved nothing…when it matters for the vehicle manufacturer what pours in it’s Recochem virgin blend, when it’s a jug for your 5 or 10 year drain job it’s Vulsay’s recycled glycol awarded to the lowest cost packager. Having the expertise and infrastructure in place allows said blender the capability to then make stupid money selling the same OEM blend at Canadian Tire.

And the same Recochem blended engine coolant in that Dodge Charger rolling off the assembly line in Brampton is the same Recochem blended engine coolant private labeled for Mopar packaged by Recochem available for sale at the Chrysler dealer.

Yes I’m suggesting when Vulsay’s little dinky 3 tank farm contains the same recycled glycol running into the same 1 or 2 production lines and when it’s just a matter of adding a baby teaspoon to 50,000L of recycled glycol to turn it into whichever colour Mazda or Toyota wants packaged that you dispose of that Vulsay product and go pick up a jug of OEM premixed product for your next drain and fill.

You’ve convinced yourself the Vulsay product is superior because Toyota signed on with the lowest price packager. I have no intention of arguing opinions but you say I’ve lost credibility…I think I’ve shared some facts and information you didn’t hear down in the garage. You’ve shared frustration but I suppose I get it: you’ve come to realize you’ve been pouring $hit into your vehicle. It’s not too late…make it a flush and drain DIY down in your garage and Canadian Tire opens soon. Send me a scan of your bill and I will even cover the cost of the OEM label coolant for you. Good luck.

You are delusional if you believe Vulsay is simply recolouring used coolant. You are also demonstrating your clear lack of knowledge of chemistry.

Glycol is recycled using a multiple stage distillation process, which should result in an almost-perfect yield of pure ethylene glycol. Furthermore, glycol serves little purpose in coolants other than expanding the serviceable temperature range of the liquid. The main cause of coolant wear is the anti-corrosion additives breaking down and physical impurities contaminating the fluid. Neither of these affect the quality of the ethylene glycol obtained after recycling. When the recycled glycol is mixed into a new coolant, fresh water and a new additive package is obviously added.

Also, might want to lay off the MOPAR/Dodge/FCA junk Kool-Aid. Mazda and Toyota never had as many cooling system issues as Dodge/FCA, so obviously they’re doing something better.

+2

Nov 13th, 2021 2:04 pm

CanadianConsumerYEG: Deal Addict; Aug 30, 2020; 3454 posts; 6471 upvotes; YEG/YYZ

Nov 13th, 2021 2:04 pm

iflyplanes wrote: ↑
Also, might want to lay off the MOPAR/Dodge/FCA junk Kool-Aid. Mazda and Toyota never had as many cooling system issues as Dodge/FCA, so obviously they’re doing something better.

True. Recochem OEM coolant is so good that OP needs to do a coolant flush every 2 years apparently. Meanwhile I have 10-15 year old Toyotas, Hondas, Mazdas and Subarus on the factory coolant and have no cooling or overheat issues and no visible coolant contamination. I've only ever had to refill from thermostat jobs or minor top ups (250mL loss in 10 years).

Nov 13th, 2021 2:36 pm

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 13th, 2021 2:36 pm

iflyplanes wrote: ↑ You are delusional if you believe Vulsay is simply recolouring used coolant. You are also demonstrating your clear lack of knowledge of chemistry.

Glycol is recycled using a multiple stage distillation process, which should result in an almost-perfect yield of pure ethylene glycol. Furthermore, glycol serves little purpose in coolants other than expanding the serviceable temperature range of the liquid. The main cause of coolant wear is the anti-corrosion additives breaking down and physical impurities contaminating the fluid. Neither of these affect the quality of the ethylene glycol obtained after recycling. When the recycled glycol is mixed into a new coolant, fresh water and a new additive package is obviously added.

Also, might want to lay off the MOPAR/Dodge/FCA junk Kool-Aid. Mazda and Toyota never had as many cooling system issues as Dodge/FCA, so obviously they’re doing something better.

None of what you posted applies to anything I’ve said lol. What I have stated is when the Safety-Kleen tanker arrives at Vulsay and fills the tank farm silo with 50,000L of their recycled glycol which is then blended with another silo of virgin glycol that’s it for Vulsay: it’s all pumped out of those 2 silos. Furthermore as stated the same product allocated into production with the teaspoon of red colour, let’s call it Flo-Perm long life universal (or the Toyota private label), is the same product allocated into production and with the teaspoon of any other colour on order whether it’s their Flo-Perm Global, Mazda, etc. I’ve stated this based on what I’ve seen produced at their plant. You know what else I’ve seen at Vulsay’s plant? Line end being sold out the door. Do you know what line end is? For those unfamiliar: when you’re running product through the line to pump out the previous mixture until the next mixture is through the fluid pumped into the waste tote is referred to line end. There are regularly totes of line end glycol and line end motor oil being sold out the door to those willing to pay. What does Vulsay/Safety-Kleen care? So unscrupulous in one aspect of glycol and oil business but not another? Yup. You got me. Fresh water? Again…deionized water should be used: ask Vulsay what they’re using over there. (Spoiler alert: “filtered water” is not deionized water).

30% recycled glycol + 70% virgin glycol = Vulsay glycol. Never suggested the Flo-Perm brand is 100% virgin glycol but it would certainly surprise some to learn otherwise. Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t the same as “synthetic blend” motor oil marketing because if you think paying a premium for 30% synthetic base I stocks with 70% mineral base is a worthwhile purchase by all means but none of that entire 100% synthetic blend product has been run in a motor or piece of equipment before. The SCA’s poured into the 30% recycled 70% virgin don’t alter the diminished overall performance of the product. And as I mentioned prior there’s a reason they’re abandoning the Flo-Perm label in favour of the Performance Plus label: in-line with their recycled motor oil for all those “budget conscious” jobbers, wholesalers,
repair shops, and municipal contracts looking at the bottom line paid today not ROI over life cycle. I suppose you’re not going to tell me you’ll happily pour the Safety-Kleen recycled motor oil with its’ additive package into your piece of equipment. Listen…God bless: I understand why the mechanic at the municipal firehall was supplied it or why the mechanic at the municipal bus depot was supplied it but what do they care when a complete overhaul is required and it keeps the wheels churning - pun intended.

As for cooling issues well that’s an entirely different can of worms. So discussing a package free of silicates for example is different than head gaskets failing. All work in unison with several contributing factors. I don’t own a Dodge Charger but take comfort in the fact at least the Brampton plant is using a 100% virgin glycol/deionized spec blended by Recochem.

This isn’t even exclusive to coolant in the Canadian market. Take R-134A for example…your vehicle was factory filled with R-134A that was either globally sourced from Arkema, Chemours, or Mexichem to name the larger players. Interesting though when you visit GTA Mazda and Toyota dealers (since they’re the hot flavour in this thread) and discover the parts managers have, drum roll please, looked for the cheapest product out there and opted for Brampton-based cylinder or Emzone R-134A. Who’s Emzone? Private label run by Empack…RFD loves their brake parts cleaner when it’s on sale at Princess Auto. Good packagers, private label to spec…but here’s the thing about their Emzone R-134A - they’re not manufacturers, they were even caught stealing and refilling competition cylinders, so how are they obtaining product? Simple: recycled R-134A. Oh I’m
certain the tanker, whether sourced from China or elsewhere, arrives with its’ very own standard of purity certificate but do you actually believe when the price is 25% less the same purity standard is applied? So your buddy over there servicing his Toyota or Mazda with that wonderful lowest-bid Flo-Perm product has the vehicle the dealer or independent mechanic and rather than virgin 1,1,1,2-tetrafluroethane he’s receiving 90% pure with some other lovely stuff being vacuumed into the system…and when that product is cycling through at a higher temperate pressure than recommended what do you think that’s doing internally? Do think the dealership parts manager or independent mechanic cares or do you think they’re jug satisfied they saved $15, literally that much, per cylinder? So the dealership over a season with use half a dozen cylinders - $90 saved between OEM and recycled and and you’re telling me I know nothing of chemistry when you likely realize the savings from cutting corners are immediate whilst the damage is slow over the long term. It’s going to happen just a question of when and for some it won’t happen during ownership and perhaps for others less fortunate it happens right after they purchase the used vehicle. Yet no law has been broken, no crime committed, and after all this is the automotive industry: ignorance is bliss.

Nov 13th, 2021 2:48 pm

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 13th, 2021 2:48 pm

CanadianConsumerYEG wrote: ↑ True. Recochem OEM coolant is so good that OP needs to do a coolant flush every 2 years apparently. Meanwhile I have 10-15 year old Toyotas, Hondas, Mazdas and Subarus on the factory coolant and have no cooling or overheat issues and no visible coolant contamination. I've only ever had to refill from thermostat jobs or minor top ups (250mL loss in 10 years).

Except I never said anything you just posted above. I don’t own vehicles as old as yours so I can’t compare but current plan is having the 2014 Mazda original coolant drained at 100,000KM (next spring) and the 2017 BMW original coolant drained at 50,000KM (next spring).

*

Last edited by MrDisco on Nov 14th, 2021 8:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: unnecessary

Nov 13th, 2021 3:26 pm

CanadianConsumerYEG: Deal Addict; Aug 30, 2020; 3454 posts; 6471 upvotes; YEG/YYZ

Nov 13th, 2021 3:26 pm

100Pacer wrote: ↑ Except I never said anything you just posted above. I don’t own vehicles as old as yours so I can’t compare but current plan is having the 2014 Mazda original coolant drained at 100,000KM (next spring) and the 2017 BMW original coolant drained at 50,000KM (next spring).

*

You literally claim that Recochem is the OEM provider of coolant for Chrysler and other makes, and that they make the best virgin coolant unlike Vulsay which makes recycled garbage.

Yet you haven't provided any proof that Recochem IS the OEM provider,

even if they are that their "OEM" brand sold at CT is the same formula,

and even if your claims are true that Recochem makes the best stuff, then why does OPs Jeep needs a flush every 2 years with such superior coolant?

*

+1

Nov 13th, 2021 10:10 pm

billford: Deal Addict; Feb 6, 2011; 2381 posts; 3021 upvotes

Nov 13th, 2021 10:10 pm

100Pacer wrote: ↑ against the Canadian Tire exclusive-OEM brand offerings). You’re getting the same formulation whether you purchase the Ford Motorcraft bottled by Plastipak or the Peak OET (see image below) bottled by Plastipak. Different country but exact same scenario.

There's nothing on the peak website that meets current Ford specs.

There's nothing on the recochem website that meets current ford specs either. Recochem even lists the wrong product to use on late model ford's.

+2

Nov 14th, 2021 6:26 am

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 14th, 2021 6:26 am

billford wrote: ↑ There's nothing on the peak website that meets current Ford specs.

There's nothing on the recochem website that meets current ford specs either. Recochem even lists the wrong product to use on late model ford's.

As per:

https://www.motorcraft.com/content/dam/ ... nglish.pdf

OET brand:

For “A” spec yellow:

https://www.owi.com/retail/brands/peak- ... les---gold

https://asset.productmarketingcloud.com ... a3d228cfa8

For “D” spec orange:

https://www.owi.com/retail/brands/peak- ... s---orange

https://asset.productmarketingcloud.com ... 68fbb36660

OEM brand:

For “A” spec yellow:

https://oemeasymatch.com/products/oem-e ... e-coolant/

For “D” spec orange:

https://oemeasymatch.com/products/oem-e ... e-coolant/

Nov 14th, 2021 12:59 pm

billford: Deal Addict; Feb 6, 2011; 2381 posts; 3021 upvotes

Nov 14th, 2021 12:59 pm

100Pacer wrote: ↑ As per:

https://www.motorcraft.com/content/dam/ ... nglish.pdf

OET brand:

For “A” spec yellow:

https://www.owi.com/retail/brands/peak- ... les---gold

https://asset.productmarketingcloud.com ... a3d228cfa8

For “D” spec orange:

https://www.owi.com/retail/brands/peak- ... s---orange

https://asset.productmarketingcloud.com ... 68fbb36660

OEM brand:

For “A” spec yellow:

https://oemeasymatch.com/products/oem-e ... e-coolant/

For “D” spec orange:

https://oemeasymatch.com/products/oem-e ... e-coolant/

Based on your links:

Link 1, ford chart, says I need ford spec WSS-M97B57-A1 or WSS-M97B57-A2

Links 2 to 6, peak and rechochem, do not meet ford specs WSS-M97B57-A1 or WSS-M97B57-A2

Link 7, rechochem, does not give any ford specs but says it may be used. But their other website, https://464313-1956606-raikfcquaxqncofq ... -Sheet.pdf, shows the orange coolant can be used on 2010 and newer fords, but it doesn't meet ford spec WSS-M97B57-A1 or WSS-M97B57-A2

Nov 14th, 2021 1:36 pm

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 14th, 2021 1:36 pm

billford wrote: ↑ Based on your links:

Link 1, ford chart, says I need ford spec WSS-M97B57-A1 or WSS-M97B57-A2

Links 2 to 6, peak and rechochem, do not meet ford specs WSS-M97B57-A1 or WSS-M97B57-A2

Link 7, rechochem, does not give any ford specs

https://standards.globalspec.com/std/14 ... -m97b57-a2

The OET spec sheet linked #3 published June 10 2020 and was current (WSS M97B51-A1) until WSS-M97B57-A2 was released on June 15 2020 (5 days later). The product on the shelf at Walmart I would guess is anywhere between 3-6 months old so have a look at what’s actually on the shelf as opposed to outdated spec sheet on the website - clearly hasn’t been updated yet but always slower to update than the speed at which formulation is revised.

Same story for OEM brand in link #6 - WSS M97B51-A1 blend referenced but they also haven’t updated the website but again have a look at the actual product on the shelf at Canadian Tire which would a revised blend triggered quicker than a spec sheet revised and post on the website during Covid.

Nov 14th, 2021 1:56 pm

billford: Deal Addict; Feb 6, 2011; 2381 posts; 3021 upvotes

Nov 14th, 2021 1:56 pm

100Pacer wrote: ↑ https://standards.globalspec.com/std/14 ... -m97b57-a2

The OET spec sheet linked #3 published June 10 2020 and was current (WSS M97B51-A1) until WSS-M97B57-A2 was released on June 15 2020 (5 days later). The product on the shelf at Walmart I would guess is anywhere between 3-6 months old so have a look at what’s actually on the shelf as opposed to outdated spec sheet on the website - clearly hasn’t been updated yet but always slower to update than the speed at which formulation is revised.

Same story for OEM brand in link #6 - WSS M97B51-A1 blend referenced but they also haven’t updated the website but again have a look at the actual product on the shelf at Canadian Tire which would a revised blend triggered quicker than a spec sheet revised and post on the website during Covid.

According to your links, the new spec came out mid 2018, pre covid. Plenty to time to update websites. The coolant websites are dated 2020 or 2021.

I went to CT yesterday, they have the recochem oem brand, but don't have the new spec either on the shelf or on their instore website.

I ended up going to the dealer and getting the proper coolant with the proper spec. Should have went there first instead of going through the posts here.

+2

Nov 14th, 2021 2:13 pm

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 14th, 2021 2:13 pm

billford wrote: ↑ According to your links, the new spec came out mid 2018, pre covid. Plenty to time to update websites. The coolant websites are dated 2020 or 2021.

I went to CT yesterday, they have the recochem oem brand, but don't have the new spec either on the shelf or on their instore website.

I ended up going to the dealer and getting the proper coolant with the proper spec. Should have went there first instead of going through the posts here.

According to the link I provided above (and the 2nd link below) current spec was published in 2020 - no clue where you came up with 2018 but clearly you’re looking elsewhere:

WSS-M97B51-A1 published by Ford on February 19 2019.

https://standards.globalspec.com/std/13 ... -M97B51-A1

WSS-M97B57-A2 published by Ford on June 15 2020.

https://standards.globalspec.com/std/14 ... -m97b57-a2

So when the coolant spec sheet is published on June 10, 2020 then 5 days later Ford published a new spec one budgets 6-8 months for new product blend to come online.

WSS-M97B57-A2 is obviously backwards compatible and makes WSS-M97B57-A1 obsolete.

Nov 14th, 2021 3:02 pm

billford: Deal Addict; Feb 6, 2011; 2381 posts; 3021 upvotes

Nov 14th, 2021 3:02 pm

100Pacer wrote: ↑ According to the link I provided above (and the 2nd link below) current spec was published in 2020 - no clue where you came up with 2018 but clearly you’re looking elsewhere:

WSS-M97B51-A1 published by Ford on February 19 2019.

https://standards.globalspec.com/std/13 ... -M97B51-A1

WSS-M97B57-A2 published by Ford on June 15 2020.

https://standards.globalspec.com/std/14 ... -m97b57-a2

So when the coolant spec sheet is published on June 10, 2020 then 5 days later Ford published a new spec one budgets 6-8 months for new product blend to come online.

WSS-M97B57-A2 is obviously backwards compatible and makes WSS-M97B57-A1 obsolete.

Look at your first link in post 35

+1

Nov 14th, 2021 3:10 pm

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 14th, 2021 3:10 pm

billford wrote: ↑ Look at your first link in post 35

I don’t see post numbers on my phone browser. The Motorcraft spec chart? Look at the date it was revised: March 11, 2020. 2018 comes from where? The banner indicates 2018 model year and forward. Again not sure where you’re coming from with the 2018 but the model year 2018 specifically calls for WSS-M97B57-A1 or WSS-M97B57-A2 as per Ford there. What model year is your vehicle? If your vehicle is model 2018 then WSS-M97B57-A1 didn’t exist so it wasn’t factory filled. Even if you refer to the outdated spec sheet for your model year 2018 you’re exactly within spec as per Ford’s document. Would be helpful to share your model year.

Nov 14th, 2021 3:48 pm

100Pacer: Deal Addict; Sep 13, 2012; 2750 posts; 2328 upvotes; Vaughan, ON

Nov 14th, 2021 3:48 pm

billford wrote: ↑ *

*

March 11, 2020 (right as the pandemic hit which would explain said Covid delays I referenced prior) Ford publishes the Motorcraft coolant guide which indicates model year 2018 and forward (you refuse to state your model but guessing you’re 2018) can use the following specs: WSS-M97B57-A1 or WSS-M97B57-A2.

WSS-M97B57–A1 published by Ford on February 19, 2019. (previously stated)

WSS-M97B57-A2 published by Ford on June 15, 2020. (previously stated)

If your model year is 2018 when it was built in 2017 or 2018 WSS-M97B57-A1 did not exist (see above date). It was likely factory filled with WSS-M97B51–A1.

In other words, as of March 11, 2020 (the latest Ford Motorcraft coolant revision to their spec sheet) engineers had already tested and approved WSS-M97B57-A2 and preparing to publish in 90 days time; however, engineers verified previous spec WSS-M97B57-A1 could still be poured into vehicles until new formulation came online.

* you’re telling me the spec was published in 2018 which it wasn’t, and you still haven’t shared which model and year the Ford vehicle you’re pouring the coolant in.

All you’ve stated which confused is the following:

“According to your links, the new spec came out mid 2018, pre covid. Plenty to time to update websites. The coolant websites are dated 2020 or 2021.”

The above shows your comment about the spec being published in mid 2018 is wrong. Your comment about websites dated 2021 I assume refer to copyright whilst the Ford Motorcraft spec sheet stated March 11, 2020 and the OET and OEM speedy sheets are dated June, 2020 and nothing has been revised due to the pandemic.

Once more: please share your Ford model and year.

Reply to Thread

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)