A Challenge: VWAG Oil Spec Requirement

Status
Not open for further replies.

wjdell

Top Post Dawg
Joined
May 17, 2006
Location
Central Florida
TDI
06 Jetta TDI DSG PKG 1 17" VV Campy White/Beige
I do not think that the internet is sensored, it is a free country. Chris do you really think its all about sales of AFL. I think I spent 7 or 800 USD with Amsoil this year and not used a single quart of AFL. You think Amsoil is really cares if I use AFL or not, they don't. DEO is important to them not AFL. I think Amsoil AFL is more of we can and we did. I want to use a oil that is 505.01 and is not on the VAG list and is made in Germany. I suppose Liqui Moly is a fly by night company to. Truth is I do not know how hard it would be to make a oil related claim with Amsoil. Been using their products since 77 and some shell a tad of Mobil. I have never had a oil related problem, and doubt I ever will. What is the cost difference of using French oil over Amsoil over 500k, about 1000 bucks. AFL is not even the best oil for the PD that Amsoil makes, its just formulated to spec. I think they have at least 3 oils that would protect our PD's better. But they are not formulated to the spec VW requires, AFL is.

I think its principal not sales.
 
Last edited:

karlaudi

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Location
San Francisco Bay area
TDI
2002 VW Golf GLS 1.9TDi; 2012 Volkswagen Golf 2.0 TDi
wjdell said:
I do not think that the internet is sensored, it is a free country. Chris do you really think its all about sales of AFL. I think I spent 7 or 800 USD with Amsoil this year and not used a single quart of AFL. You think Amsoil is really cares if I use AFL or not, they don't. DEO is important to them not AFL. I think Amsoil AFL is more of we can and we did. I want to use a oil that is 505.01 and is not on the VAG list and is made in Germany. I suppose Liqui Moly is a fly by night company to. Truth is I do not know how hard it would be to make a oil related claim with Amsoil. Been using their products since 77 and some shell a tad of Mobil. I have never had a oil related problem, and doubt I ever will. What is the cost difference of using French oil over Amsoil over 500k, about 1000 bucks. AFL is not even the best oil for the PD that Amsoil makes, its just formulated to spec. I think they have at least 3 oils that would protect our PD's better. But they are not formulated to the spec VW requires, AFL is.

I think its principal not sales.


Lubro Moly GmbH has always provided one or more motors oils that have passed Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft's Oil Quality Standard Approval process, since I believe VW AG adopted such standards, and has appeared on all TSB's since July / August last year here in North America.

In fact, here is their view on such standards by companies like VW AG.

http://pics.tdiclub.com/data/529/TI_engine_oil_approvals.pdf

Please note the phrase "Today,...... like tailor-made suits."
 
Last edited:

karlaudi

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Location
San Francisco Bay area
TDI
2002 VW Golf GLS 1.9TDi; 2012 Volkswagen Golf 2.0 TDi
mparker326 said:
So you don't think it is confusing to see Castrol TXT 505.01 listed as an approved 502.00 oil and then not see it listed as an approved 505.01 oil, but then you are supposed to ignore this and know that you can also find it under its part number? Oh, but wait I'm supposed to know that it has been superseded in Europe by "Edge" brands?

Why do you think that VW puts it must have 505.01 printed on the bottle in the OM?


That must be the new formulation of this superseded brand of oil. So if I have a vehicle that requires 502.00 can I run the oil shown in my picture? It is on the 502.00 approved list. Would the exact oil in this bottle meet the 502.00 standard or was it reformulated? Again, why do you think VW puts <oil standard> printed on label in the owner's manual?





So how is a user supposed to know based on these "fine prints" that the bottle of oil they just found that has 505.01 printed on the label hasn't been accidentally left off in a typo?

Again, I prefer to rely on my Owner's Manual rather than some poorly worded list with "fine print".
Apparently you are referencing an "old" bottle, although I note the Customer Service Phone numbers are the same, it would seem, as the current [production] product bottle SUNRG has kindly provided. The barcode SKU# and Castrol Product number are clearly different.

Referencing the production code and date on SUNRG's bottle, what is yours?

On the inside back cover of every booklet of my TDi’s Owner’s Manual is the All Rights Reserved “fine print” including the following phrase”

“Text, illustrations and specifications in this manual are based on information and knowledge available at the time of printing.”

What does your’s say?
 

wjdell

Top Post Dawg
Joined
May 17, 2006
Location
Central Florida
TDI
06 Jetta TDI DSG PKG 1 17" VV Campy White/Beige
Im sorry but that is not correct - although they have several oils that are on latest sheet the 505.01 oil I speak of is not. Thanks for your input though. This oil is available in NA and their new TOP TEC 4100 and 4200 are on the new list. But the LONGTIME HIGH TECH 5 W-30 which meets all the same specs as Amsoil AFL is not on the list.

I am wrong their TOP TEC 4100 is not on the 505.01 approved list either. But their TOP TEC 4200 is on the 504 507 approval list

the list I have for 505.01 is dated May 2006
 
Last edited:

bhtooefr

TDIClub Enthusiast, ToofTek Inventor
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Location
Newark, OH
TDI
None
There's only one test for this. A court of law.

If I had a PD-TDI, I would not run Amsoil's "505.01" in it unless someone had had an engine failure in a PD-TDI in North America, was denied warranty for use of Amsoil, and had successfully sued VWoA over it, setting precedent.
 

wny_pat

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Location
Western New York State
TDI
2002 Jetta TDI
TwoSlick said:
However the dollar amounts I've seen kicked around on this forum are way too low to involve any sort in full up engine sequence testing by VW over in Germany. I'd bet a complete VW/TDI engine test is probably on the order of $30,000.00-$50,000.00. That documented testing is done before the oil is ever submitted to VW/Audi to get on the approved list.
I'm glad someone finally came out and said that!
 

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
bhtooefr said:
There's only one test for this. A court of law.

If I had a PD-TDI, I would not run Amsoil's "505.01" in it unless someone had had an engine failure in a PD-TDI in North America, was denied warranty for use of Amsoil, and had successfully sued VWoA over it, setting precedent.
To re-cast your statement with a slight variation (which I think is what you really meant anyway)

Since I DO have a PD-TDI, I will not run any engine oil in it that is not explicitly in writing on VWAG's list of approved oils, regardless of their statement that the list may not be inclusive, unless someone had had an engine failure in a PD-TDI in North America involving an oil that claimed to be 505.01 but was not on the approved list, was denied warranty for use of said oil, and had successfully sued VWoA over it, setting precedent.
 

mparker326

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2005
Location
Knoxville, TN
TDI
Golf 2002 Gray
I wonder why VW chooses to use the word "conform" instead of "approved"?

I think all this is paranoia anyway. The few PD engine failures we have seen have long been past warranty time anyway.

Do we actually think a service writer will know the difference between a 505.01 oil that is on the list vs. one that isn't on the list? Many of them don't even know the difference between Syntec & TXT.
 

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
Sooch said:
With no due respect Andy,

Another circular discussion is EXACTLY what you asked for and wanted here, just as you always do. You wish to turn this into an Amsoil house, and it upsets you that you are failing to increase your market share by an appreciable margin. Your mostly useless, verbose blather of Amsoil vs. all others pollutes this forum on an all too regular basis. Amsoil is what it is. Great oil, not certified. Get over it.

Unless you are also a lawyer, please stop giving legal advice on what is or is not suitable for US warranty. If you are not an attorney, you should watch your ass, because plenty of your misinformation on what is or is not legal in the US could be used against you.

The only poor assumption was yours, way back when you surmised that the 505.01 spec was a myth and unnecessary. Your soup analogy is also a poor one. As with any property, one must use a bit of common sense. If common sense and reality escape you, i'm afraid that I can do nothing to assist you.

Your point in starting this thread, like 10's of others, is to try to convince folks that just because Amsoil won't step up with the big boys and get certified, that it doesn't matter anyway. You consistently post or reply in rediculously verbose fashion, to cloud the facts. That is the sign of a snake oil salesman.

Again, to promote YOUR personal view of reality to agitate yet ANOTHER circular discussion, is just what you as an Amsoil salesman wanted. Don't insult us by implying that you really wanted to "figure something out".

That is all I will say, because any time conversing with you is, in my opinion, wasted time. I've wasted too much time with this reply already.
My intent for this thread was stated very clearly. The last think I want is a circular discussion - and truth is the only way I know to stop it once and for all.

Thank you for taking your precious time to pull the thread off track. It's your choice - not mine. Therefore, it's not my fault if you're not enjoying yourself. If a doesn't equal b at the start, it still won't equal b at the end.

It seems you can put me in my place very, very quickly, and do the collective membership a great service. And I'll lay it out so you can follow it very, very easily: Call VWoA Customer Care. Ask for the head of the section. Verify that he is the gentleman that authorized release of the letters received by jombl and SunRG. Ask him for the official position of VWoA on how approved products lists fit into the US warranty. Also ask him why it only says 'on the bottle' or 'on the label' in the owners manuals and warranty documents. For extra credit, ask him why words like 'confirm' were chosen instead of 'certified' when referencing 505.01.

I've already done that and have answers from both VWoA and VWAG. I don't know why they won't put it into a nice letter, and I don't know why they won't authorized public release. That's not my problem either.

You do that and report in full your contact info, questions, answers, and final verdict, and I'll fax Fred to pull my vendor status.

Personally, I think you enjoy throwing rocks too much.
 

karlaudi

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Location
San Francisco Bay area
TDI
2002 VW Golf GLS 1.9TDi; 2012 Volkswagen Golf 2.0 TDi
mparker326 said:
I wonder why VW chooses to use the word "conform" instead of "approved"?

I think all this is paranoia anyway. The few PD engine failures we have seen have long been past warranty time anyway.
I have no doubt that the reputation of Audi AG and VW AG for engineering excellence matters to them long after the warranty period.

The reason VW AG prefers the word “conform” over the word “approved” lies in the meaning of each, it would appear.

For example:

“My wife approved of the pants I bought, because they conform to the shape of my derriere.”


From Merriam-Webster’s On-line Dictionary:

conform
Main Entry: con·form
Pronunciation: k&n-'form
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French conformer, from Latin conformare, from com- + formare to form, from forma form
transitive verb : to give the same shape, outline, or contour to : bring into harmony or accord <conform furrows to the slope of the land>
intransitive verb
1 : to be similar or identical; also : to be in agreement or harmony -- used with to or with <changes that conform with our plans>
2 a : to be obedient or compliant -- usually used with to <conform to another's wishes> b : to act in accordance with prevailing standards or customs <the pressure to conform>
synonym see ADAPT
- con·form·er noun
- con·form·ism /-'for-"mi-z&m/ noun
- con·form·ist /-mist/ noun or adjective


approve
Main Entry: ap·prove
Pronunciation: &-'prüv
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): ap·proved; ap·prov·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French apruer, approver, from Latin approbare, from ad- + probare to prove -- more at PROVE
transitive verb
1 obsolete : PROVE, ATTEST
2 : to have or express a favorable opinion of <couldn't approve such conduct>
3 a : to accept as satisfactory <hopes she will approve the date of the meeting> b : to give formal or official sanction to : RATIFY <Congress approved the proposed budget>
intransitive verb : to take a favorable view <doesn't approve of fighting>
- ap·prov·ing·ly /-'prü-vi[ng]-lE/ adverb
synonyms APPROVE, ENDORSE, SANCTION, ACCREDIT, CERTIFY mean to have or express a favorable opinion of. APPROVE often implies no more than this but may suggest considerable esteem or admiration <the parents approve of the marriage>. ENDORSE suggests an explicit statement of support <publicly endorsed her for Senator>. SANCTION implies both approval and authorization <the President sanctioned covert operations>. ACCREDIT and CERTIFY usually imply official endorsement attesting to conformity to set standards <the board voted to accredit the college> <must be certified to teach>.

mparker326 said:
Do we actually think a service writer will know the difference between a 505.01 oil that is on the list vs. one that isn't on the list? Many of them don't even know the difference between Syntec & TXT.
My Instructors in College and at BMW NA devoted their life’s work to transform Automotive Service students, apprentices, and current Profession Mechanics and Service Writers into competent and knowledgeable Automotive Service professionals while at the same time trying to undue countless myths and half-truths deeply ingrained in the Automotive Service and Repair “culture”. A culture that, to this day, down plays the value and importance of a formal Automotive Service Education and was something they all knew too well from their respective days in the [retail] automotive trade.

:)
 

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
I want to redirect all eyes to post 1 of this thread.

I have only respect and gratitude for those of you that really want to move the group forward. But this thread is not intended for circular anything, for thoughts, conjectures, or anything other than pure, direct, truth. And heaven forbid - no selling.

I truly hope someone will call VWoA and verify this crucial piece of information.

This will be one more nail in the coffin of FUD. May it rest in peace. Or not.
 

wny_pat

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Location
Western New York State
TDI
2002 Jetta TDI
I personally think this is a excecise in semantics. We, the consumer, have nothing to go by except our warranty book that was supplied by VWoA, and any suppliment to that warranty that VWoA has forwarded to us. It does not matter what anyone from VWoA tells anyone on the phone. What someone from VWoA says on the phone does not change the legal jargon of the warranty. Only VWoA or a court of law can change the warranty. As to understanding the warranty, it is suppose to be written in plain English. What it all comes down to is "what would a reasonable man do?". All the TSBs in the world can not change this.
 

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
Pat,

I don't disagree with you at all - I think yours is a very reasonable view.

My focus has been one one specific point - the view of VWoA on the purpose of, or requirement for, the approved product list, and whether they think there's a warranty issue if a US owner uses one of the many products available that list 505.01 on the bottle but aren't on the VWAG list.

Some of us here feel safer with the guarantee of the list - and that's perfect for them. Others want to know where VWoA has really drawn the line - it's their line and their program, after all. And who better to get the answer from than the guy that's responsible for the US program? Maybe he's not one of the corporate attorneys, but he should be as close to the 'correct' viewpoint as humanly possible.

I work in this aftermarket parts/lube side of the industry daily, and have been researching other oil specs as part of my education. I'm very conservative with recommendations and do not want to even get close to damaging a customer's equipment. I drove 250 miles yesterday to pull a transmission fluid sample just to have one available if needed. I was looking at Cummins last night. They recommend petroleum oil for their entire line of engines, and they especially like the two products from Valvoline, with whom they have a supplier agreement.

Same thing for Cat - they recommend their oil. John Deere does the same.

In the US powersports world, it's even more blatent - the Yamaha dealers swear up and down that the only product you can use to maintain your warranty is Yamalube. Suzuki says you really should use their oil and oil filters for their outboards...these are the same products they sell in the dealerships for cars.

This is one of the reasons for Mag-Moss and the tie-in provision jombl has educated us all on. And in spite of Mag-Moss, these other dealer networks do their best to push their customers to their lubes and parts. They won't put it in writing, generally, though some have. Once it's in writing, they've broken the law.

I believe this is one of the main reasons why VWoA and VWAG have different policies with regard to the approved lists. The list can be used in other countries to push consumers toward products that benefit VWAG. They legally can't in the US, as long as the selected product meets the minimum standard.

Auto manufacturers have continued to slowly move to more proprietary specs and are slowly closing the door to service information. The US aftermarket industry has been strongly resisting this change. One example of this is the 'Right to Repair Act' that appears to be stuck in Congress. New Jersey has recently passed their own version of the act.

"...The New Jersey Right to Repair Act gives motoring consumers the ability to choose where, how and by whom to have their vehicles repaired, whose parts they wish to purchase, and even work on their vehicles themselves..."

"Car company representatives testified that consumers don't have a right to their repair information on their vehicles."

What I was hoping for, especially in light of the recent calls to VWoA for approval letters, is for someone that's not affiliated with an oil company to make a phone call and report what they've learned. That's all.

Andy
 
Last edited:

nortones2

Veteran Member
Joined
May 10, 2000
Location
High Peak, UK
TDI
Formerly Passat 1.9 110hp
Andy: re "The list can be used in other countries to push consumers toward products that benefit VWAG." In the EU, independent servicing is specifically permitted under EU law. As long as the right types of oil are used, and the schedule of all work is carried out competently, warranty cannot be denied. The oil maker choice is of course much broader within the range of VW approved oils, so I'm not sure why you think along the lines above. Maybe out of the EU, NA conditions are different?
 

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
Sigh. Broad brush to try to give a more 'big picture' overview instead of focusing entirely on VW, and I forgot something you'd taught me earlier - that things have changed since I left Germany in 1990. Thanks.

In spite of this, though, the most recent number's I've seen suggest that the vast majority of EU motorists still get service at dealerships - at least for oil changes, with some marketshare taken by independents. The EU has a much lower number of DIYers than our approximately 50/50 split (with do-it-for-me overtaking the DIYers here).

Your 'pendulum swing' seems to be moving from dealerships to independents, while ours is moving from DIY and independents to independents and dealerships.
 
Last edited:

nortones2

Veteran Member
Joined
May 10, 2000
Location
High Peak, UK
TDI
Formerly Passat 1.9 110hp
Second para entirely correct, Andy. Large part of the UK market for new is company funded - therefore insensitive to service price. However, the stranglehold in warranty by the main mfrs and their franchisees has been broken, and many people use independents not only to save cash, but to get the job done properly!
 

brann524

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Location
Huntsville,Texas
TDI
03 Jetta tdi, 5 speed
Moving this discussion forward.

I agree with the point Andy is trying to make. I took a bottle of AFL to my dealer and asked one of the junior service reps if it was ok to use it in the PD. He wasn't sure so we walked over to speak to his boss the head service manager. He looked over the bottle and noticed the red label saying it conforms to 505.01 standards and said if it has that on the bottle it will be fine to use. I believe that is because someone higher up had already taught him that in his training. I think Andy is absolutely correct that it only has to say so on the bottle in order to qualify. Each to his own. From what I've seen on uoa's so far AFL is holding its own compared to the Euro oils which costs double the amount. If I have read the uoa's wrong please correct me. Keep up the good work Andy of dispelling misleading and false information. I have seen others who are in love with the high price Euro-oils on this site take some of the same chances and gambles with some of the new 506.01 and 507.00 even before any approval letters came from VWOA. Andy keep on defending your product which you have just as much faith in as the EURO-LOVERS do theirs. I will keep using AFL till I see uoa's that show a clear indication that the 506.01 or 507.00 are worth the almost double price.
ve
AndyH said:
I want to redirect all eyes to post 1 of this thread.

I have only respect and gratitude for those of you that really want to move the group forward. But this thread is not intended for circular anything, for thoughts, conjectures, or anything other than pure, direct, truth. And heaven forbid - no selling.

I truly hope someone will call VWoA and verify this crucial piece of information.

This will be one more nail in the coffin of FUD. May it rest in peace. Or not.
 
Last edited:

SUNRG

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Location
Roanoke, VA
TDI
None currently. Previously owned 04 Golf TDI & 05 Passat GLS Wagon TDI
TwoSlick said:
However the dollar amounts I've seen kicked around on this forum are way too low to involve any sort in full up engine sequence testing by VW over in Germany. I'd bet a complete VW/TDI engine test is probably on the order of $30,000.00-$50,000.00. That documented testing is done before the oil is ever submitted to VW/Audi to get on the approved list.
wny_pat said:
I'm glad someone finally came out and said that!
AndyH said:
Hey Everyone,

Greetings from the middle of AMSOIL University! One of tonight's opportunities, in addition to the tour of AMSOIL's storage, blending, bottling, and distribution plant, was an indepth conversation with the PhD responsible for, among other things, Euro oil development.

AMSOIL's AFL is no longer in the running for VW 505.01 testing and certification and is not currently recommended for use in engines requiring a VW 505.01 lubricant.

Why Not?

Because there is one required wear test that must be completed before VW will perform the endurance/certification testing. VW will not release the parameters of the test - even to European labs that are licensed to perform VW sequence testing (like Lubrizol). VW charges about $500,000 to run the test.

We can't certify, and won't recommend a product be used in an application, when we can't get our hands on the required test parameters.

Sorry folks.
Andy
which is true - red or blue?
 

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
SUNRG said:
which is true - red or blue?
The blue, posted by me in May of 2005, was the best info available to me at the time. I spoke directly with the senior engineer coordinating the complete redesign of the lubricant in question.

Since then, the 505.01 spec has been revised and updated, and the 'industry' has moved from first to second generation 505.01 products.

The red, were I to comment on someone elses input, was written by a practicing chemical engineer active in the industry. From my prior contact with this individual, I consider his input to be both current and accurate - especially in light of that fact that the lowest priced single test required for 505.01 testing is more than $6000 to run.

This is a beautiful thing about a group such as this, and about life in general -- things change! People learn, new studies conducted, new documents published.

Care to tell me how this responds to the challege of post 1 of this thread?
 
Last edited:

SUNRG

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Location
Roanoke, VA
TDI
None currently. Previously owned 04 Golf TDI & 05 Passat GLS Wagon TDI
AndyH said:
Care to tell me how this responds to the challege of post 1 of this thread?
i guess you need to ask TS, as my comment followed wny_pat's comment on TS's post.

to clarify:
info from TS, a practicing chemical engineer active in the industry = accurate.

info directly from "senior engineer coordinating the complete redesign of the lubricant in question" = inaccurate

is that what you're saying? or are you saying that in May05 VW 50501 approval testing was as you reported and now, in 2006, it is as TS bets? - i.e. "things change!"

your May05 post was communicated it as fact.

like your May05 discussion, a premise of this thread is a discussion you had with a VWoA representative, nothing in writing. what if your current claims turn out to be inaccurate? i don't think someone paying out of pocket for a warranty issue will find much consolation in "it was the best information i could access at the time".
 

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
SUNRG said:
i guess you need to ask TS, as my comment followed wny_pat's comment on TS's post.
No. Don't blame TS or Pat. Your post was written by you knowing the purpose of this thread. Therefore, you appear to have made a conscious decision to enter an off-topic post.

SUNRG said:
to clarify:
info from TS, a practicing chemical engineer active in the industry = accurate.

info directly from "senior engineer coordinating the complete redesign of the lubricant in question" = inaccurate

is that what you're saying? or are you saying that in May05 VW 50501 approval testing was as you reported and now, in 2006, it is as TS bets? - i.e. "things change!"

your May05 post was communicated it as fact.

like your May05 discussion, a premise of this thread is a discussion you had with a VWoA representative, nothing in writing. what if your current claims turn out to be inaccurate?
I have fully disclosed both the info as received, and sufficient contact info for validation, to those that have asked. Therefore, this line of questioning is simply a diversion.

SUNRG said:
... i don't think someone paying out of pocket for a warranty issue will find much consolation in "it was the best information i could access at the time".
You don't think. Granted. Leave it at that.

Have you read the information I forwarded to you from the gent at VWoA? Have you contacted VWoA to prove or disprove what I've written?

If not, you're simply sniping.

I stand behind what I've written. It was accurate as of the date entered. Would you prefer to be limited to the information avialable in 2004? Or would you rather continue to push 506.01 before receiving authorization from VWoA that it's suitable for warranty? Is this snipefest simply a cry from a guilty conscience?

I wouldn't think this to be such a difficult concept for someone that works at a university. (Why did you remove your job from your profile?)

For the last time. You have the contact info for VWoA. Contact them and prove or disprove my statement. If not, stop wasting bandwidth.
 
Last edited:

SuburbanTDI

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Location
Midwest
TDI
Beetle TDI, and two Jetta TDI
AndyH said:
you appear to have made a conscious decision to enter an off-topic post.

Therefore, this line of questioning is simply a diversion.

You don't think. Granted. Leave it at that.

you're simply sniping.

Is this snipefest simply a cry from a guilty conscience?

I wouldn't think this to be such a difficult concept for someone that works at a university.

If not, stop wasting bandwidth.

Andy,

With all due respect, your posts are appearing to become increasingly mean and aggressive.

Sorry if we don't all agree with you.

It does seem like a valid question, indeed it goes right to the heart of the matter, especially in regards to the uninitiated who would trust a Fred's TDI Club FAQ:

SUNRG said:
A premise of this thread is a discussion you had with a VWoA representative, nothing in writing.

What if your current claims turn out to be inaccurate? i don't think someone paying out of pocket for a warranty issue will find much consolation in "it was the best information i could access at the time".
 
Last edited:

SUNRG

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Location
Roanoke, VA
TDI
None currently. Previously owned 04 Golf TDI & 05 Passat GLS Wagon TDI
AndyH said:
Have you read the information I forwarded to you from the gent at VWoA? Have you contacted VWoA to prove or disprove what I've written?
Yes to both - and I am unable to get anything in writing that confirms what you claim from VWoA or VAG.

AndyH said:
I stand behind what I've written. It was accurate as of the date entered.
What you posted was inaccurate and continues to be inaccurate. If you can document your claim, do so.
AndyH said:
I wouldn't think this to be such a difficult concept for someone that works at a university. (Why did you remove your job from your profile?)
Inaccurate again. I've never worked at a university. Are you going to firmly stick by this too - and insist that I'm a university employee? FWIW - i just looked at my profile and it states "i work w various aspects of tennis" which is accurate.

AndyH said:
For the last time. You have the contact info for VWoA. Contact them and prove or disprove my statement.
I have and neither VWoA or VAG will send me anything in writing that coincides with your claims.

This is your claim Andy. You do the legwork and post written documentation.
 
Last edited:

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
SunRG said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyH
Have you read the information I forwarded to you from the gent at VWoA? Have you contacted VWoA to prove or disprove what I've written?

Yes to both - and I am unable to get anything in writing that confirms what you claim from VWoA or VAG.
That can mean anything. If you talked on the phone, you don't have anything in writing. With whom did you speak? What did you ask? Can you confirm or deny what I've stated? Because - if you cannot, or have received information that points in another direction, we have an issue with VWoA. Because I have proof of what I've written in writing with source information, and with time/date stamps. I have not given you everything I have and will not.

SunRG said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyH
I stand behind what I've written. It was accurate as of the date entered.

What you posted was inaccurate and continues to be inaccurate. If you can document your claim, do so.
My intent is to support this group, not provide BS information. I know how to do that, and have done that in a previous life for more than 21 years. That information was accurate in early 2005. The specs have changed, the oils available have changed, and the company in question's product lineup has changed.

In addition - the information I reported was clearly reported as coming from one specific company. It is not from either VWoA or VWAG. I was reporting on one company's decision on whether to produce a product. While you are free to beat me about the head and shoulders for your personal view on how it might or might not reflects VW's process, that is not the focus of the communication. The fact remains as written, the context remains accurate as written, and I stand by it as written.

SunRG said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyH
I wouldn't think this to be such a difficult concept for someone that works at a university. (Why did you remove your job from your profile?)

Inaccurate again. I've never worked at a university. Are you going to firmly stick by this too - and insist that I'm a university employee? FWIW - i just looked at my profile and it states "i work w various aspects of tennis" which is accurate.
True - college is inaccurate. I saw "___, ___, & ______, USTA Virginia Tennis" and figured state school affiliation. Mea Culpa.

SunRG said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyH
For the last time. You have the contact info for VWoA. Contact them and prove or disprove my statement.

I have and neither VWoA or VAG will send me anything in writing that coincides with your claims.
As above, explain your answer in detail. Contact method was via: phone, email, letter, fax, other. Response method was via: phone, email, letter, fax, other.

Because IF you have, you're the first - congratulations and thank you.
IF you have, and proved me wrong, I suspect you and jombl and others would be dancing around enjoying yourselves with your proof instead of continuing to attempt to pick me apart and discredit what I've written. I think you've gotten enough from your call to suggest I'm not in error.

SunRG said:
This is your claim Andy. You do the legwork and post written documentation.
I have and have presented what I'm able to present. That works for you when you pass-on info from Elf and Motul, and when you publish letters from VWoA that clearly state they're not for public consumption. I have documented my claim. Your job is to document your challenge.

I will not break my agreement with the gentleman I spoke with and emailed at VWoA.

I'll simply leave you with this written, official, information from VWoA:






I have personally confirmed the validity of the areas in red to my satisfaction with VWoA, the keepers of the US warranty. I suggest anyone with a warranty question call the toll-free number above and ask their own questions.
 
Last edited:

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
jombl said:
Andy,

With all due respect, your posts are appearing to become increasingly mean and aggressive.

Sorry if we don't all agree with you.
Ya think? Here - would you like a few of these rocks back? It's ok - keep them until I replace the rest of my windows - you'll need them again.

No more PMs. I have stopped giving you the benefit of the doubt. I will not reply to your beautifully worded requests for information so you can twist them out of shape and throw them back at me in public.

You have the same rights and responsibilities as anyone else - prove me wrong or stop throwing rocks.
 

SuburbanTDI

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Location
Midwest
TDI
Beetle TDI, and two Jetta TDI
This was a copy of the "beautifully worded request for information" I sent you.


clarification of VWoA
"I have permission to forward the info to owners that want a clarification of VWoA's point of view."

May I please have a copy?


J
And you sent it, and like everyone else I found it wholly unconvincing and lacking any official "seal".

If VW decides to change their policy I have no doubt they are quite capable of letting it be known publicly.


PS>> Additionally I did not see any specific job title on SUNRG's profile, SUNRG himself posted the following:
FWIW - i just looked at my profile and it states "i work w various aspects of tennis" which is accurate.
For you to post his actual position, organization and title publicly when he is not doing so is wrong.
Outing is very bad behavior and threatens everyone who values their right to privacy.

So not only were you wrong when you said "I wouldn't think this to be such a difficult concept for someone that works at a university", you were also making it up when you said you saw ""***, *** ****, *** *** Tennis". I know that SUNRG's profile read as he said it did as I was reading this in realtime. You've made it an issue, otherwise I would not have commented.
 
Last edited:

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
jombl said:
Outing is very bad behavior and threatens everyone who values their right to privacy.
Thank you for sharing. Not a surprising position, considering the last PM you sent. You certainly are free to your thoughts, opinions, and positions.

Unfortunately, in an environment where full disclosure and full transparency is not practiced by all, people that want to harm others are free to operate anonymously. It would be more honorable if suicide bombers wore a vest, for instance.

Or if amazingly gentle PMers behaved the same way in public. If that were the case, you'd still have the benefit of doubt from me.

The info was published publically on this forum, therefore, there's no 'outing'. The genie's been out of the bottle, so to speak, for a number of years.

On topic, troll.
 
Last edited:

AndyH

Registered Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
May 25, 2001
Location
San Antonio, TX
TDI
'97 Passat Wagon 410K RIP
jombl said:
And you sent it, and like everyone else I found it wholly unconvincing and lacking any official "seal".
Nice. How many emails have you seen with a seal? Can you educate me on how to pass-on information I have been given permission to pass-on, while protecting information I've been asked not to disclose? (More specifically - how would you have validated an email exchange when you were asked not to release the source's email address?)

In addition, your statement above suggests that 'everyone else' also found it 'unconvincing'. To date, I have an unconfirmed indication that exactly ONE member of this group has attempted to confirm the information. I might suggest that your assumed 'everybody' is a fairly small group.

You have missed the point of the correspondence - I don't expect you to agree with me based on the email. I expected you to contact VWoA to prove me wrong if you could. I figured that you, if anyone, would absolutely love to do that!

Since you have apparently not done that, you have not earned the right to be in this thread, or berate me in any way for this information, or my statements based on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top