by Amy Antenora
Editor, aftermarketNews.com
NEW YORK — Last week, the debate regarding “universal” coolants pressed forward as the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Better Business Bureau issued a recommendation that Honeywell Consumer Products Group discontinue advertising that suggests its Prestone Extended Life Antifreeze/Coolant can be used in all makes and models of automobiles and light trucks and is compatible with all other antifreeze products.
This recommendation is the latest in a debate that dates back to 2003, according to John Wesley, senior vice president of The Valvoline Company. At that time, Valvoline began to accumulate OEM approvals for its competing antifreeze product, which specifies certain antifreeze products for specific applications.
Honeywell Consumer Products Group challenged Valvoline’s advertising claims via NAD, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum. In 2005, NAD determined that Valvoline provided a reasonable basis for some of its advertising claims, specifically that Valvoline’s was the only chemistry that obtained OEM-approvals from Ford and Chrysler. The NAD also concluded that the advertiser’s Ford 300 Hour ASTM D2809-based test results provided a reasonable basis for its intended claim, e.g. that in laboratory testing, the use of organic acid technology (OAT) chemistry in an application that is designed to accommodate (or has approved of the use of only) HOAT chemistry, can be potentially damaging to the water pump.
In December 2005, Ford Motor Co. issued a dealer/distributor FAQ communication addressing concerns over the use of ‘universal’ coolants.
In its communication, Ford stated, “Ford does not have performance data for the multitude of engine coolants available in the aftermarket and therefore cannot recommend the use of any coolant except those approved by Ford Motor Company. Due to the complexity of cooling systems, no coolant has been approved to work in all vehicles. ‘Universal’ coolants generally do not contain silicates and nitrites, both of which are required for Ford vehicles equipped with Motorcraft Premium Gold Engine Coolant. Thus, these ‘universal’ coolants may not be suitable for use in vehicles originally equipped with Motorcraft Premium Engine Coolant. … Use of non-approved ‘universal’ coolants may lead to eventual engine damage or failure.”
As a result of the NAD’s ruling in 2005, Valvoline agreed to modify some product packaging claims for its Zerex G-05 Extended Life Antifreeze and to discontinue the use of certain photographs on its packaging.
Now, following a review of the evidence, the NAD has determined that the automotive industry consensus standard relied upon by Honeywell did not address questions of compatibility or universality and said the compatibility testing offered by Honeywell did not sufficiently support its compatibility claims. As a result, NAD determined that the advertiser did not provide a reasonable basis for its claims that Prestone Extended Life antifreeze can be used in all makes and models, or its claim that the antifreeze is compatible with all other antifreezes. NAD recommended that Honeywell discontinue both its “all makes, all models” claims and its compatibility claims.
“It’s clear that the OEMs have developed specific coolant technology to drive specific applications and maximize a consumer’s satisfaction and the life of their vehicle. This technology that has been marketed as ‘all makes, all models’ flies in the face of that,” said Wesley.
Honeywell argued that industry consensus standards do support its claims. “Honeywell respectfully requests that this case be referred to the NARB for review of the following issues: (1) NAD’s conclusions with respect to Honeywell’s “all makes/all models” claim and the corresponding substantiation that was submitted in support of this claim; and (2) NAD’s conclusions with respect to Honeywell’s compatibility claims (including extended life compatibility) and the corresponding substantiation that was submitted in support of this claim.”
In a statement, Honeywell said it will appeal the NAD decision to the National Advertising Review Board (NARB). Calls to the company seeking comment were not returned as of press time.
“I think the decision speaks for itself and it’s hard to interpret any other way,” said Wesley. “We’ve been very consistent with the Zerex story. It’s OEM approved chemistry and universal all makes, all models technology cannot meet the requirements of today’s vehicles. My personal concern is with our broader friends in the aftermarket who have sold or installed this product and those who continue to, and the potential responsibility they have to their customers.
“We have been consistent in communicating that if you want to be safe and do it things the right way you need three technologies and Valvoline/Zerex label is the only provider of those three distinct technologies. We’ve warned the marketplace consistently that you need three technologies and we will continue with that marketing effort.
“I think generally speaking, people look for the easiest solution,” said Wesley. “This universal application, if it existed, would be an easy solution, but it doesn’t exist. If you walk into a reputable store and you see something marketed by a national leader, your inclination is to trust the brand. These parties have a potential responsibility to these consumers [who trust their brand].
_______________________________________
Click here to view the rest of today’s headlines.
