PQIA finds three more junk oils in Mid-West

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad

They should require a compliance sticker on the oil (NOT incorporated in the label, but a distinct add-on). That way every type could still be available for sale, an educated consumer can determine if they want to run the otherwise good non-compliant oil with no sticker, and the true junk won't have the sticker, or will have a counterfeit sticker that the State can nail them with a fine for. Hit them in the pocket book and pretty soon there's no incentive to fake it. I'm pretty sure you could introduce a little consumer education at point-of-sale in stores that sell good oil, and I expect a few State-sponsored TV ads could easily be squeezed into the existing media budget. Government loves to tell us how wonderful they are. California is a big enough market that it won't be a cost burden to the oil manufacturers to have to add the sticker to the product, and once Cali does it, it becomes just as cheap to manufacturers when another State adopts the same regulation. Even if you don't do it that way, I am surprised these otherwise fine oils can't be sold with a "for racing engine use only" limitation rather than an outright ban. But maybe they are worried that it would only make the junk oil seem more attractive to the average idiot.

Don't we already have such indications with the API donut? We don't need yet another, consumers need to read their owners manual (most are on-line if you didn't get one with your car) and read the portion where it describes the oil to use. It specifies what to look for on the bottle. So the proof that an oil meets the necessary standards is already on the bottle. There is no need for a stand alone mechanism to tell the consumer it meets the standard. There is a standard means of marking the product. The consumer needs to do his due diligence, read the manual and choose the appropriate oil.

 

[Tom NJ]

Consumers are ignorant about a lot of things they buy. That's human nature - we don't have the time or interest to research everything we purchase, and we all rely on labels and a certain level of trust in the seller. Some sellers knowingly and intentionally market damaging products for higher profits to exploit that consumer ignorance, and that crosses a line. In this case the company is putting swill in a motor oil bottle, calling it quality motor oil, placing it on motor oil shelves, and claiming it protects engines, when in fact it is not motor oil and will damage engines. They know very well what they are doing, and their fine print cautions do not excuse their deplorable exploitation of innocent consumers. The cry of "Buyer Beware" does not excuse intentional deception with products that are harmful or damaging. Tom NJ/VA

 

[4WD]

I agree - and where I live I think they prey on folks who can't read English - and please stay away from inappropriate or political comments - most folks understand how many of these workers live in Texas - and many of them buy a beater that burns oil.

 

[Tom NJ]

Originally Posted By: Matagonka

Did anyone read the label? Says for top off only and older engines.

Many of the junk oil marketers label "For top off only" thinking that this phrase somehow protects and excuses them. The problem is that "top off" is an undefined term that means different things to different people. Does it mean it's okay to add one quart to hold you until an oil change? How about one quart per month? One quart every two weeks? One quart per week? Add enough of this "top off" oil and soon you will be running just the "top off" oil, and in this case ruining your engine. And likewise, what is an "older car"? Five years old? Ten years old? Fifteen years old? 75,000 miles? Tom NJ/VA

 

[Tom NJ]

Originally Posted By: 4WD

I agree - and where I live I think they prey on folks who can't read English - and please stay away from inappropriate or political comments - most folks understand how many of these workers live in Texas - and many of them buy a beater that burns oil.

Very true. PQIA finds most of these oils in low income areas where people tend to buy on price alone. These are the very people who can least afford to lose their vehicles, and less likely to understand oil specifications. The marketers know exactly what they are doing and don't care. Disgusting! Tom NJ/VA

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ

Originally Posted By: Matagonka

Did anyone read the label? Says for top off only and older engines.

Many of the junk oil marketers label "For top off only" thinking that this phrase somehow protects and excuses them. The problem is that "top off" is an undefined term that means different things to different people. Does it mean it's okay to add one quart to hold you until an oil change? How about one quart per month? One quart every two weeks? One quart per week? Add enough of this "top off" oil and soon you will be running just the "top off" oil, and in this case ruining your engine. And likewise, what is an "older car"? Five years old? Ten years old? Fifteen years old? 75,000 miles?

Exactly. What is so special about "top off" oil? Like you mention what if I need to "top off" the oil on my ECHO when it is a quart down? The thing only holds 3 1/2 quarts total, that would constitute nearly 30% of the total volume. What if I sold colored water for "top off". Would that be OK?

 

[Fasttimez]

Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh

Originally Posted By: Fasttimez

The problem lies with the consumer. Instead of educating themselves, they wanna place blame when their car blows up due to their own ignorance. But it's OK....The Government/State will TELL YOU what's good for you & what's not, what you can buy & what you can't. By all means DON'T educate yourself or do any research on a subject you're about to spend money on, the Government/State will do it for you & decide what's best for you.....Whether you like it or not, because your ignorance has empowered them to do so.

There is a legitimate need for the government to regulate and enforce standards within reason. Otherwise drug companies would be selling sugar tablets as blood thinners. Remember snake oil?

Like your own state of NY banning sodas over 16oz......That's government regulation at it's finest right there. So tired of these "Nanny" states.....people need to take responsibility for their own ignorance. Your comment about blood thinners & sugar pills is moot, just look at the list of class action lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies of drugs that were approved by the government that were found to be pure garbage. I guess people just like being told what to do & how to live nowadays, being told what's in THEIR best interest according to some [censored] study funded by the government. I for one am in the minority I guess when it comes to using common sense & doing research before I jump feet first into something, & NOT believing everything I hear, see or read without checking the facts first.

 

[Virtus_Probi]

I can't believe somebody is trying to defend the idea of selling apparently used oil with lots of contaminants and no detergents labelled for use in any kind of vehicle on the road today.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi

I can't believe somebody is trying to defend the idea of selling apparently used oil with lots of contaminants and no detergents labelled for use in any kind of vehicle on the road today.

No one is defending this. I can't believe people don't expect consumers to do a little due diligence. I don't understand is one thing when someone reads the manual and doesn't get it. I didn't know isn't really an excuse that warrants much sympathy for those who didn't do a nanosecond of research. It didn't take long to find an on-line copy of the owners manual for my 14 year old car. It takes about another minute to look at the chapter about oil and what to look for and compare it to the bottle. Even if I can't read, I can see that the images in the manual are not on the bottle. I can see that it doesn't say 10W-30 or 5W-30 on the bottle. So maybe I shouldn't use that product in my car. I'm not defending the product. But I also have little patience for the consumer who fails to do even basic due diligence. As I said before, if you don't buy their product, they will not be in the market place. So the best thing a consumer can do is spend a little time getting educated so that he may avoid buying a substandard product.

 

[Dallas69]

This junk is sitting next to Pennzoil on the shelf. How many people that need to get a qt of oil will read the fine print? A lot of folks will see the low price and assume it must be OK,just cheaper, and after all it's still oil. This is deceptive at the very least,especially if many don't speak English well. It is not just on the consumer.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69

This junk is sitting next to Pennzoil on the shelf. How many people that need to get a qt of oil will read the fine print? A lot of folks will see the low price and assume it must be OK,just cheaper, and after all it's still oil. This is deceptive at the very least,especially if many don't speak English well. It is not just on the consumer.

I would say it was deceptive if it said it was something it wasn't. I.E. if it had the API Donut and/or Sunburst, but didn't meet those standards, yes deceptive. If it said it was a 5W-30 when it wasn't, deceptive. I teach my children (now adults) critical reasoning skills. If I was with them and they saw and advertisement, we would analyze it to understand what it really said and didn't say. How to tell the difference between an implied meaning or emotional tug and the facts. If you know your car uses oil, why don't you have some on hand from Wal*Mart that meets the specification? It has to be cheaper than paying $6/qt a the c-store. I guess I see few scenarios where it's a good idea to buy an off brand oil from the c-store. Unless someone just bought the car, they probably know it's using oil. So why would they put themselves in the scenario where this is their perceived best option? Like I said, if people didn't pick up that bottle of oil in the c-store, take it the counter, and buy it with their smokes, lottery tickets and the bladder buster, the companies that bottle it would be out of business. I get the impression that these are the same folks who didn't do their homework, or thought it was funny that they got a C- in remedial math in school. Just doing the bare minimum to get by. And somehow, it's the fault of others when life kicks them in the nads. I have no expectation that others are looking out for my best interest. The c-store owner is looking to make a profit. If he can buy this oil for $1-2/quart and sell it for $6, he's going to do that. Not as a service for me, but because he believes there will be some desperate soul who needs this quart of oil. I have no control over what he puts on his shelf. Nor should I in a free society. My job in a free society is to become educated so I know the difference. It's not the job of anyone to protect me from the c-store owner or the bottler. How can I be sure they are really protecting me? What I do control is my knowledge. I control my preparation and planning and so on. My defense against the c-store owner and his $6 quart of substandard oil is to carry a quart of good oil in my car that uses a quart every 1500-2000 miles. It's a lot better option and cheaper at $2-3/quart than letting myself get into the situation where I'm suddenly at the mercy of the c-store owner and how he chooses to stock his shelves. I'm not defending him. But I cannot defend those who go through life clueless either. As a taxpayer, I can't afford to take care of my family and the apparently dozens of others who fail to do their homework. We need more preparedness and less dependence.

 

[javacontour]

And the information is out there. It only took me about 10 minutes to find the guy who owns CONATUS OIL & GAS, INC. Florida Business Entity P10000090605 Looks like he operates in or around a strip mall in Miami. If a rank novice detective like me can find out about his company and see the shady looking store front, I would think others could easily figure out Q Motor Oil wasn't Quaker State.

 

[Fasttimez]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69

This junk is sitting next to Pennzoil on the shelf. How many people that need to get a qt of oil will read the fine print? A lot of folks will see the low price and assume it must be OK,just cheaper, and after all it's still oil. This is deceptive at the very least,especially if many don't speak English well. It is not just on the consumer.

I bet when you financed your house, car or whatever you read the fine print....So why not with everything else you spend your hard earned on ? It's pretty simple, NO API Starburst, Not approved to run in your vehicle. You DON'T need to be able to read or speak English to understand that starburst symbol. It comes down to laziness on the part of the consumer not doing their research.....

 

[PimTac]

It's not a coincidence that this oil made by Q Motor Oil is named Golden State.