Quantum Blue - SRT8 - UOA question

[bluesubie]

Would the FTC be a good place to report something like this? I mean he's ruining people's cars.

Or maybe PQIA?

Although they're not claiming to meet any kind of specs, at the very least maybe PQIA could issue a warning about the labeling in regards to things like "SAE 12.5w-35". How does one get them to create a blend and label like that?

Are there any warnings on the their web site in regards to the extremely high phosphorous levels? Check out the phosphorous in this UOA

Paging @Tom NJ ! Thoughts?

 

[ABN_CBT_ENGR]

Or maybe PQIA?

Although they're not claiming to meet any kind of specs, at the very least maybe PQIA could issue a warning about the labeling in regards to things like "SAE 12.5w-35". How does one get them to create a blend and label like that?

Are there any warnings on the their web site in regards to the extremely high phosphorous levels? Check out the phosphorous in this UOA

Paging @Tom NJ ! Thoughts?

Because they don't put "SAE in front of their numbers. ( bad website- very carefully selected and legally vetted wording on it however)

Unfortunately ( based on what I see on their site) they are not violating any law nor are their claims "crossing the line" ( not any more than any other aggressive marketing scheme)

 

[farrarfan1]

Not sure what all the hand wringing is about. If someone’s engine is damaged by using an inferior product then it’s up to the owner to handle it however he or she sees fit. Let the buyer beware.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

Or maybe PQIA?

Although they're not claiming to meet any kind of specs, at the very least maybe PQIA could issue a warning about the labeling in regards to things like "SAE 12.5w-35". How does one get them to create a blend and label like that?

Are there any warnings on the their web site in regards to the extremely high phosphorous levels? Check out the phosphorous in this UOA

Paging @Tom NJ ! Thoughts?

Because they don't put "SAE in front of their numbers. ( bad website- very carefully selected and legally vetted wording on it however)

Unfortunately ( based on what I see on their site) they are not violating any law nor are their claims "crossing the line" ( not any more than any other aggressive marketing scheme)

It's just easier to avoid them altogether. Unfortunately, IMHO, they have tapped into a niche of the MOPAR aficionados and are exploiting some of their fears, like the dreaded HEMI tick. Those motors aren't hard on oil, to begin with, so just keep them clean and do more frequent oil changes if you drive them hard or do a lot of short trips. And if you track a Charger, Challenger, or any other SRT vehicle, select an oil accordingly. Don't expect to rev the nuts off your 6.4 or Hellcat, or any other SRT vehicle at the track using PUP 0W-40 on weekends and then commute all week with that same oil and do 16000!!! mile OCIs. It won't end well, no matter what you're using. You also need to bump up the viscosity and oil, like go to Red Line 5W-40 for example if you track your vehicle. Don't go looking for "miracle" motor oils like Quantum Blue because all you'll find is trouble, headache and the money sucked out of your wallet.

I believe that the owner of the Dodge SRT8 is also a victim of Sunk-Cost Fallacy. And for him it's not just about money, but if he stayed for all these years with the same brand, then why quit now? He's not only invested financially but also emotionally. I mean, what could possibly go wrong this time? Most people, including me, would just run in the opposite direction and never touch that product again. Then again, most people, including me, wouldn't do 16000 miles OCIs using an unproven product in a vehicle that's probably also driven hard. So the blame here goes both ways.

 

[ABN_CBT_ENGR]

It's just easier to avoid them altogether.

I agree completely and do avoid vendors like them but there is a segment of the population that for whatever the reason is going to "believe" that "Smiling Bob" has got the secret sauce that's going to finally cure all their perceived ills and will fight to the death to avoid facing the truth.

As long as there are marks like that, there will be people like old P.T. who will zero in on the sucker and remove him from his money.

 

[Tom NJ]

Or maybe PQIA?

Although they're not claiming to meet any kind of specs, at the very least maybe PQIA could issue a warning about the labeling in regards to things like "SAE 12.5w-35". How does one get them to create a blend and label like that?

Paging @Tom NJ ! Thoughts?

Proper labeling of the viscosity grade on oil containers is well defined by the SAE, and in the NIST Handbook 130 which is codified into law in most states. Per NIST HB 130 from the PQIA website:

"One example is seen in Section IV. Uniform Regulations B. Uniform Regulation for the Method of Sale of Commodities in the NIST Handbook 130 (HB-130). This regulation states; “The label on any vehicle engine (motor) oil container, receptacle, dispenser, or storage tank, and any invoice or receipt from service on an engine that includes the installation of vehicle engine (motor) oil dispensed from a receptacle, dispenser, or storage tank, shall contain the viscosity grade classification preceded by the letters “SAE” in accordance with SAE International’s latest version of SAE J300, Engine Oil Viscosity Classification.” "

Likewise in California code, again from PQIA:

"Another example of regulations pertaining to how the viscosity must appear on motor oil labels is seen in Chapter 14, Article 9 – Labeling [13480] (b), in California’s Business and Professional Code. The regulation states; “When the product is a lubricant, as defined by Section 13400, each sign or label shall also have in letters or numerals, plainly visible, the viscosity grade classification as determined in accordance with the SAE International latest standard for engine oil viscosity classification SAE J300 or manual transmission and axle lubricants viscosity classification SAE J306, as applicable, and shall be preceded by the letters ‘SAE’.” "

PQIA: Properly Displaying Viscosity Grade

Are these QB oils with non-complying viscosity grades available on retail shelves or only by special order from the blender?

 

[ABN_CBT_ENGR]

Proper labeling of the viscosity grade on oil containers is well defined by the SAE, and in the NIST Handbook 130 which is codified into law in most states. Per NIST HB 130 from the PQIA website:

"One example is seen in Section IV. Uniform Regulations B. Uniform Regulation for the Method of Sale of Commodities in the NIST Handbook 130 (HB-130). This regulation states; “The label on any vehicle engine (motor) oil container, receptacle, dispenser, or storage tank, and any invoice or receipt from service on an engine that includes the installation of vehicle engine (motor) oil dispensed from a receptacle, dispenser, or storage tank, shall contain the viscosity grade classification preceded by the letters “SAE” in accordance with SAE International’s latest version of SAE J300, Engine Oil Viscosity Classification.” "

Likewise in California code, again from PQIA:

"Another example of regulations pertaining to how the viscosity must appear on motor oil labels is seen in Chapter 14, Article 9 – Labeling [13480] (b), in California’s Business and Professional Code. The regulation states; “When the product is a lubricant, as defined by Section 13400, each sign or label shall also have in letters or numerals, plainly visible, the viscosity grade classification as determined in accordance with the SAE International latest standard for engine oil viscosity classification SAE J300 or manual transmission and axle lubricants viscosity classification SAE J306, as applicable, and shall be preceded by the letters ‘SAE’.” "

PQIA: Properly Displaying Viscosity Grade

Are these QB oils with non-complying viscosity grades available on retail shelves or only by special order from the blender?

It will make no difference because this particular oil does not advertise itself as meeting SAE standards nor does it claim their rating so they are free to make up whatever they want to as long as "they" have some kind of definition or reason.

Its called "Caveat Emptor" for a reason.

Its also protected under the 1st A so don't expect the "make it right" fairy to swoop down and give them the "what for" like she did Bill Murray in Scrooged.

If they get challenged, expect the same result as the original "synthetic' challenge as to its use.

From the link posted to illustrate the point....

So why is it important to comply with the regulations concerning viscosity-grade labeling? First of all, it is required by law in most states. Furthermore, it’s a slippery slope if by way of exceptions and precedent it becomes acceptable to omit the “SAE” from the viscosity grade declaration on motor oil labels. Because if this is acceptable, by way of extension, will it also be acceptable to omit the hyphen in multigrades, or drop the “W?”

By not following uniform standards and regulations, as PQIA has seen, some marketers define the viscosity grade declaration on the labels to whatever they intend it to mean, a practice that could potentially mislead or deceive consumers into buying the wrong grade of motor oil for their vehicle and possibly violating their warranty and/or cause harm to their engine.

 

[MolaKule]

What's even more unbelievable is that not only did the guy with the SRT8 not complain about Quantum Blue, he went back for some more after he fixed his engine Would the FTC be a good place to report something like this? I mean he's ruining people's cars.

I am beginning to think this was more of a coordinated setup to focus attention on QB; look at my 'ticky' engine, it didn't explode, so I went back to QB.

Did you notice any similar language between the ticky-engine's poster and the textual garbage on QB's website?

The only thing the FTC could do is file an order to have QB support their claims via real-world testing like they have done in other cases.

I think PQIA should have a write-up in their newsletter analyzing the QB claims verses results. The problem is, what QB version would you be getting for analysis? If you can get some of this stuff off the shelf then maybe yes, the analysis would be somewhat valid and untainted.

But asking for oil directly from QB would be like telling a Chameleon what color his cage would be.

 

[ABN_CBT_ENGR]

I am beginning to think this was more of a coordinated setup to focus attention on QB; look at my 'ticky' engine, it didn't explode, so I went back to QB.

Did you notice any similar language between the ticky-engine's poster and the textual garbage on QB's website?

I went back and actually detail read that page, you may be on to something here

The only thing the FTC could do is file an order to have QB support their claims via real-world testing like they have done in other cases.

After really reading it, I doubt that would happen. They really don't make a definitive claim or actionable statement to have to be defined or held against.

His oil may not be up to snuff but the attorney who reviewed the wording is certainly World Class.

 

[bruce381]

We take a 6′ x 6′ steel panel and heat it up to 600 Deg F and splash basestock on it for 24 hours. If there is any measurable hydrocarbons on the panel, the batch is sent back for more regeneration.

LOL what crap did not look at the site but I remeber this crap from this site maybe 10 years a go is total BS

 

[bruce381]

"There is so much disinformation, obfuscation, and double speak in QuantumBlue's literature I don't know whether to laugh or cry"

very well said and that indicates do not use this stuff.

 

[bluesubie]

Other than here on BITOG, I recalled discussing QB on a Subaru site. Just found it and it was the BRZ/FT86 forum:

Since the twins came out I'm sure most of you like myself are very particular on what oil they use. I always believed in Mobile1 and I still do but why not look for something better. A couple months after i got my car I found some reviews of a custom blended oil called QuantumBlue that is made specifically for your application. When I called BND the CEO, Brian answered the phone and asked me several questions like my climate, driving habits, and aftermarket parts. Brian also mentioned that the 0w-20 is an economy oil and is used to offer better EPA ratings rather than protecting the engine. He blended me a 7.5w 27 weight oil specifically for my car and future aftermarket parts like a supercharger. He also guarantees that his oil will last at least 9000 miles. I'm a bit skeptical of that but I am waiting for my BlackStone oil test kit to test my oil at around 3,500 miles and I will do so every 2000 miles till I reach the 9000 mark.

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51960

User BRZY's reply is hilarious!

Wow @bruce381 is back!

 

[OVERKILL]

Other than here on BITOG, I recalled discussing QB on a Subaru site. Just found it and it was the BRZ/FT86 forum:



https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51960

User BRZY's reply is hilarious!

Wow @bruce381 is back!

That thread was pretty amusing!

 

[bruce381]

LOL Now I know the guy the writes the Blue oil website is Professor Ervin Corey guys that do not know google him he can talk nonsene all day.

 

[kschachn]

That thread was pretty amusing!

It's also enlightening if you look back at some of the posting history of the OP in that thread. He states he's 18, plus he apparently has other interests besides cars and oil (although the most illustrative posts were deleted).

Reading his posts reminds me a lot of someone who comes here now and then.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

I am beginning to think this was more of a coordinated setup to focus attention on QB; look at my 'ticky' engine, it didn't explode, so I went back to QB.

Did you notice any similar language between the ticky-engine's poster and the textual garbage on QB's website?

The only thing the FTC could do is file an order to have QB support their claims via real-world testing like they have done in other cases.

I think PQIA should have a write-up in their newsletter analyzing the QB claims verses results. The problem is, what QB version would you be getting for analysis? If you can get some of this stuff off the shelf then maybe yes, the analysis would be somewhat valid and untainted.

But asking for oil directly from QB would be like telling a Chameleon what color his cage would be.

I didn't notice a similar language between the SRT8 owner and BND Automotive LLC / Quantum Blue, however, the SRT8 owner claims that he went back to using 15W-50 Quantum Blue motor oil after he got his motor fixed. I wonder how Mr. Brian Shubert made things right with the SRT8 owner (the ticky-engine poster) so that he won't complain or go around and spread the gospel of how Quantum Blue ruined his engine. He even posted pictures of his personalized 15W-50 Quantum Blue jugs. I wonder if Mr. Brian Shubert poured either Mobil 1 15W-50 from Walmart or Red Line 15W-50 in his white jugs without adding any of his "awesome sauce" to the mix. Time will tell I guess. Or we may never hear from the SRT8 owner again.

I invite Mr. Brian Shubert from BND Automotive LLC, the maker of Quantum Blue (not to be confused with motor oil for electric vehicles) to show us some pictures of his blending facility or present us a virtual tour via a YouTube video. I don't expect ISO 9001, however, a clean facility with a lab where minimum requirements are met is absolutely expected. I hope that it's not shrunk inside his PO Box

What I realistically expect to see is a person operating out of a shack in Ohio, surrounded by off the shelf jugs of motor oil and additives obtained from questionable sources that mixes his own recipes using a measuring cups and .99 cent funnels from Walmart. Until otherwise proven, this is what I believe.

NOT BND Automive LLC blending facility:

​

 

[Tom NJ]

It will make no difference because this particular oil does not advertise itself as meeting SAE standards nor does it claim their rating so they are free to make up whatever they want to as long as "they" have some kind of definition or reason.

It doesn't matter if they do not claim to meet any SAE standards. If they sell their products as "motor oil", they must state the viscosity grade on the container in accordance with the regulations under NIST HB 130, which is adopted in most states. These regulations reference SAE J300 for the definition and proper display of the viscosity grade.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

It doesn't matter if they do not claim to meet any SAE standards. If they sell their products as "motor oil", they must state the viscosity grade on the container in accordance with the regulations under NIST HB 130, which is adopted in most states. These regulations reference SAE J300 for the definition and proper display of the viscosity grade.

They get around that by "customizing the motor oil according to customer needs on a person by person basis". In other words, you can't get a hold of their product by any conventional means. Neither will two people get the same product. I'm not an attorney, however, it seems to me that they are walking a fine legal line. I'm truly amazed at what some people think of when it comes to making money.

 

[ABN_CBT_ENGR]

It doesn't matter if they do not claim to meet any SAE standards. If they sell their products as "motor oil", they must state the viscosity grade on the container in accordance with the regulations under NIST HB 130, which is adopted in most states. These regulations reference SAE J300 for the definition and proper display of the viscosity grade.

Negative Ghostrider

NIST is a standard, not a codified law or regulation. Voluntary is one thing but we are not talking about that right now.

It most certainly does matter and the irrefutable proof is they any many others DO IT and nobody fines them, stops them, removes them from the market or anything else because they are not committing an ACTIONABLE offense. ( providing they stay in that legalese grey area and don't blatantly violate an established law)

Tell me, what agency actually enforces this and give me the docket number of a case where it was actually litigated and the company lost.

One case will do

Thanks

 

[Deleted member 89374]

Negative Ghostrider

NIST is a standard, not a codified law or regulation. Voluntary is one thing but we are not talking about that right now.

It most certainly does matter and the irrefutable proof is they any many others DO IT and nobody fines them, stops them, removes them from the market or anything else because they are not committing an ACTIONABLE offense. ( providing they stay in that legalese grey area and don't blatantly violate an established law)

Tell me, what agency actually enforces this and give me the docket number of a case where it was actually litigated and the company lost.

One case will do

Thanks

The worst-case scenario for BND Automotive LLC would be to completely lose their customer base if they were under investigation. At that point, Brian would pull out the off the shelf motor oil and ATF jugs and tell investigators that all he did was to repackage and resell them. As far as I know, that's not illegal, better yet, he did not use anyone else's brand or trade name, though most petroleum product manufacturers would frown upon such actions. And that would be the end of it. He would suffer some embarrassment and probably would need to come up with a new racket.

And for him and his business to be investigated, his product has to cause some sort of catastrophic failure that results in injury or death. That would probably get the attention of the authorities. Until then, he can keep suckering people in and sell them Quantum Blue. Later on, many of those customers will sing the Quantum Blues because they need a new motor for their vehicle, as Brian sold them a tweaked off the shelve motor oil. It is what it is. This thread can only serve as a fair warning to those looking to buy his products.