Q Oils - Quaker State's new ads

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by RF Overlord:
I think most of us here can distinguish between true marketing BS and marketing which is aimed at the uneducated public in general.

---

IMO, true marketing "BS" is marketing that is in no way, shape, form, or fashion grounded in reality. If something is used in advertising that is (no matter how loosely) tied to a legitimate component or function of the motor oil, then it is not "marketing BS."

Based on what I've said here, then I think "SUV" oil qualifies as marketing BS. "High Mileage" oils do not. And I didn't see anything on the Q oil web pages that qualifies as marketing BS.

 

[Mystic]

The strange thing about Quaker State is that it seems like the forgotten motor oil at this web site. As far as I know it is still the second best selling motor oil in the USA but it might as well be like Mystik motor oil and sold only in Ranch & Farm stores as far as this web site is concerned. In fact, it is more mysterious then Mystik oil because it is so well-selling and yet still below the radar screen. Where I live Mystik oil is very hard to find. But you can find Pennzoil and Quaker State motor oil everywhere.

Quaker State needs to come out with some new ads and new products and new technology to keep from falling even further beneath the radar screen.

 

[pscholte]

Just an impression...no tape measure applied, but it seems to me that PZ and QS share of the shelf space at AZ is decidedly shrinking.

 

[thedawk]

quote:

---

Originally posted by G-Man II:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RF Overlord:
I think most of us here can distinguish between true marketing BS and marketing which is aimed at the uneducated public in general.

---

IMO, true marketing "BS" is marketing that is in no way, shape, form, or fashion grounded in reality. If something is used in advertising that is (no matter how loosely) tied to a legitimate component or function of the motor oil, then it is not "marketing BS."

Based on what I've said here, then I think "SUV" oil qualifies as marketing BS. "High Mileage" oils do not. And I didn't see anything on the Q oil web pages that qualifies as marketing BS.

---

"High Mileage" is most definetly marketing BS. They all claim that their high mileage formulas are safe for new or rebuilt engines. Then they claim that older vehicles will benefit from their magical older car formula. I think it was posted on here by Molakule that the high mileage oils were indeed better formulas and that's what the starting point of most oils should be to begin with. Why don't they just call them "Better Formula" or something like that? Because of marketing and everybody who has a vehicle with 75000 miles or more will look at the "High Mileage" label and think that he needs it. That's good 'ol marketing my friend.

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by thedawk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by G-Man II:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RF Overlord:
I think most of us here can distinguish between true marketing BS and marketing which is aimed at the uneducated public in general.

---

IMO, true marketing "BS" is marketing that is in no way, shape, form, or fashion grounded in reality. If something is used in advertising that is (no matter how loosely) tied to a legitimate component or function of the motor oil, then it is not "marketing BS."

Based on what I've said here, then I think "SUV" oil qualifies as marketing BS. "High Mileage" oils do not. And I didn't see anything on the Q oil web pages that qualifies as marketing BS.

---

"High Mileage" is most definetly marketing BS. They all claim that their high mileage formulas are safe for new or rebuilt engines. Then they claim that older vehicles will benefit from their magical older car formula. I think it was posted on here by Molakule that the high mileage oils were indeed better formulas and that's what the starting point of most oils should be to begin with. Why don't they just call them "Better Formula" or something like that? Because of marketing and everybody who has a vehicle with 75000 miles or more will look at the "High Mileage" label and think that he needs it. That's good 'ol marketing my friend.

---

Whatever. One of the key ingredients in HM oils are the seal conditioners. Older engines with dry seals DO benefit from these oils. It is the OTHER additive levels that all PCMOs should start with.

 

[doitmyself]

Somebody correct me if I am wrong. But,in the past year or two, when people would write in saying that PZ and QS are owned by the same company and are the same exact oil, didn't Johnny always chime in to tell us that they are not the same oils and that PZ was the better of the two (base oil, additives, etc.)???

Is this where we developed the notion that QS is a lesser oil???

Just like we have developed the idea that Valvoline is a lesser oil, but people turn in good UOA's with it.

 

[wavinwayne]

I think the reason people don't like QS is; before they were purchased by Penzoil or Shell or whoever, they used to market that "Slick 50" engine treatment, which from what I understand, should never be used in any engine....never, never, not ever.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm not trying to spread mis-information.

I have nothing against QS. In fact, QS Peak Performance 5w30 is in my wife's '97 Expedition as I type this.

 

[buster]

I called the Q tech line. Said the oils are Grp III, which is fine, but the PDS won't be out for couple of months. He really wasn't sure. Said the racing oils will be sold through a distributor.

 

[haley10]

quote:

---

Originally posted by novadude:
Why does everyone hate QS so much? I have always felt that QS was a great product. For years, that is all my Dad and Grandfather would use in thier Small Block Chevies, and every one of those engines lived a long, trouble free life.

Have the old wives tales damaged Quaker States reputation for good?

---

No one hates Quaker State that I know of. I don't. I did have to do a partial re-build 30 Years ago, but people have a long memory. That was in the days of round oil cans and the 10W-40 recommendations. My hi-speed driving on the Interstate in heat and no emission controls on the V-8's back then contributed. I remember the ropey plastic-like goo.

Times have changed, it's a different company now and was long ago and engines have definitely improved. No worries with Quaker State. I would use it today. Things change, but it wasn't all old wives tales.

 

[RF Overlord]

quote:

---

Originally posted by thedawk:
"High Mileage" is most definetly marketing BS.

---

I respectfully disagree..."High Mileage" oils ARE a different formulation than regular oil; they are generally blended to be on the thicker side of their viscosity rating, and DO contain seal-swelling additives, both of which are (potentially) useful features in a higher-mileage motor.

I do disagree with the oil companies classifying all motors with 75,000 miles or more as "high mileage", though...I don't think it's reasonable to assume that every motor instantly becomes worn and develops bad seals at some magic common threshold...that part is BS...

[ February 22, 2005, 08:31 AM: Message edited by: RF Overlord ]

 

[oilyriser]

Does QS have a version of that web page for dialup users? I gave up after staring at the "loading..." message for a while.

 

[MAJA]

quote:

---

Originally posted by rg144:
..........Wasn't Q in Star Tek?

---

Q is the R&D lab guy in the Bond movies.
QS lost my interest when they were affiliated with Slick 50. But alot has probably changed. Supposedly the 24 Dupont car has QS in it, and it just won the Daytona 500.

 

[Audi Junkie]

Does QS even have an international market like other "blender" brands? I don't see them involved with any international motorsport.

The whole "Quaker" thing is decidely NOT high-tech. Kinda basic observation there, but central when product perception is paramount. My grandpa used it too, but it gives me no comfort. I pick the best from any and all brands, QS does not really feature anything "killer". I have 9 QS Premium Synth 5w-50, a great oil probally, but I don't really have a use for it. Anyone want it for a trade?

 

[dickwells]

I am thinking that the "high mileage" oils are not energy consverving and thus cannot be recommended for newer cars that are still on warranty.

 

[TallPaul]

If the they told the truth about High Mileage oils (IMO, "here's an oil as we would formulate it if CAFE were not driving the train"), it might not present the best overall public image, so the "High Mileage" story is a good cover and the 75,000 gets them more or less out of the warranty arena. However, Valvoline does say Maxlife can be used in new and rebuilt engines.

quote:

---

Originally posted by wavinwayne:
I think the reason people don't like QS is; before they were purchased by Penzoil or Shell or whoever, they used to market that "Slick 50" engine treatment, which from what I understand, should never be used in any engine....never, never, not ever.

---

My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is that Shell bought PZ, QS, and Sick 50. I have within the last year seen plastic wrapped packages of 5 qts either Pennzoil or QS with a bottle of Slick 50. Of course my favorite oil company once marketed TM-8, a teflon containing additive. I believe FTC got them to pull the product. Now they don't like to talk about it.

 

[sully]

I've seen the same package at PEP Boys recently. I can't help but wonder why they are still marketing the Slick 50 with all the bad press it generated.

 

[Audi Junkie]

They should ship all the SL-50 stuff off to Mexico.