Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
Home
>
Auto Detailing: Secrets of the Experts
>
Topic
Water beading as a test for wax?
Posted by Anthony Orosco
|
Water beading as a test for wax? May 10, 2005 03:42AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 466 |
<HTML>I was given this as a response in another forum. I disagree with most of it, please let me know your thoughts.
"Sal Zaino on water beading:
Water Beading and Sheeting... as a Measure of Durability
Almost all polishes, waxes, etc. bead water initially. As they are removed, breakdown or dissipated by washing, exposure to sunlight and heat, expansion and contraction, abrasion, abrasion from pollen and other pollutants, the water beading is diminished. This is due to the reduction in surface tension of the polish or wax once it is removed or breaks down.
If the surface has any protection when there is no water beading is the subject of much controversy. Especially when the polish or wax exhibits good water beading immediately after the initial application. If there is any protection left, how would one know? There are no scientific tests to my knowledge that can determine this. Most consumers and especially wax/polish manufacturers use the reduction in the height, contact angle and diameter of water beading as a gauge to know when to re-apply polish/wax for continued protection.
If a polish/wax gives water beading initially but then stops beading after washing, part of the polish formula has been removed. If this happens, is there any protection left???? Was the chemical or film that caused the water beading also the protection????
If a manufacturer claims that their polish/wax will bead water initially and then magically change to sheeting... I say impossible!!!! Let them prove that the polish/wax film protection initially applied is still there...
Until a specific test is developed and not some fake, razzle-dazzle test, these questions will remain unanswered and I will continue to use water beading, (height, contact angle and diameter) as a major factor in gauging a polish/wax protection.
P.S. Please remember that healthy paint will bead water without any polish/wax applied. This confuses many people to believe a polish/wax is lasting longer than they think.
To test your polish/wax, you must measure the water beading of your paint (height, contact angle and diameter) without any polish/wax applied. Next, measure the water beading of your paint (height, contact angle and diameter) within 24 hours after initially applying your polish/wax. This is your starting point. This will also be the gauge for determining the water beading (longevity, duration and changes) for that specific product. As the water beads start to diminish (get wider and shallower and loses contact angle), the polish/wax and its film protection factor is going away. When the water beading is the same as before you apply your product, the polish/wax and its protection are gone."
--- It is my understanding that water beading has nothing to do with wax but rather surface tension period, wax or no wax. A drop of water will take on that sphere shape because of cohesion...something about the molecules on the side having an equal attraction but the center molecules having an unequal attraction and then drawn to the center.....caused by gravity if I remember correctly. Other liquids, such a common household rubbing alcohol, will not bead because it has a low surface tension, water having a high surface tension.
Your thoughts?
Anthony</HTML>
Details, Details, Details....It's all in the details!
www.UltimateReflections.NET
"Sal Zaino on water beading:
Water Beading and Sheeting... as a Measure of Durability
Almost all polishes, waxes, etc. bead water initially. As they are removed, breakdown or dissipated by washing, exposure to sunlight and heat, expansion and contraction, abrasion, abrasion from pollen and other pollutants, the water beading is diminished. This is due to the reduction in surface tension of the polish or wax once it is removed or breaks down.
If the surface has any protection when there is no water beading is the subject of much controversy. Especially when the polish or wax exhibits good water beading immediately after the initial application. If there is any protection left, how would one know? There are no scientific tests to my knowledge that can determine this. Most consumers and especially wax/polish manufacturers use the reduction in the height, contact angle and diameter of water beading as a gauge to know when to re-apply polish/wax for continued protection.
If a polish/wax gives water beading initially but then stops beading after washing, part of the polish formula has been removed. If this happens, is there any protection left???? Was the chemical or film that caused the water beading also the protection????
If a manufacturer claims that their polish/wax will bead water initially and then magically change to sheeting... I say impossible!!!! Let them prove that the polish/wax film protection initially applied is still there...
Until a specific test is developed and not some fake, razzle-dazzle test, these questions will remain unanswered and I will continue to use water beading, (height, contact angle and diameter) as a major factor in gauging a polish/wax protection.
P.S. Please remember that healthy paint will bead water without any polish/wax applied. This confuses many people to believe a polish/wax is lasting longer than they think.
To test your polish/wax, you must measure the water beading of your paint (height, contact angle and diameter) without any polish/wax applied. Next, measure the water beading of your paint (height, contact angle and diameter) within 24 hours after initially applying your polish/wax. This is your starting point. This will also be the gauge for determining the water beading (longevity, duration and changes) for that specific product. As the water beads start to diminish (get wider and shallower and loses contact angle), the polish/wax and its film protection factor is going away. When the water beading is the same as before you apply your product, the polish/wax and its protection are gone."
--- It is my understanding that water beading has nothing to do with wax but rather surface tension period, wax or no wax. A drop of water will take on that sphere shape because of cohesion...something about the molecules on the side having an equal attraction but the center molecules having an unequal attraction and then drawn to the center.....caused by gravity if I remember correctly. Other liquids, such a common household rubbing alcohol, will not bead because it has a low surface tension, water having a high surface tension.
Your thoughts?
Anthony</HTML>
Details, Details, Details....It's all in the details!
www.UltimateReflections.NET
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 10, 2005 11:13PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 51 |
<HTML>--- It is my understanding that water beading has nothing to do with wax but rather surface tension period, wax or no wax. A drop of water will take on that sphere shape because of cohesion...something about the molecules on the side having an equal attraction but the center molecules having an unequal attraction and then drawn to the center.....caused by gravity if I remember correctly. Other liquids, such a common household rubbing alcohol, will not bead because it has a low surface tension, water having a high surface tension.
That is also my basic understanding...
Sal last para is also a great idea but I like to keep it simple 'cause I'm dumb/
Durability:
[: Able to exist for a long time without significant deterioration]
Nearly all wax and sealant products exhibit water beading or sheeting initially (in fact so does a paint without an applied protection) this is due solely to surface tension, once the protection breaks down (abrasion from water, road dirt/grime and other airborne pollutants) it will cause a reduction in the surface tension and the beading will revert to its former level
If your goal is maximum protection, don't use water beading/sheeting as an indicator; while its true that it is a visual indicator that a wax / sealant previously applied is still present it does not guarantee that its actually providing protection.
a) Water beading- although you cannot equate a products beading ability to protection and durability, if an applied product continues to `bead' water, one wash after another, then that would prove that whatever it is that is causing high surface tension is not washing off. Beading is indicative, not conclusive proof of protection.
b) Water bead definition- convex beads that have a small, tight symmetrical shape.
c) Indications that the products durability may be diminishing- when the water beads become noticeably larger in diameter with a flat, concave or an irregular shape usually indicate that the surface tension of the wax or sealant is diminishing. Or when dust, dirt or bug residue becomes more difficult to wipe off with a quick detailing spray are indications that its time to renew the protection
d) Slickness- slide a micro fibre towel across a horizontal surface to see how much resistance there is, if there has been a significant reduction from what you experienced previously the durability is probably diminishing
e) Sheeting or water beading- if a product beads on initial application and after a period of time starts to sheet water (and visa versa) it is normally indicative that the wax/sealant protection has diminished.</HTML>
[ each one / teach one, then student /becomes teacher ]
That is also my basic understanding...
Sal last para is also a great idea but I like to keep it simple 'cause I'm dumb/
Durability:
[: Able to exist for a long time without significant deterioration]
Nearly all wax and sealant products exhibit water beading or sheeting initially (in fact so does a paint without an applied protection) this is due solely to surface tension, once the protection breaks down (abrasion from water, road dirt/grime and other airborne pollutants) it will cause a reduction in the surface tension and the beading will revert to its former level
If your goal is maximum protection, don't use water beading/sheeting as an indicator; while its true that it is a visual indicator that a wax / sealant previously applied is still present it does not guarantee that its actually providing protection.
a) Water beading- although you cannot equate a products beading ability to protection and durability, if an applied product continues to `bead' water, one wash after another, then that would prove that whatever it is that is causing high surface tension is not washing off. Beading is indicative, not conclusive proof of protection.
b) Water bead definition- convex beads that have a small, tight symmetrical shape.
c) Indications that the products durability may be diminishing- when the water beads become noticeably larger in diameter with a flat, concave or an irregular shape usually indicate that the surface tension of the wax or sealant is diminishing. Or when dust, dirt or bug residue becomes more difficult to wipe off with a quick detailing spray are indications that its time to renew the protection
d) Slickness- slide a micro fibre towel across a horizontal surface to see how much resistance there is, if there has been a significant reduction from what you experienced previously the durability is probably diminishing
e) Sheeting or water beading- if a product beads on initial application and after a period of time starts to sheet water (and visa versa) it is normally indicative that the wax/sealant protection has diminished.</HTML>
[ each one / teach one, then student /becomes teacher ]
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 12:02AM |
<HTML>I agree with the argument that water beading diminishing is only an indicator of the certain ingredients in the wax/sealant responsible for it are wearing away, not the protective qualities of the product or the product in its entirety.
I believe the only true way to measure with certitude that a product is indeed no longer present is with impractical, expensive equipment. They are simply ruled out in "real world usage".
So,perhaps time frames are the best way to keep on track of when to reapply the products. Examples would be every 3 to 4 weeks and for pros who do several washes and waxes, perhaps product re application at every third wash or so.
Something along those line.</HTML>
I believe the only true way to measure with certitude that a product is indeed no longer present is with impractical, expensive equipment. They are simply ruled out in "real world usage".
So,perhaps time frames are the best way to keep on track of when to reapply the products. Examples would be every 3 to 4 weeks and for pros who do several washes and waxes, perhaps product re application at every third wash or so.
Something along those line.</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 01:46AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
<HTML>Anthony:
Rather than comment on the entire statement I will tell you what I know about this subject:
1. If you put oil on a paint finish it will bead. Does that mean it has protection?
2. The ingredients that cause a wax or sealant to bead water do not necessarily offer protection.
3. The ingredients in a wax or sealant that provide protection do not necessarily bead water.
All you can go on is what the manufacturer says and any test information they offer.
That is why the "Comparative Study of Automotive Paint Sealants and Waxes" is a good tool for detailers to use to know a little more about the products they are using.
As you may recall the test included 25 waxes and paint sealants used by detailers in the USA and Canada.
The test setup models to test:
1. Reflective shine before and after application of the product. This was measured by the German-made Gardnier Glossometer.
2. Reflective shine after 12 washings with shampoo and water.
3. Resistence to salt water corrosion
What is interesting that every chemist knows is that ingredients in products that enhance corrosion resistence take away from shine, and ingredients that enhance shine take away from shine.
In the test of 25 products you will find that the 2 top products in reflective shine were 18th and 19th in resistence to salt water corrosion.
Unfortunately car enthusists and many detailers do not want to accept factual evidence that a product they are using is not as good as they think it is and bad-mouth studies, etc.
As for the test we commissioned, there is nothing to be gained by my slanting the results of the test one way or another. Whether we sell a few more gallons of paint sealant is not worth damaging the company's reputation.
So it is with any company you deal with, if they are honorable they will tell it to you like it is. And the way it is simply waxes last 30 to 45 days and paint sealants about 3 to 4 months. If you do not drive the car in the rain and only on sunny days and do not wash it too often then it might, and I say might, last 6 months.
But, to read commentaries on the forums you know that detailers do not want to believe these facts.
Regards
Bud Abraham
DETAIL PLUS SYSTEMS</HTML>
buda
Rather than comment on the entire statement I will tell you what I know about this subject:
1. If you put oil on a paint finish it will bead. Does that mean it has protection?
2. The ingredients that cause a wax or sealant to bead water do not necessarily offer protection.
3. The ingredients in a wax or sealant that provide protection do not necessarily bead water.
All you can go on is what the manufacturer says and any test information they offer.
That is why the "Comparative Study of Automotive Paint Sealants and Waxes" is a good tool for detailers to use to know a little more about the products they are using.
As you may recall the test included 25 waxes and paint sealants used by detailers in the USA and Canada.
The test setup models to test:
1. Reflective shine before and after application of the product. This was measured by the German-made Gardnier Glossometer.
2. Reflective shine after 12 washings with shampoo and water.
3. Resistence to salt water corrosion
What is interesting that every chemist knows is that ingredients in products that enhance corrosion resistence take away from shine, and ingredients that enhance shine take away from shine.
In the test of 25 products you will find that the 2 top products in reflective shine were 18th and 19th in resistence to salt water corrosion.
Unfortunately car enthusists and many detailers do not want to accept factual evidence that a product they are using is not as good as they think it is and bad-mouth studies, etc.
As for the test we commissioned, there is nothing to be gained by my slanting the results of the test one way or another. Whether we sell a few more gallons of paint sealant is not worth damaging the company's reputation.
So it is with any company you deal with, if they are honorable they will tell it to you like it is. And the way it is simply waxes last 30 to 45 days and paint sealants about 3 to 4 months. If you do not drive the car in the rain and only on sunny days and do not wash it too often then it might, and I say might, last 6 months.
But, to read commentaries on the forums you know that detailers do not want to believe these facts.
Regards
Bud Abraham
DETAIL PLUS SYSTEMS</HTML>
buda
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 01:10PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 641 |
<HTML>Bud,
Any chemist also knows that when doing a comparative test, the test protocal must be equal for all products tested.
IE. the same protocal for all- like "cure time".
The test you refer to did not do that.
The person in charge of the test did not allow all the product to have "equal" cure time of the resins before subjecting to the washing cycles.
This lack of equal and full cure time will influence the end results, as any trained chemist knows.
So the question is this, did the "chemist" not know that "dry" time is much different than "cure" time?
Any product with polymer resins must have "cure" time in order to properly attain cross-link and able to perform.
This is commonly a 24 hour "cure" time, and I noticed that only two or three were allowed full 24 hour cure before exposed to the washing part.
This was not done, according the the published test process, note, I do not use the term "protocal", as there was no "protocal".
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
Any chemist also knows that when doing a comparative test, the test protocal must be equal for all products tested.
IE. the same protocal for all- like "cure time".
The test you refer to did not do that.
The person in charge of the test did not allow all the product to have "equal" cure time of the resins before subjecting to the washing cycles.
This lack of equal and full cure time will influence the end results, as any trained chemist knows.
So the question is this, did the "chemist" not know that "dry" time is much different than "cure" time?
Any product with polymer resins must have "cure" time in order to properly attain cross-link and able to perform.
This is commonly a 24 hour "cure" time, and I noticed that only two or three were allowed full 24 hour cure before exposed to the washing part.
This was not done, according the the published test process, note, I do not use the term "protocal", as there was no "protocal".
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 02:12PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
<HTML>Ron:
Thank you for your commentary. From what the laboratory told me about this matter was that they allowed the product to cure as the instructions on the container indicated.
Where there were no curing instructions they allowed a normal time they felt the normal ingredients in a paint sealant would need to cure.
I will, however, forward your comments to the chief chemist for her comments on this matter.
Keep in mind nothing is an exact science and I make no claims that this test is 100% accurate. However it is a great tool, as is the Guru Report (although less scientific than ours) for the detailer to judge the products they use or are considering using.
You know, as well as I do, as a salesman and not a chemist, that there is no paint sealant on the market that will last more than 3 to 4 months on a car and that is under the best driving conditions.
Yet, we know there are chemical companies that continue to "BS" the detail industry and the consumer with these wild claims. They continue to sell "Protection Packages" to dealers to have their Finance & Insurance Sales Person sell to unsuspecting consumers for hundreds of dollars.
The detailer has to have some knowledge, imperfect as it is, to protect themselves from these industry "rapists" I would call them who make claims about their chemicals that are simply not true or possible.
Regards
Bud Abraham
DETAIL PLUS SYSTEMS</HTML>
buda
Thank you for your commentary. From what the laboratory told me about this matter was that they allowed the product to cure as the instructions on the container indicated.
Where there were no curing instructions they allowed a normal time they felt the normal ingredients in a paint sealant would need to cure.
I will, however, forward your comments to the chief chemist for her comments on this matter.
Keep in mind nothing is an exact science and I make no claims that this test is 100% accurate. However it is a great tool, as is the Guru Report (although less scientific than ours) for the detailer to judge the products they use or are considering using.
You know, as well as I do, as a salesman and not a chemist, that there is no paint sealant on the market that will last more than 3 to 4 months on a car and that is under the best driving conditions.
Yet, we know there are chemical companies that continue to "BS" the detail industry and the consumer with these wild claims. They continue to sell "Protection Packages" to dealers to have their Finance & Insurance Sales Person sell to unsuspecting consumers for hundreds of dollars.
The detailer has to have some knowledge, imperfect as it is, to protect themselves from these industry "rapists" I would call them who make claims about their chemicals that are simply not true or possible.
Regards
Bud Abraham
DETAIL PLUS SYSTEMS</HTML>
buda
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 02:22PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 641 |
<HTML>Very few companies put "cure" time on a label.
They do put "dry" or "haze" time before wipe off.
Big difference, as your chemist knows, or should know.
You continue to state that no sealant will last more than a few months, however vehicle manufacturers such as DaimlerChrysler, Saturn, Renault, etc say different.
They did true, protocal driven lab testing before they decided to market their sealants, with a "factory" backed warranty, by them!
This is 180 degrees from what you keep saying.
Do you have the testing that is protocal driven, by a certified, independant lab to counter their test results?
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
They do put "dry" or "haze" time before wipe off.
Big difference, as your chemist knows, or should know.
You continue to state that no sealant will last more than a few months, however vehicle manufacturers such as DaimlerChrysler, Saturn, Renault, etc say different.
They did true, protocal driven lab testing before they decided to market their sealants, with a "factory" backed warranty, by them!
This is 180 degrees from what you keep saying.
Do you have the testing that is protocal driven, by a certified, independant lab to counter their test results?
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 02:43PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
<HTML>Ron:
Really appreciate your efforts to properly educate me on the protocols of wax/sealant testing.
But as a salesperson and not a scientist, as you, I defer to the scientists and will provide their comments to your charges when they reply to me.
As for what Daimler Chrysler might be saying about paint sealants, I am from Missouri, show me the scientific facts.
Just because this company manufacturers a great car does not give them creditability in the field of paint sealants.
In fact, if I am not mistaken a few years back on one of the other forums it was you who was criticizing what little knowledge the auto manufacturers said about paint protection products and you who were claiming to be giving a great deal of the information they, in fact had, to them.
Was it not you who claimed to write the presentation that a person from Ford Motor Co made at the ICA Show a few years back? If that is the case, then the auto manufacturers should have absolutely no creditability in my mind.
Just a few well intentioned comments.
Bud Abraham</HTML>
buda
Really appreciate your efforts to properly educate me on the protocols of wax/sealant testing.
But as a salesperson and not a scientist, as you, I defer to the scientists and will provide their comments to your charges when they reply to me.
As for what Daimler Chrysler might be saying about paint sealants, I am from Missouri, show me the scientific facts.
Just because this company manufacturers a great car does not give them creditability in the field of paint sealants.
In fact, if I am not mistaken a few years back on one of the other forums it was you who was criticizing what little knowledge the auto manufacturers said about paint protection products and you who were claiming to be giving a great deal of the information they, in fact had, to them.
Was it not you who claimed to write the presentation that a person from Ford Motor Co made at the ICA Show a few years back? If that is the case, then the auto manufacturers should have absolutely no creditability in my mind.
Just a few well intentioned comments.
Bud Abraham</HTML>
buda
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 03:38PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 641 |
<HTML>Bud,
We did supply them with the valid, indpendant testing results, which is why companies such as GM's Saturn division now offers these types of products, and in some countries, Renault and Nissan.
If you doubt that DCX would not do very extensive testing, by true protocal, before marketing their Master Shield system, then you are saying that they don't know or care about if the product they sell works, as they state in the warranties, that they back, not some one else, but DaimlerChrysler.
The vehicle manufacturers are constantly exploring paint protection, it is to their benefit to do so, it's called, Customer Satisfaction, the driving force of their industry.
I did supply the majority of Mr. Hughes' presenation for the ICA seminar you refer to.
It was based on "facts", not "show me, I am from Missouri" methods.
These facts were gleaned from documented sources, and substantiated, by engineer's, chemists, etc.
These were not "I think maybe, so I'll tell em this" sort of informational facts
I can not send you the testing papers for the sealants, as we did not pay for them and do not own them, so not allowed.
I am able to "show" them, and have done so, if you would have stopped by our booth at the ICA show this year, I could have let you see them.
Rather thick document of not only paint sealant tests, but fabric, leather, vinyl, rust inhibitors, undercoating, carpet cleaners, vinyl cleaners, etc, all done by trained, certified labs, not us at AI.
Some who visit this forum saw these documents at the booth, and noticed that there was a strong warning on the cover that stated they may not be reproduced or provided to the trade.
That is our agreement with the vehicle manufacturers, we can show them, we can not circulate them.
They own them, not us.
Ketch.</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
We did supply them with the valid, indpendant testing results, which is why companies such as GM's Saturn division now offers these types of products, and in some countries, Renault and Nissan.
If you doubt that DCX would not do very extensive testing, by true protocal, before marketing their Master Shield system, then you are saying that they don't know or care about if the product they sell works, as they state in the warranties, that they back, not some one else, but DaimlerChrysler.
The vehicle manufacturers are constantly exploring paint protection, it is to their benefit to do so, it's called, Customer Satisfaction, the driving force of their industry.
I did supply the majority of Mr. Hughes' presenation for the ICA seminar you refer to.
It was based on "facts", not "show me, I am from Missouri" methods.
These facts were gleaned from documented sources, and substantiated, by engineer's, chemists, etc.
These were not "I think maybe, so I'll tell em this" sort of informational facts
I can not send you the testing papers for the sealants, as we did not pay for them and do not own them, so not allowed.
I am able to "show" them, and have done so, if you would have stopped by our booth at the ICA show this year, I could have let you see them.
Rather thick document of not only paint sealant tests, but fabric, leather, vinyl, rust inhibitors, undercoating, carpet cleaners, vinyl cleaners, etc, all done by trained, certified labs, not us at AI.
Some who visit this forum saw these documents at the booth, and noticed that there was a strong warning on the cover that stated they may not be reproduced or provided to the trade.
That is our agreement with the vehicle manufacturers, we can show them, we can not circulate them.
They own them, not us.
Ketch.</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 07:56PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 17 |
<HTML>Ketch: Sometimes utilizing the same exact sample preparation procedure is not the best method for evaluating products. It would be if all of the test products had the same use instructions. However, the waxes and sealants in this test battery each had their own set of use instructions. In this case it would be better to follow the manufacturers instructions as to how to use the product. What good would the test reults be if the manufacturer could come back and say "but you didn't use my product correctly". Therefore, in this case the individual products manufacturer's recommended useage procedure was followed. Products that were supplied to be tested and did not come in their original containers, and therefore, no directions, were then subjected to a standard protocol that allowed ample dry and ample cure times.
The Chemist</HTML>
The Chemist</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 08:06PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 17 |
<HTML>Ketch...... Paint Sealants as we know them today do not last longer than 4-6 months at the very absolute maximum. End of story!
Of course the OEM's offer protection packages...as they have for years. And of course they offer warrantees...as they have for years. And they will continue to do so. It is an enormous revenue generator for them. One of the most profitable parts of any car sale is the protection package. They can afford to fund a warranty/guarantee that no one ever takes advantage of anyway. The whole thing is ludicrous and always has been. Paint sealants/waxes DO NOT prevent paint failure. Paint sealants/waxes DO NOT prevent paint from fading if adequate UV inhibitors have not been used in the paint to begin with. Paint Sealants/waxes help the paint look better longer.. and they ned to be reapplied every 4-6 months to even do that. The industry needs to stop promoting these chermicals as miracle products.
The Chemist</HTML>
Of course the OEM's offer protection packages...as they have for years. And of course they offer warrantees...as they have for years. And they will continue to do so. It is an enormous revenue generator for them. One of the most profitable parts of any car sale is the protection package. They can afford to fund a warranty/guarantee that no one ever takes advantage of anyway. The whole thing is ludicrous and always has been. Paint sealants/waxes DO NOT prevent paint failure. Paint sealants/waxes DO NOT prevent paint from fading if adequate UV inhibitors have not been used in the paint to begin with. Paint Sealants/waxes help the paint look better longer.. and they ned to be reapplied every 4-6 months to even do that. The industry needs to stop promoting these chermicals as miracle products.
The Chemist</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 08:17PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 641 |
<HTML>Ms. Hitti,
That is a cop-out, and you know it.
You make some of these products, under private label, for some other companies.
My question remains, and I have read the "usage instruction", for example on TST's product.
No where can I find that it states, on the "lablel", 48 hours cure time.
I do not have a sample bottle, with instructions, here of the Diamond Plus product, but know some who do. I would like to know if it states on the label that 24 hours is required for cure time.
Anyone how has this product, please read the label, I for one would like to know what it actually says regarding this subject.
Further more, why, did you folks at USC, (who years ago blended our old Waxoyl product) put a pure resin into the test?? The PTFE resin, and gave it 48 hours of cure.
Where are the "instructions" for applying a pure resins such as this, state 48 hours in pure form.
There are more holes in this Comparative Study than a beer can that been used for shot gun practice.
Do you deny that any quality polymer resin, be it polydimethalsiloxane family or polyaminosiloxane family, requires more than 30 minutes of air cure time to get anywhere close to 80% or less crosslink?
The "rusting" part is another that I will take issue with.
First, any product that is worth it's salt and allowed to complete cure will reduce or eleminate, for a given period of time, corrossion.
It must have reached cure though, shouldn't it?
Been known for years, if you can seal off ferrous or some other metals from air and moisture, it will be far less likely to corrode or rust.
How could any of the tested products, of a polymer nature, and not allowed to have at least 24 hours of cure time, be able to protect from the corossion?
Some thoughts, for you to figure out how to come back with another cop-out for this very tainted and unfair test.
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
That is a cop-out, and you know it.
You make some of these products, under private label, for some other companies.
My question remains, and I have read the "usage instruction", for example on TST's product.
No where can I find that it states, on the "lablel", 48 hours cure time.
I do not have a sample bottle, with instructions, here of the Diamond Plus product, but know some who do. I would like to know if it states on the label that 24 hours is required for cure time.
Anyone how has this product, please read the label, I for one would like to know what it actually says regarding this subject.
Further more, why, did you folks at USC, (who years ago blended our old Waxoyl product) put a pure resin into the test?? The PTFE resin, and gave it 48 hours of cure.
Where are the "instructions" for applying a pure resins such as this, state 48 hours in pure form.
There are more holes in this Comparative Study than a beer can that been used for shot gun practice.
Do you deny that any quality polymer resin, be it polydimethalsiloxane family or polyaminosiloxane family, requires more than 30 minutes of air cure time to get anywhere close to 80% or less crosslink?
The "rusting" part is another that I will take issue with.
First, any product that is worth it's salt and allowed to complete cure will reduce or eleminate, for a given period of time, corrossion.
It must have reached cure though, shouldn't it?
Been known for years, if you can seal off ferrous or some other metals from air and moisture, it will be far less likely to corrode or rust.
How could any of the tested products, of a polymer nature, and not allowed to have at least 24 hours of cure time, be able to protect from the corossion?
Some thoughts, for you to figure out how to come back with another cop-out for this very tainted and unfair test.
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? May 11, 2005 08:24PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 641 |
<HTML>Ms. Hitti,
Then why do you continue to produce them for small companies to sell as a warrantied product?
We have 20 years of documented results, starting with the old Waxoyl product you folks blended for us in the 80's, and the failure rate of clears was far less than un treated vehicles.
The former Nu-Car Prep Center of the old Chrysler Corp, that operated in the L.A. area , applying the Master Shield product that you made, had all the proof in the world that the sealant reduced paint claims.
And that was "YOUR" product, we bought from you!
Of course, new resin technology, has made it possible to formulate even better products for the sealant business.
We are up to Generation 7, since we first used your company.
As I stated earlier, and until proven wrong, knowning you have a vested interest in taking care of your client, I find the "test" invalid and very tainted.
ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
Then why do you continue to produce them for small companies to sell as a warrantied product?
We have 20 years of documented results, starting with the old Waxoyl product you folks blended for us in the 80's, and the failure rate of clears was far less than un treated vehicles.
The former Nu-Car Prep Center of the old Chrysler Corp, that operated in the L.A. area , applying the Master Shield product that you made, had all the proof in the world that the sealant reduced paint claims.
And that was "YOUR" product, we bought from you!
Of course, new resin technology, has made it possible to formulate even better products for the sealant business.
We are up to Generation 7, since we first used your company.
As I stated earlier, and until proven wrong, knowning you have a vested interest in taking care of your client, I find the "test" invalid and very tainted.
ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!! May 12, 2005 01:17AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 585 |
<HTML>
As a member of delphi forum for many years and the old autodetailing forum at delphi for over 8 years I have seen the convenient appearance and disappearance of this "CHEMIST" to help bolster some claims.
This chemist refuses to credentialize themselves, divulge the company they work for, and expect us to accept on face value whatever they say because they say they are a "CHEMIST"
Please do not post here if you have no intent of credentializing yourself. with verifiable links, supporting your research in this arena...we want information for a veriafiable source and hope you have not come here to to create the same muck you did in the old autodetailing forum.</HTML>
As a member of delphi forum for many years and the old autodetailing forum at delphi for over 8 years I have seen the convenient appearance and disappearance of this "CHEMIST" to help bolster some claims.
This chemist refuses to credentialize themselves, divulge the company they work for, and expect us to accept on face value whatever they say because they say they are a "CHEMIST"
Please do not post here if you have no intent of credentializing yourself. with verifiable links, supporting your research in this arena...we want information for a veriafiable source and hope you have not come here to to create the same muck you did in the old autodetailing forum.</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 01:22AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 585 |
<HTML>
Ron:
I am sure you remember this CHEMIST in the old detailing forum...
As to paint sealants... i am totally confused at this point...all papers and information in the last 2 years that I have read suggests that paint sealants can last 6 to 12 months...(not 5 years as some claim) Waxes 6 weeks to 3 months...
Now I am hearing that sealants last only 3-4 months...from this chemist who has not even provided a link to verify the statements...
If we (I) as a detailer am so confused can you imagine the public.</HTML>
Ron:
I am sure you remember this CHEMIST in the old detailing forum...
As to paint sealants... i am totally confused at this point...all papers and information in the last 2 years that I have read suggests that paint sealants can last 6 to 12 months...(not 5 years as some claim) Waxes 6 weeks to 3 months...
Now I am hearing that sealants last only 3-4 months...from this chemist who has not even provided a link to verify the statements...
If we (I) as a detailer am so confused can you imagine the public.</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 01:30AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 241 |
<HTML>Very well stated.
I have no issue with whether one sealant maybe "better" than another.
My one and only issue is that whatever "test" being done, and the "publication" of such test, be "equal" and done with an industry accepted protocal.
I feel sure that the top rated sealants, in the test, are sealants that perform.
What concerns me is when any "published" results, may not be quite as honest as presented to the industry.
I have to question this, as would anyone, such as yourself, who has some time and experience, in the detailing industry, as to "what is the true motive" of such publications, the protocal's involved and "why" they were presented without an even and just testing of the products.
ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it all!
I have no issue with whether one sealant maybe "better" than another.
My one and only issue is that whatever "test" being done, and the "publication" of such test, be "equal" and done with an industry accepted protocal.
I feel sure that the top rated sealants, in the test, are sealants that perform.
What concerns me is when any "published" results, may not be quite as honest as presented to the industry.
I have to question this, as would anyone, such as yourself, who has some time and experience, in the detailing industry, as to "what is the true motive" of such publications, the protocal's involved and "why" they were presented without an even and just testing of the products.
ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 02:59AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 241 |
<HTML>Interestingly enough, I have had a couple of personal emails to me regarding the "instructions on the label" issue.
Both stated that the instructions do not state that the product must be allowed to cure for 24 hours before exposure to water or washing.
I asked both to please jump in and post here as to what they read on the bottle's instructions, rather than email me personally.
We shall see, won't we?
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it all!
Both stated that the instructions do not state that the product must be allowed to cure for 24 hours before exposure to water or washing.
I asked both to please jump in and post here as to what they read on the bottle's instructions, rather than email me personally.
We shall see, won't we?
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 05:15AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 466 |
<HTML>Well this has gone a bit off topic eh? lol
Just for the record, I was one of the ones Ron was speaking of who saw the information on these tests. It was very interesting and while I am not a chemist, I do appreciate accurate tests and research. It seems that the test in question should of been done in a different manner as the testing conditions do not allow for a set standard.
It would be like asking a group of kids to take a test. All kids have 20 minutes to complete the test. Teachers pet though gets 45 minutes. It then can not be called a "test" if it favors one.
Bud -
I do wish to thank you, as well as Bill and Jon, for your remarks concerning the water beading issue.
Ron -
Could you please comment on the water beading issue, and Zaino products in general, what's your take on them?
I personally have used the products and don't care for them. Many people believe they are Gods gift to detailing and nothing else compares. I on the other hand would like to know why, if Zaino stuff is so great, they are not backed by manufacturers such as Chrysler, Ford, Mercedes, BMW, etc.??
Appreciate your comments,
Anthony</HTML>
Details, Details, Details....It's all in the details!
www.UltimateReflections.NET
Just for the record, I was one of the ones Ron was speaking of who saw the information on these tests. It was very interesting and while I am not a chemist, I do appreciate accurate tests and research. It seems that the test in question should of been done in a different manner as the testing conditions do not allow for a set standard.
It would be like asking a group of kids to take a test. All kids have 20 minutes to complete the test. Teachers pet though gets 45 minutes. It then can not be called a "test" if it favors one.
Bud -
I do wish to thank you, as well as Bill and Jon, for your remarks concerning the water beading issue.
Ron -
Could you please comment on the water beading issue, and Zaino products in general, what's your take on them?
I personally have used the products and don't care for them. Many people believe they are Gods gift to detailing and nothing else compares. I on the other hand would like to know why, if Zaino stuff is so great, they are not backed by manufacturers such as Chrysler, Ford, Mercedes, BMW, etc.??
Appreciate your comments,
Anthony</HTML>
Details, Details, Details....It's all in the details!
www.UltimateReflections.NET
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 01:01PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 641 |
<HTML>While "beading" may seem attractive to the uninformed, in reality it may cause damage to clearcoats.
The reason is very simple actually.
The "bead", on a hot day, works like a magnifying glass.
Most kids, at one time or another took a magnifying glass and tried to burn up ants, started a piece of paper or a leaf burning.
The temperature at the bottom of a water bead can get very warm, and that is why we see those "bad water spots" on some finishes, that have turned into more than "water spots", but deeply damaged the paint.
Most waxes can not handle this heat and "melt", allowing the minerals on the surface or in the water to do damage.
Polymer sealant, will "sheet" the water away.
However, due to most formula's having some hydrocarbon components as the carrier, will exhibit "beading" for anywhere from a couple of days, to a few weeks.
That is not as serious though as when water beads on wax surfaces, due to the 'melt" or "evaporative" temperatures of polymer resins.
Quality resins, usually two or more are combined to produce the polymer sealant, will have "fracture" points of 200F to over 360F.
In other words, they are not fractured or "melted" away by the heat.
The Zanio product is basically a modified version of the old waterborned floor waxes, made for the non-wax floors of the 60's.
I am NOT saying it is the same, as it is much more robust than the old floor coatings.
They sell a lot of the product to the "wantabe's", the enthusists who desires a certain look to their paint and are willing to keep reapplying the product, very regularly, as it is part of their "hobby".
There is always room for products such as this, they come into the market, stick around for a while and then a new "magic boutique" product becomes the "rave" for this part of the market and they go away.
ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
The reason is very simple actually.
The "bead", on a hot day, works like a magnifying glass.
Most kids, at one time or another took a magnifying glass and tried to burn up ants, started a piece of paper or a leaf burning.
The temperature at the bottom of a water bead can get very warm, and that is why we see those "bad water spots" on some finishes, that have turned into more than "water spots", but deeply damaged the paint.
Most waxes can not handle this heat and "melt", allowing the minerals on the surface or in the water to do damage.
Polymer sealant, will "sheet" the water away.
However, due to most formula's having some hydrocarbon components as the carrier, will exhibit "beading" for anywhere from a couple of days, to a few weeks.
That is not as serious though as when water beads on wax surfaces, due to the 'melt" or "evaporative" temperatures of polymer resins.
Quality resins, usually two or more are combined to produce the polymer sealant, will have "fracture" points of 200F to over 360F.
In other words, they are not fractured or "melted" away by the heat.
The Zanio product is basically a modified version of the old waterborned floor waxes, made for the non-wax floors of the 60's.
I am NOT saying it is the same, as it is much more robust than the old floor coatings.
They sell a lot of the product to the "wantabe's", the enthusists who desires a certain look to their paint and are willing to keep reapplying the product, very regularly, as it is part of their "hobby".
There is always room for products such as this, they come into the market, stick around for a while and then a new "magic boutique" product becomes the "rave" for this part of the market and they go away.
ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 01:32PM |
<HTML>Ah, yes I recall you telling me that Ketch.
The whole thing about Zaino the users like though is that they find it so long lasting, elminating the need to reapply so often , especially good during winter months,unless they are "looking for that certain look".
n fact, they declare it's the "longest lasting" sealant. Not anything like 12 months or something like that, just adamant about how great and long lasting it is.</HTML>
The whole thing about Zaino the users like though is that they find it so long lasting, elminating the need to reapply so often , especially good during winter months,unless they are "looking for that certain look".
n fact, they declare it's the "longest lasting" sealant. Not anything like 12 months or something like that, just adamant about how great and long lasting it is.</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 01:49PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 641 |
<HTML>Maintain any vehicle with the constant work that those do, and any product will do what they want, as long as it is a sealant or quality wax.
I perfer, as most people to have a life, other than washing, cleaning, waxing, etc my car.
That is what these folks are missing.
They have made the whole thing a hobby, good for them.
However, with close to 17,000,000 new vehicles hitting the road every year in North America, one can readily see that the majority of people are not like the enthusists/hobby types.
Those who perfer to have a real life are what makes a true professional detailer very happy, as it is business.
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
I perfer, as most people to have a life, other than washing, cleaning, waxing, etc my car.
That is what these folks are missing.
They have made the whole thing a hobby, good for them.
However, with close to 17,000,000 new vehicles hitting the road every year in North America, one can readily see that the majority of people are not like the enthusists/hobby types.
Those who perfer to have a real life are what makes a true professional detailer very happy, as it is business.
Ketch</HTML>
Do it right or don't do it at all!
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 01:58PM |
<HTML>Understood but they say they can enjoy both the hobby and the benefits of markedly long lasting protect as well. I'm certain more layers would be added any way with the exception of the slow down in winter months. The whole extended durablity issue just seems to become null for them overall.</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 04:17PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 751 |
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 04:46PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 751 |
<HTML>Just pulled out my copy of the comparative test .
Bud , could you just explain this to me ?
In your above post you state .."2. The ingredients that cause a wax or sealant to bead water do not necessarily offer protection."
Your test says ..
"Durability was evaluated in two ways... "
"After each wash, the the test areas were were visually inspected for water beading"
If water beading does not offer proof that the protection is still there , then way was it a part of your test ?
Not being critical, just curious .
Jim Hammill.</HTML>
Bud , could you just explain this to me ?
In your above post you state .."2. The ingredients that cause a wax or sealant to bead water do not necessarily offer protection."
Your test says ..
"Durability was evaluated in two ways... "
"After each wash, the the test areas were were visually inspected for water beading"
If water beading does not offer proof that the protection is still there , then way was it a part of your test ?
Not being critical, just curious .
Jim Hammill.</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 07:31PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 17 |
<HTML>Please re-read my posting...... I did not say 3-4 months... I said 4-6 months at best.
You may listen or not listen to what I have to post. I have no agenda. Others that get on here for the sole purpose of trying to discredit others and sell their stories and sell their products are the ones you should pass judgement on. I have no products to sell. I have no reason to make myself look more intelligent than the next guy. I have no reason to attempt to sway your decision on a particular product line. By keeping myself anonymous, I have more credibility than someone who has a line of products and therefore ...an agenda. Since you do not know who I am..... I can not look intelligent, I can not bring credibility to myself or to any product lines, or to any particular company. Please pay close attention as I do not promote particular products. I may render an opinion on a particular product that I have seen test results for.... that's as close as I get to promotion. You really need unbiased opinions and facts presented on this forum by myself and I would hope by others. And...of course you are confused, and so is the general public. And you are confused by people with products and agendas. People who name drop, utilize the so called backing and knowledge of large and powerful OEM's.....in essence..you are confused by salesmen and marketing people. These people attqack facts presented by others so that they can either sell their products or make themselfs look like the powerful experts so that you will buy their line of crap and therefore their line of products. They need to appear to stand taller than the others to get themselves noticed... and falsly gain "respect". Pay close attention to those on here that continually attact information presented by others and you will then know those that have an ego problem, an agenda, a story to tell, and YES...oh YES... a product to sell.
The Chemist</HTML>
You may listen or not listen to what I have to post. I have no agenda. Others that get on here for the sole purpose of trying to discredit others and sell their stories and sell their products are the ones you should pass judgement on. I have no products to sell. I have no reason to make myself look more intelligent than the next guy. I have no reason to attempt to sway your decision on a particular product line. By keeping myself anonymous, I have more credibility than someone who has a line of products and therefore ...an agenda. Since you do not know who I am..... I can not look intelligent, I can not bring credibility to myself or to any product lines, or to any particular company. Please pay close attention as I do not promote particular products. I may render an opinion on a particular product that I have seen test results for.... that's as close as I get to promotion. You really need unbiased opinions and facts presented on this forum by myself and I would hope by others. And...of course you are confused, and so is the general public. And you are confused by people with products and agendas. People who name drop, utilize the so called backing and knowledge of large and powerful OEM's.....in essence..you are confused by salesmen and marketing people. These people attqack facts presented by others so that they can either sell their products or make themselfs look like the powerful experts so that you will buy their line of crap and therefore their line of products. They need to appear to stand taller than the others to get themselves noticed... and falsly gain "respect". Pay close attention to those on here that continually attact information presented by others and you will then know those that have an ego problem, an agenda, a story to tell, and YES...oh YES... a product to sell.
The Chemist</HTML>
|
Re: The Chemist May 12, 2005 09:23PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 466 |
<HTML>Personally I believe that those who use an alias have less, not more, credit.
The pros (most) on this forum use their real names and I believe because of this the tall tales are kept to a minimum. Sure many on here are seeking to sell products and I see nothing wrong with that. Many other detailing forums prohibit that type of posting but I for one believe it should be allowed.
I am looking into creating an automitive forum and I will allow the plugging of ones products until the cows come home. No one will be banned for promoting their stuff because I feel if you are stupid enough to believe everything you hear about a product and buy it, then it's your own fault if it does not work.
Lastly, while you may not sell products, if you work for the company that makes the products Bud sells, then anything you put out as "objective" is tainted and will be looked at as such. This does not mean that it is tainted but nonetheless, it leaves a bad taste in ones mouth regarding the results.
Last lastly, your post is...well....illogical in many areas....but that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand
Anthony</HTML>
Details, Details, Details....It's all in the details!
www.UltimateReflections.NET
The pros (most) on this forum use their real names and I believe because of this the tall tales are kept to a minimum. Sure many on here are seeking to sell products and I see nothing wrong with that. Many other detailing forums prohibit that type of posting but I for one believe it should be allowed.
I am looking into creating an automitive forum and I will allow the plugging of ones products until the cows come home. No one will be banned for promoting their stuff because I feel if you are stupid enough to believe everything you hear about a product and buy it, then it's your own fault if it does not work.
Lastly, while you may not sell products, if you work for the company that makes the products Bud sells, then anything you put out as "objective" is tainted and will be looked at as such. This does not mean that it is tainted but nonetheless, it leaves a bad taste in ones mouth regarding the results.
Last lastly, your post is...well....illogical in many areas....but that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand
Anthony</HTML>
Details, Details, Details....It's all in the details!
www.UltimateReflections.NET
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 09:24PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 73 |
<HTML>ok im lost if paint sealants and wax offer no signifacant protection and or reduce oxidation or increase the life of the paint what are all of use wasting are time for.why do we buy these products and why do we sell are service to custumers.that post just completely discredited are entire profession.</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 12, 2005 11:36PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
<HTML>Dave sorry for the confusion. Both Waxes and Paint Sealants do offer some protection against acid rain, industrial pollution; bird and insect residue acid, and they would help to protect against paint oxidation if clear coat paint finishes did oxidize as the old single stage paints did.
However, the question that got distorted here was HOW MUCH?
The best waxes, in my experience, under normal driving conditions, don't protect for more than about 30 to 45 days. Some will say longer and they might be waxes that include amino functional silicone fluids rather than standard silicon fluids.
The best paint sealants, again in my experience, under normal driving conditions don't provide much protection beyond 3 to 4 months. They can last up to six months, IF, you don't drive the car in the rain or snow; don't wash it all the time and don't live in a salt air climate and if you park it indoors.
That is why our company does not sell a wax product. We sell only Paint Sealants because they are a better product, easier to apply and easier to remove.
Hope that helps clarify.
Regards
Bud Abraham</HTML>
buda
However, the question that got distorted here was HOW MUCH?
The best waxes, in my experience, under normal driving conditions, don't protect for more than about 30 to 45 days. Some will say longer and they might be waxes that include amino functional silicone fluids rather than standard silicon fluids.
The best paint sealants, again in my experience, under normal driving conditions don't provide much protection beyond 3 to 4 months. They can last up to six months, IF, you don't drive the car in the rain or snow; don't wash it all the time and don't live in a salt air climate and if you park it indoors.
That is why our company does not sell a wax product. We sell only Paint Sealants because they are a better product, easier to apply and easier to remove.
Hope that helps clarify.
Regards
Bud Abraham</HTML>
buda
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 13, 2005 01:06AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 585 |
<HTML>Chemist
I have read your posting……and have a problem with you or anyone who claims to provide technical scientific information without proper credentials, educational background, links to published papers, peer review, your name, affiliation with scientific organizations and place of employment.
For all I know you could be an alias/nic pretending to be someone you are not. We would be all complete idiots and professionally irresponsible to give any credence to anything you have to say without the above. This is not the first time you have anonymously appeared out of nowhere to bolster another persons claims.... in fact your behavior was instrumental in causing the demise of another forum and would suggest that it is you who is biased.
I resent the patronizing tone in which you suggest that I (others) somehow lack intelligence and can be manipulated and confused by Mr. Ketcham statements and cannot discern for myself marketing hype… The fact is this, I do not use any sealants manufactured by Mr. Ketcham but I do use Sealant manufactured by Mr. Abraham of Detail Plus. Mr. Ketcham has raised some valid points with reference to the testing and they are deserving of a proper response and those of us who use the product and Test Sealant Reports in our marketing are deserving of an answer.
The only agenda that I am concerned about is yours… who are you? Unless you are willing have the balls to come forward… I have not interest in anything you have to say and suggest that you take yourself elsewhere</HTML>
I have read your posting……and have a problem with you or anyone who claims to provide technical scientific information without proper credentials, educational background, links to published papers, peer review, your name, affiliation with scientific organizations and place of employment.
For all I know you could be an alias/nic pretending to be someone you are not. We would be all complete idiots and professionally irresponsible to give any credence to anything you have to say without the above. This is not the first time you have anonymously appeared out of nowhere to bolster another persons claims.... in fact your behavior was instrumental in causing the demise of another forum and would suggest that it is you who is biased.
I resent the patronizing tone in which you suggest that I (others) somehow lack intelligence and can be manipulated and confused by Mr. Ketcham statements and cannot discern for myself marketing hype… The fact is this, I do not use any sealants manufactured by Mr. Ketcham but I do use Sealant manufactured by Mr. Abraham of Detail Plus. Mr. Ketcham has raised some valid points with reference to the testing and they are deserving of a proper response and those of us who use the product and Test Sealant Reports in our marketing are deserving of an answer.
The only agenda that I am concerned about is yours… who are you? Unless you are willing have the balls to come forward… I have not interest in anything you have to say and suggest that you take yourself elsewhere</HTML>
|
Re: Water beading as a test for wax? WARNING!!!Ron May 13, 2005 12:55PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 17 |
<HTML>So it takes balls to reveal my identity huh. And if I don't have balls? hummmm
Anyway...... you may disregard what you like and you may suggest what you like. Make yourself happy. All of "Ketch's" points have been addressed over and over again. This stuff gets rehashed by him at regular intervals to a new audience of forum participants. ANyone who has been on this forum and other forums for a long enough time has seen all of his attacks and all of the corresponding answers presented. I do not have the time nor the inclination to play with Mr. Ketch. The shame of the whole thing is that Ron has knowledge and experience to offer the industry. Although not a chemist, he has sources to get information and present it. There is no reason for him to become defensive like he does ...except for one..... he wants to be the "expert"...the "guru"..... the one who is "in the know". In that regard...... you make yourself look better and consequently your product line looks better. And its not only me he goes after...now its a Ms. Hitti too, and I have seen others. And it's not all in an effort to search out the facts..the truth....... It's an effort to discredit and pat yourself on the back. If you paid attention to my posts, I just presented information. The only time I addressed an individual was in direct response to a blatant attempt to attack me. Everyone has information and facts to present...and you surely may disagree with my information or others information, however, if you read Ron's posts in particular..... he doesn't just disagree,,,,he attempts to discredit others on a regular basis. He feels threatened by others that are knowledgable in the industry.
Just present information for the detail profession to utilize....stop the personal, egotistical, agenda laden games.
The Chemist</HTML>
Anyway...... you may disregard what you like and you may suggest what you like. Make yourself happy. All of "Ketch's" points have been addressed over and over again. This stuff gets rehashed by him at regular intervals to a new audience of forum participants. ANyone who has been on this forum and other forums for a long enough time has seen all of his attacks and all of the corresponding answers presented. I do not have the time nor the inclination to play with Mr. Ketch. The shame of the whole thing is that Ron has knowledge and experience to offer the industry. Although not a chemist, he has sources to get information and present it. There is no reason for him to become defensive like he does ...except for one..... he wants to be the "expert"...the "guru"..... the one who is "in the know". In that regard...... you make yourself look better and consequently your product line looks better. And its not only me he goes after...now its a Ms. Hitti too, and I have seen others. And it's not all in an effort to search out the facts..the truth....... It's an effort to discredit and pat yourself on the back. If you paid attention to my posts, I just presented information. The only time I addressed an individual was in direct response to a blatant attempt to attack me. Everyone has information and facts to present...and you surely may disagree with my information or others information, however, if you read Ron's posts in particular..... he doesn't just disagree,,,,he attempts to discredit others on a regular basis. He feels threatened by others that are knowledgable in the industry.
Just present information for the detail profession to utilize....stop the personal, egotistical, agenda laden games.
The Chemist</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.