Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
Home
>
Auto Detailing: Secrets of the Experts
>
Topic
FREE Sealant & Wax Study
Posted by buda
|
FREE Sealant & Wax Study October 31, 2011 03:20PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
If you are willing to LIKE our Facebook page (DETAIL PLUS) and provide us with your email address we will send you a copy of an independent study that we had done a few years back on a comparison of the most popular paint sealants and waxes used by detailers in the USA and Canada.
The reports lists all the products by name and manufacturer
The test protocols
The results.
If interested please contact detailplus@detailplus.com
Thank you
The reports lists all the products by name and manufacturer
The test protocols
The results.
If interested please contact detailplus@detailplus.com
Thank you
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study October 31, 2011 08:23PM |
Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 323 |
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 01, 2011 02:47AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
The protocols of the test would apply to any product, past or present.
First test was increase in reflective shine before and after application measured by a Glossometer, about as objective as you can get.
Second test was percentage decrease in reflective shine after 12 washings, again measured by a Glossomter.
Third test was the product's resistance to salt water corrosion. This was measured by misting an unpainted metal panel on which the products had been applied.
They were all misted the same amount of time and then the panels were reviewed as to the amount of rust on each panel.
The control panel with no paint and no wax or sealant in some cases had less rust than some panels with product applied.9
Interesting the two products that were #1 & #2 in highest percentage of reflective shine were 18th and 19th respectively in corrosion resistance which is understandable because shine enhancing ingredients are not particularly durable.
Is the test expensive to conduct? In a word, YES!
But if you can afford a Glossomter ($2500) you can easily conduct before and after tests to determine how Sony a product is on a painted surface.
Bud Abraham
First test was increase in reflective shine before and after application measured by a Glossometer, about as objective as you can get.
Second test was percentage decrease in reflective shine after 12 washings, again measured by a Glossomter.
Third test was the product's resistance to salt water corrosion. This was measured by misting an unpainted metal panel on which the products had been applied.
They were all misted the same amount of time and then the panels were reviewed as to the amount of rust on each panel.
The control panel with no paint and no wax or sealant in some cases had less rust than some panels with product applied.9
Interesting the two products that were #1 & #2 in highest percentage of reflective shine were 18th and 19th respectively in corrosion resistance which is understandable because shine enhancing ingredients are not particularly durable.
Is the test expensive to conduct? In a word, YES!
But if you can afford a Glossomter ($2500) you can easily conduct before and after tests to determine how Sony a product is on a painted surface.
Bud Abraham
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 01, 2011 09:18PM |
Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 323 |
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 06, 2011 04:51AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 1,182 |
Profile-
Bud and I have had some serious flame-ups over his wax test. See excerpts below :
Doug Delmont [ PM ]
Wax Test Fair ?
September 17, 2004 12:56AM
<HTML> Bud described a laboratory study of 25 waxes and sealants in posts on 5/2/04 and 8/8/04 .
From reading his posts, it appears the waxes were applied over bare surfaces and without any accompanying polish or cleaner.
Some of the waxes tested were intended to be used as part of a multi-step process . Unless one uses the prescribed cleaner and polish before applying such products , it is unfair to compare these " pure waxes " to one-step products.
This is a flaw I never allow in my own tests.
Zymol Carbon rated 24th out of 25 waxes for increase in gloss in the lab test cited by Bud . When Consumer Reports tested the Zymol multi-step system , it out-shined all of the one-step products they tested that time.
Unless I'm mistaken , the lab test Bud is endorsing is like comparing pure base motor oil to oil with its additive package .
If I'm wrong, please explain .
Doug</HTML>
waynestowels [ PM ]
Re: Wax Test Fair ?
September 20, 2004 04:29PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 443
<HTML>Maybe we should all get people to "purchase" our advertising in a "creative way", LOL!!!
Looks like someone is trying to "preach" what is best..., AND have you pay cash to read it...., WOW!!! what a plansmiling smiley
I bet all the folks that send out flyers in the newspaper would really love it if we all paid for them instead of it being in their advertising budget and out of their pockets...,
Bud, IMO, is a marketing genius .
Bud Abraham [ PM ]
Re: Wax Test Fair ?
September 20, 2004 07:09PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 3,319
<HTML>Fellas:
What difference does it make whether a test is fair or not fair? Does this really make a difference in the success or failure of your detail business?
Not really, as I pointed out on another posting.
Why waste time discussing things that do not matter. You do not have to pay any attention to the test. You do not have to believe the results and certainly you do not have to buy the product.
So why waste time on such incidential discussions that are not going to help your business.
We did the test to allow detailers to see how a number of products they were using measured up. This was especially done to show that these boutique products like Zymol; Zaino Bros and Klasse were not any better or worse than others being used and certainly were not worth the high prices being asked by these companies.
I have been in the detail business long enough and have enough respect for detailers that I would not even try to sell you on my products based on a test that our company commissioned.
You will buy my products if you want to. You will buy them because another detail says he likes them. You will buy my products if you trust me, not because the product might shown well on a test that I commissioned.
But, I can tell you that the protocols used for the tests were legitimate and accurate.
In any case, I would not waste your time deciding if mine or anyone else's tests are fair or not. Does not make you a single penny.
REgards
Bud Abraham</HTML>
Doug Delmont [ PM ]
Re: Zaino Bros.
September 06, 2006 10:45PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 1,031
Bud : Your test, which I thank you for providing me, was not an independent test but rather was done by your company, using your choice of procedures. You may be about to say that these facts don't mean the test was biased or unfair.
I wonder how you'd feel if Sal Zaino tested your product against his and loudly proclaimed his to be the winner.
What follows is the result of independent testing.
Class, please open your copies of the Guru Report to page 46 and read aloud, " Zaino Brothers Show Car Polish...One single ounce of Z-5 or Z-2 is enough to cover a Chevrolet Suburban, twice...It glides on easily and buffs off without any effort...This stuff is bulletproof. It's simply indestructible , and it laughs at the competition...on our test panel, the Zaino is still beading water...seven months after our first and only application...The stuff is simply amazing...won't stain your trim and won't dry white on your emblems...
Page 41 --Overall rating "A-". Durability "A+". Ease of application "B+". Ease of buffing "A+".... Week 6: ...continuing to blind us with its shine."
www.gurureports.org . Editor's Choice winner.
Doug
buda [ PM ]
Re: Zaino Bros.
September 07, 2006 11:49AM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 3,319
Doug, the test was not conducted by my company, but for my company. There is a difference.
You were able to read the test protocols and determine for yourself if they were biased or not.
There is no reason why I would want to present biased or slanted results, the reason for the test, which was quite expensive to conduct, was to help detailers have some type of standard by which to judge chemicals.
Keep in mind that our company, first and foremost is an equipment systems manufacturer that sells chemicals we know will work in our system.
However, these chemicals are of the highest quality and can be used by any detailer.
In that respect we do not have to slant tests to make our products seem better than any other, plus personally I would not do that, I have to much respect for the industry and those in it to do that.
If Mr Zaino wanted to spend the money to conduct a test by a company other than his, and his protocols were legitimate I would have no problem with that.
Keep in mind that it by setting up tests like were done for this study a chemical company can actually make a product better than any other.
How? Simple, they keep testing their product's reflective shine against others, using a Glossometer until it is more shine than others by adding the appropriate ingredients.
To make it more durable after 12 washings, again they test the refective shine after 12 washings and they add ingredients until the product has a greater reflective shine than others.
Finally they test their product's resistence to salt water corrosion against all others and add ingredients until it is more resistent than others.
It is really quite simple, chemically to do that.
It is all about chemistry and measurements. The test model provides the measurements.
The hardest part is to get any wax or sealant product to have shine; be resistent to soaps and have corrosion resistence. Because the ingredients for each of these features work against each other. That is where good chemistry and a good chemist comes in.
You will note that on our test the two top products in terms of reflective shine were 18th and 19th out of 25 in resistence to salt water corrosion.
When our DIAMOND PLUS was formulated a few years back this is exactly the test
we used to formulate it to have good shine; durability and corrosion resistence.
Regards
Bud Abraham
Doug Delmont [ PM ]
Re: Zaino Bros.
September 07, 2006 02:07PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 1,031
Bud : I can find no indication in the copy of your test that you provided me that it was conducted by anyone other than your company. I see no lab or other agency named. If I missed it, I apologize. In any case, a test commissioned by you is not an independent test.
You claim you would have no reason to slant the test. How about to boost sales of your product ? I've heard of companies doing exactly that.
Some of the questionable areas of your test are :
1) The use of samples supplied by various detailers. That means that the purity, authenticity, age and condition of the test samples cannot be established.
2) The use of some samples provided without their instructions and the consequent application of these samples contrary to the makers instructions.
Who knows how that might change the results !??
3) The " apples and oranges " testing of one-step products ( cleaner/polish/wax in one bottle ) against pure waxes that are intended to be used after a seperate polish is used.
4) Dependence on a glossometer in spite of Consumer Reports' claim that the glossometer may not indicate what will look glossiest to the human eye.
5) Measuring how well a wax prevents corrosion on bare metal panels may have zero relevance to a wax's performance on vehicle paint.
6) Testing conducted on an old single-stage paint job may not be relevant to use on new clearcoats.
You make it sound as if I am unfairly critical and I resent that. You may have conducted your test as fairly as you could, for all I know. Your motives are not what I question. I reserve the right not to accept the test as valid.
Doug
Bud and I have had some serious flame-ups over his wax test. See excerpts below :
Doug Delmont [ PM ]
Wax Test Fair ?
September 17, 2004 12:56AM
<HTML> Bud described a laboratory study of 25 waxes and sealants in posts on 5/2/04 and 8/8/04 .
From reading his posts, it appears the waxes were applied over bare surfaces and without any accompanying polish or cleaner.
Some of the waxes tested were intended to be used as part of a multi-step process . Unless one uses the prescribed cleaner and polish before applying such products , it is unfair to compare these " pure waxes " to one-step products.
This is a flaw I never allow in my own tests.
Zymol Carbon rated 24th out of 25 waxes for increase in gloss in the lab test cited by Bud . When Consumer Reports tested the Zymol multi-step system , it out-shined all of the one-step products they tested that time.
Unless I'm mistaken , the lab test Bud is endorsing is like comparing pure base motor oil to oil with its additive package .
If I'm wrong, please explain .
Doug</HTML>
waynestowels [ PM ]
Re: Wax Test Fair ?
September 20, 2004 04:29PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 443
<HTML>Maybe we should all get people to "purchase" our advertising in a "creative way", LOL!!!
Looks like someone is trying to "preach" what is best..., AND have you pay cash to read it...., WOW!!! what a plansmiling smiley
I bet all the folks that send out flyers in the newspaper would really love it if we all paid for them instead of it being in their advertising budget and out of their pockets...,
Bud, IMO, is a marketing genius .
Bud Abraham [ PM ]
Re: Wax Test Fair ?
September 20, 2004 07:09PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 3,319
<HTML>Fellas:
What difference does it make whether a test is fair or not fair? Does this really make a difference in the success or failure of your detail business?
Not really, as I pointed out on another posting.
Why waste time discussing things that do not matter. You do not have to pay any attention to the test. You do not have to believe the results and certainly you do not have to buy the product.
So why waste time on such incidential discussions that are not going to help your business.
We did the test to allow detailers to see how a number of products they were using measured up. This was especially done to show that these boutique products like Zymol; Zaino Bros and Klasse were not any better or worse than others being used and certainly were not worth the high prices being asked by these companies.
I have been in the detail business long enough and have enough respect for detailers that I would not even try to sell you on my products based on a test that our company commissioned.
You will buy my products if you want to. You will buy them because another detail says he likes them. You will buy my products if you trust me, not because the product might shown well on a test that I commissioned.
But, I can tell you that the protocols used for the tests were legitimate and accurate.
In any case, I would not waste your time deciding if mine or anyone else's tests are fair or not. Does not make you a single penny.
REgards
Bud Abraham</HTML>
Doug Delmont [ PM ]
Re: Zaino Bros.
September 06, 2006 10:45PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 1,031
Bud : Your test, which I thank you for providing me, was not an independent test but rather was done by your company, using your choice of procedures. You may be about to say that these facts don't mean the test was biased or unfair.
I wonder how you'd feel if Sal Zaino tested your product against his and loudly proclaimed his to be the winner.
What follows is the result of independent testing.
Class, please open your copies of the Guru Report to page 46 and read aloud, " Zaino Brothers Show Car Polish...One single ounce of Z-5 or Z-2 is enough to cover a Chevrolet Suburban, twice...It glides on easily and buffs off without any effort...This stuff is bulletproof. It's simply indestructible , and it laughs at the competition...on our test panel, the Zaino is still beading water...seven months after our first and only application...The stuff is simply amazing...won't stain your trim and won't dry white on your emblems...
Page 41 --Overall rating "A-". Durability "A+". Ease of application "B+". Ease of buffing "A+".... Week 6: ...continuing to blind us with its shine."
www.gurureports.org . Editor's Choice winner.
Doug
buda [ PM ]
Re: Zaino Bros.
September 07, 2006 11:49AM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 3,319
Doug, the test was not conducted by my company, but for my company. There is a difference.
You were able to read the test protocols and determine for yourself if they were biased or not.
There is no reason why I would want to present biased or slanted results, the reason for the test, which was quite expensive to conduct, was to help detailers have some type of standard by which to judge chemicals.
Keep in mind that our company, first and foremost is an equipment systems manufacturer that sells chemicals we know will work in our system.
However, these chemicals are of the highest quality and can be used by any detailer.
In that respect we do not have to slant tests to make our products seem better than any other, plus personally I would not do that, I have to much respect for the industry and those in it to do that.
If Mr Zaino wanted to spend the money to conduct a test by a company other than his, and his protocols were legitimate I would have no problem with that.
Keep in mind that it by setting up tests like were done for this study a chemical company can actually make a product better than any other.
How? Simple, they keep testing their product's reflective shine against others, using a Glossometer until it is more shine than others by adding the appropriate ingredients.
To make it more durable after 12 washings, again they test the refective shine after 12 washings and they add ingredients until the product has a greater reflective shine than others.
Finally they test their product's resistence to salt water corrosion against all others and add ingredients until it is more resistent than others.
It is really quite simple, chemically to do that.
It is all about chemistry and measurements. The test model provides the measurements.
The hardest part is to get any wax or sealant product to have shine; be resistent to soaps and have corrosion resistence. Because the ingredients for each of these features work against each other. That is where good chemistry and a good chemist comes in.
You will note that on our test the two top products in terms of reflective shine were 18th and 19th out of 25 in resistence to salt water corrosion.
When our DIAMOND PLUS was formulated a few years back this is exactly the test
we used to formulate it to have good shine; durability and corrosion resistence.
Regards
Bud Abraham
Doug Delmont [ PM ]
Re: Zaino Bros.
September 07, 2006 02:07PM Registered: 5 years ago
Posts: 1,031
Bud : I can find no indication in the copy of your test that you provided me that it was conducted by anyone other than your company. I see no lab or other agency named. If I missed it, I apologize. In any case, a test commissioned by you is not an independent test.
You claim you would have no reason to slant the test. How about to boost sales of your product ? I've heard of companies doing exactly that.
Some of the questionable areas of your test are :
1) The use of samples supplied by various detailers. That means that the purity, authenticity, age and condition of the test samples cannot be established.
2) The use of some samples provided without their instructions and the consequent application of these samples contrary to the makers instructions.
Who knows how that might change the results !??
3) The " apples and oranges " testing of one-step products ( cleaner/polish/wax in one bottle ) against pure waxes that are intended to be used after a seperate polish is used.
4) Dependence on a glossometer in spite of Consumer Reports' claim that the glossometer may not indicate what will look glossiest to the human eye.
5) Measuring how well a wax prevents corrosion on bare metal panels may have zero relevance to a wax's performance on vehicle paint.
6) Testing conducted on an old single-stage paint job may not be relevant to use on new clearcoats.
You make it sound as if I am unfairly critical and I resent that. You may have conducted your test as fairly as you could, for all I know. Your motives are not what I question. I reserve the right not to accept the test as valid.
Doug
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 06, 2011 10:22PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 585 |
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 07, 2011 12:47AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 07, 2011 05:08AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 1,182 |
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 08, 2011 03:50AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
Doug I am not going to get into a pissing match with you on what you personally think of the study.
The testing protocols are all in the study and the results presented.
If you are challenging my integrity by inferring I would commission such a study to enhance my product that is your choice.
Others can get a FREE copy and decide for themselves.
Regards
Bud Abraham
The testing protocols are all in the study and the results presented.
If you are challenging my integrity by inferring I would commission such a study to enhance my product that is your choice.
Others can get a FREE copy and decide for themselves.
Regards
Bud Abraham
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 10, 2011 01:37PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 1,182 |
Bud-
Not insinuating anything. I simply reprinted some old posts, including your side, which I think was a fair thing to do. Concours raised a valid point, and I made a quip implying that the test might at least help you promote your products .
I'll get over the disappointment of your refusal to reignite the flame war LOL.
Doug
Not insinuating anything. I simply reprinted some old posts, including your side, which I think was a fair thing to do. Concours raised a valid point, and I made a quip implying that the test might at least help you promote your products .
I'll get over the disappointment of your refusal to reignite the flame war LOL.
Doug
|
Re: FREE Sealant & Wax Study November 11, 2011 03:58AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 3,550 |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.