# Crystal Rock available now



## *MAGIC* (Feb 22, 2007)

http://www.detailingbliss.com/forum/f38/introducingpaul-daltons-crystal-rock-wax-1616-40.html

Robbie


----------



## Detail My Ride (Apr 19, 2006)

Cool. Any idea on exact costs Robbie?


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

£500 in a swissvax pot according to paul's post on DB.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> £500 in a swissvax pot according to paul's post on DB.


Lining up against Destiny then... one of *****'s best waxes, it had better be good to hold its head along side it.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Lining up against Destiny then... one of *****'s best waxes, it had better be good to hold its head along side it.


Just used the last of my destiny yesterday on my fathers meteor grey porsche and it really is amazing, i'm switching to zaino from here on in so both zaino and crystal rock have a hell of a lot to live up to IMO!


----------



## visor (Sep 8, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Lining up against Destiny then... one of *****'s best waxes, it had better be good to hold its head along side it.


that would be interesting to see


----------



## Jakedoodles (Jan 16, 2006)

Paul has a LOT at stake if this is not one of the best waxes on the market, and having seen him use it on a Bugatti, I don't doubt for one second it is up there.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Wonderdetail said:


> Paul has a LOT at stake if this is not one of the best waxes on the market, and having seen him use it on a Bugatti, I don't doubt for one second it is up there.


I hope so - would be nice to see it rock the boat of the silly-money waxes  I wonder though, how it stacks up against Zaino...


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

Wonderdetail said:


> Paul has a LOT at stake if this is not one of the best waxes on the market, and having seen him use it on a Bugatti, I don't doubt for one second it is up there.


But who's going to be the judge of how good it is? Wasn't that long ago he was banging on about how fantastic Royale was, then the next thing it was a load of overpriced rubbish.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

I personally feel with the advent of Dodo, Race Glaze, etc i.e. cheap waxes that punch above their price bracket and sealants such as Zaino, both becoming popular, coupled with the hugely increased cost of living, Paul has missed the boat and the crystal rock is going to be a bit of a flop.

This is not my personal opinion or a dig because it is Paul's' wax, but just my observation based on economics...


----------



## Jakedoodles (Jan 16, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> I personally feel with the advent of Dodo, Race Glaze, etc i.e. cheap waxes that punch above their price bracket and sealants such as Zaino, both becoming popular, coupled with the hugely increased cost of living, Paul has missed the boat and the crystal rock is going to be a bit of a flop.
> 
> This is not my personal opinion or a dig because it is Paul's' wax, but just my observation based on economics...


It won't, cos all the yanks will buy it. He's got a lot of fans out there.


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2008)

Good luck to him, hope it sells well.

Lets see if its one of the first waxes to be tested by the forthcoming mag.

Would be nice to see if it gets 10/10/


----------



## A20 LEE (Feb 20, 2007)

A long time coming. Looking forward to seeing it,


----------



## mattyb95 (Apr 21, 2008)

Am new to Detailing, who is he? Also what's this mag you mention?


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

mattyb95 said:


> Am new to Detailing, who is he? Also what's this mag you mention?


Use the search fucntion mate other wise this thread will turn to rat shi!t if everyone starts expressing their opinion!


----------



## br3n (Jul 16, 2007)

rmorgan84 said:


> I personally feel with the advent of Dodo, Race Glaze, etc i.e. cheap waxes that punch above their price bracket and sealants such as Zaino, both becoming popular, coupled with the hugely increased cost of living, Paul has missed the boat and the crystal rock is going to be a bit of a flop.
> 
> This is not my personal opinion or a dig because it is Paul's' wax, but just my observation based on economics...


but when you look at it like this... if he sells half of what hes got (10) he makes 5k, where as dodo at for arguments sake £50 each (somewhere inbetween soft and supernatural) they have to sell 100. the costs to produce are probably very similar so from a business point of view, its a fantastic idea.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

br3n said:


> but when you look at it like this... if he sells half of what hes got (10) he makes 5k, where as dodo at for arguments sake £50 each (somewhere inbetween soft and supernatural) they have to sell 100. the costs to produce are probably very similar so from a business point of view, its a fantastic idea.


But swissvax are manufacturing the wax and he has to pay them what i expect is not a small amount, so he is not making any where near 100% profit!


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> Just used the last of my destiny yesterday on my fathers meteor grey porsche and it really is amazing, i'm switching to zaino from here on in so both zaino and crystal rock have a hell of a lot to live up to IMO!


Crystal rock over zaino is mental.....Especially on white...


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

vxrmarc said:


> Crystal rock over zaino is mental.....Especially on white...


Have you tried Zaino on your mum's porsche yet?


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

I cant actually remember i did a thread but think it was jetseal.....I have a grey aston shortly for a friend so gonna do it on that..


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

rmorgan84 said:


> But swissvax are manufacturing the wax and he has to pay them what i expect is not a small amount, so he is not making any where near 100% profit!


He'll not be involved with the selling - the whole thing is a strategic marketing ploy to have his name on a number of products, as part of his sponsorship package.
Like a band, they'll get a royalty every time a record is sold, but they also get fronted money to pay for the studio, etc.
In this case, fronted money is equated to product supply, and the royalty will be whatever %age he negotiated as part of the contract/deal.

But I'd be more interested in when DaveKG has his signature line of Zaino out, I might try some - but then knowing him, the royalties will be more than 10%, and I'm sorry Dave, but unlike L'Oreal, you're not worth it!


----------



## paddy328 (Mar 4, 2007)

I have seen it being used and have spoken to people who have used it and they say its a fantastic wax. I'll get some one day. Maybe when my divine runs out.


----------



## ZoranC (Jun 9, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> I wonder though, how it stacks up against Zaino...


I am also curious but I would make competition little bit more exciting by stacking it up against Collinite or FK1.

Actually that gives me an idea ...


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> I wonder though, how it stacks up against Zaino...


thats comparing apples with pears, isnt it dave 
and further, crystal rock may be lining up against destiny in terms of price but in terms of quality we're talking about "divine"!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Just because Divine is more expensive doesn't necessarily make it a better wax than say, Best of Show. (I am talking from a technical perspective here).

I would ignore the price and concentrate on the performance. If a product performs well it may be worth the price, whatever that may or may not be.

The interesting thing will be whether it inadvertently kills the market for Divine, as if it establishes itself 'as good or better' than Divine yet less than half the price, it could rock the product range a little. Its biggest enemy will be Best of Show etc.; i.e. a good performing wax from the same stable that costs less money, as the differences in performance with high end LSPs are very slim/subtle/subjective.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Macmini said:


> thats comparing apples with pears, isnt it dave
> and further, crystal rock may be lining up against destiny in terms of price but in terms of quality we're talking about "divine"!


I wouldn't say so... they are both LSPs, both designed to do the same job at the end of the day if we peel away the skin (marketing) and get down to grass roots - the difference being that one uses an natural product (shared with just about every other wax on the market), the other uses man made technology... But the main purpose of both is to protect the paintwork and the underlying finish from polishing and perhaps to _slightly_ infuse their own nuance but its only ever going to be slight... its more like comparing Braeburn to Gala, both apples, subtly different flavour but most of us will just say they taste like apples.

To that end, I'd consider them both simply as LSPs and judge first and foremost the protection and durability offered and secondly the subtle nuance in looks... Zaino has an advantage in the protection stakes: its not limited by a natural raw ingredient. And this does seem to show over the waxes I have (of which Collinite is one), but would be nice to see if Crystal Rock can match or exceed it (in unbiased opinion of course). Looks wise, well, its all too subjective so at the end of the day we'll never be able to say.

I agree with Dom that Crystal Rock's biggest rivals are not from above (Destiny, Divine, Vintage) but from below (Best of Show)... in real world performance terms at least, where say BoS is a superb wax and to better its looks really is going to take a lot of effort from a waxed based LSP... In marketing terms though, Crystal Rock will have a good head start in some circles.

I wish it well, and if its a quality product (which I'm sure it is, Swissvax dont tend to produce rubbish) then it deserves to do well. It would be nice to see it in the flesh, on a car and compare it side by side with other LSPs to see if it can justify its price tag over say BoS or Zaino, but that kind of thing doesn't happen in the wax world... pity really.


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

Dave this statement surprises me...

To that end, I'd consider them both simply as LSPs and judge first and foremost the protection and durability offered and secondly the subtle nuance in looks...

If this was the case surely collonite would be your first choice.....When judgeing a top end wax its sheer looks im after as if i have to reapply after 2 months instead of 6 then the car will always look fantastic in shine , depth and reflection.....To judge a wax firstly on protection seems very strange to me over apperance because if i was dressing a car for concours or a show i would pick the wax that gave me the best appearance not durability or protection...

Just my thoughts Dave no more irrespective of crystal rock or divine etc....


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

vxrmarc said:


> Dave this statement surprises me...
> 
> To that end, I'd consider them both simply as LSPs and judge first and foremost the protection and durability offered and secondly the subtle nuance in looks...
> 
> ...


But Marc, you've just shifted the parameters for basing judgement on!
Dave's not referring to Concours (which is looks only) but everyday, real-world, applications - which is where the longevity and protection element comes into play.
How many jars will be sold purely for Concours, and how many will be bought by pros for business use on their clients' cars, or individuals on their own?
The sole purpose of an LSP is to protect the paintwork beneath it, any improvement over a perfectly polished surface is an added bonus.


----------



## ZoranC (Jun 9, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> I would ignore the price and concentrate on the performance. If a product performs well it may be worth the price, whatever that may or may not be.





Dave KG said:


> ... they are both LSPs, both designed to do the same job at the end of the day ...


Both very *very* strong points.


----------



## baseballlover1 (Sep 25, 2007)

i am a 'yankee' that you spoke about earlier. Despite me living in the south (VA)... and i DO love sweet tea and fried chicken haha. 

Anyways, I am concerned about durability because i am basically trying to duplicate pauls business over here. I want to be the highest of high end and travel around the world detailing cars. I cannot travel back and forth to Kuwait (just a random place :devil to re-apply wax every month or two. And if i am going to charge above 1k for a detail i cannot do it multiple times a year. It would have to be a once a year thing. But if the wax is good enouph for paul... then its good enough for me. anyone know the price point?


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

500 GBP apparently (Swissvax plastic tub version) although Paul was touting the same wax in a Swarovski Tresor container (in a larger quantity) for a lot more.

The interesting point re longevity is that 1) it is unlikely a wax will last beyond 6 months if the car is taken outside and exposed to UV light - especially the levels somewhere in Kuwait - and even 6 weeks may be a good result for a carnauba in some climates. And that 2) what is the point of waxing a car once a year? That basically means one claying of the car per year and if it is actually used, the contaminants picked up by the waxed surface, the yellowing of the wax layer through dirt, and the degredation of the wax layer through UV exposure, will be very high over that length of time. Stripping the wax off, cleansing the paint, claying, then rewaxing it - say, 2 to 4 times a year - would surely be a far better regime for the looks of the car and the durability of the protection.

It's like changing your underpants once a year, LOL. Theoretically possible but hardly an appealing regime. Better to educate the customer how to use a few products or just pop out more regularly for a 'Sheikh 'n' Vac'.


----------



## trhland (Sep 22, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> 500 GBP apparently (Swissvax plastic tub version) although Paul was touting the same wax in a Swarovski Tresor container (in a larger quantity) for a lot more.
> 
> The interesting point re longevity is that 1) it is unlikely a wax will last beyond 6 months if the car is taken outside and exposed to UV light - especially the levels somewhere in Kuwait - and even 6 weeks may be a good result for a carnauba in some climates. And that 2) what is the point of waxing a car once a year? That basically means one claying of the car per year and if it is actually used, the contaminants picked up by the waxed surface, the yellowing of the wax layer through dirt, and the degredation of the wax layer through UV exposure, will be very high over that length of time. Stripping the wax off, cleansing the paint, claying, then rewaxing it - say, 2 to 4 times a year - would surely be a far better regime for the looks of the car and the durability of the protection.
> 
> It's like changing your underpants once a year, LOL. Theoretically possible but hardly an appealing regime. Better to educate the customer how to use a few products or just pop out more regularly for a 'Sheikh 'n' Vac'.


very well said!!


----------



## swiftshine (Apr 17, 2008)

So is anyone buying it then?
Have to say the results I saw were pretty impressive.:devil:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

vxrmarc said:


> Dave this statement surprises me...
> 
> To that end, I'd consider them both simply as LSPs and judge first and foremost the protection and durability offered and secondly the subtle nuance in looks...
> 
> ...


Not really surprising, simply different perspectives. As PJS has said, the purpose of the LSP is to protect the finish underneath as at the end of the day... let us be honest, no wax or any LSP is going to transform a finish, it'll add a subtle nuance and that is is - no matter how much it costs. I will spend many hours machine polishing and that is where the finish comes from, all I want from the wax is to protect it as at the end of the day, I see little addition to looks from waxes - again, just me. Zaino is the only LSP that has really offered me something extra and thats comparing to seriously expensive waxes... So in terms of looks, I will machine polish to get them, and just protect with a wax. Really and honestly, do you think two cars prepped to perfection would really show a difference between say Crystal Rock and #16? Would 99% of the population spot the difference?

I guess I am just cynical about the whole expensive wax thing, having been down that road and ultimately not been rewarded by it - looks wise, they offer little if anything more than cheaper waxes.

If you feel that the wax is adding to the finish, then for certain it is worthwhile to judge it on this... but as I dont feel it is, its not relevant for me to be judging that first and foremost so I dont. What is relevant to me is protection... and as PJS has also said, not every car and indeed very few are show concours cars for me: I work on real world working cars where protection of the underlying finish is paramount, and I can get the looks from polishing, so protection is where I focus my thoughts... Which is why, as you eluded to, Collinite falls very near the top of my choices as does Zaino


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> I wouldn't say so... they are both LSPs, both designed to do the same job at the end of the day...


true, but one is a wax and the other one is a sealant and there indeed are differences (lookwise) between waxes and sealants which definitely can be observed in the finish of each product!
personally i'd say that your favorite Collinite 476 is a great and durable wax which beads like bloody hell, but to me thats about it and there are a lot of waxes on the market (i am not specifically referring to sv and zymöl waxes) which offer a lot more than just a nice beading and a good look


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Macmini said:


> true, but one is a wax and the other one is a sealant and there indeed are differences (lookwise) between waxes and sealants which definitely can be observed in the finish of each product!
> personally i'd say that your favorite Collinite 476 is a great and durable wax which beads like bloody hell, but to me thats about it and there are a lot of waxes on the market (i am not specifically referring to sv and zymöl waxes) which offer a lot more than just a nice beading and a good look


But are there _really_ big differences, honestly? I've tried this at a few meets, preparing a panel to the best I can machine polish wise and then doing a blind 50/50 expensive vs. cheap wax test - and nobody can really tell the difference, least of all tell me what wax was used. I couldn't spot the difference myself between Concours and Nattys one meet!! To me, this just points to the final look generated by a wax being little or nothing more than the polished finish, in my experience of use of the waxes.

I'm not just laying into expensive waxes because I fell like it, I genuinely believe that there is no real tenable difference between say Collinite 476S and say ***** Concours if the prep is right. Subtle subtle nuances perhaps, but ultimately, in real world terms, naught to choose. So that means that to me, the purpose of an LSP is simply protection and nothing more and to that end, there is no difference between waxes and sealents job wise - they are both designed to do the same thing, difference being one is man made, the other natural. Thats what I am getting at with my previous comments.

I'm all for prepping two identical cars and topping one with say Collinite and the other Vintage and seeing truly, in a blind test, who can tell which car had what wax. I'd love to see that done, really I would, because I reckon I know what the results would be... which is why it'll never be done alas.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> I'm all for prepping two identical cars and topping one with say Collinite and the other Vintage and seeing truly, in a blind test, who can tell which car had what wax. I'd love to see that done, really I would, because I reckon I know what the results would be... which is why it'll never be done alas.


Certainly nothing more than the statistical average - you'd have a 50% chance of guessing which was wearing what.
Better to involve a 3rd car, and then you'd see a truer reflection - no pun intended.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> So that means that to me, the purpose of an LSP is simply protection and nothing more and to that end, there is no difference between waxes and sealents job wise - they are both designed to do the same thing, difference being one is man made, the other natural.


I agree with you there, Dave - both are LSPS which should protect the paint, but a nice carnuba wax will always look different on a well prepared surface than a sealant thats the main difference to me. Your favorite Zaino will leave a "sharper" maybe "edgier" finish whereas a nice nuba will give a "warm" and "glossier" one. 
Which one of these you fancy more is up to you, but I think - to come back to my initial statement - when you want to compare or find out how crystal rock stacks up against Zaino you should stay in the range/segment of sealants (which Zaino is) and compare it with lets say Jetseal or whatever.
I have seen a short HD quality video sequence of the finish CR gave on a Porsche 997 which is absolutely impressive and really speaks for the quality of this wax.


----------



## paddy328 (Mar 4, 2007)

I bet you will be buying some to add to your collection mate.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

I have to agree 100% with what Dave KG said, basically i don't think that in a blind trial anyone would tell the difference and for this reason i can't see how alot of waxes justify their massive price tags. 

I used to swear by using a nuba based wax as a LSP however i've recently been using AG EGP and i have to say i find it easier/quicker to apply and i find the finish fantastic, and this is from a sealant that is of a very low price tag, i've also heard great things about jetseal109 and think that i'll try that next time. 

Personally i would never spend £500 + quid on a tub of wax, not because i couldn't but in my mind i can't see what i'd be getting that was better for my money, apart from a nice pot??


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

paddy328 said:


> I bet you will be buying some to add to your collection mate.


it might be a substitute for my first divine pot that comes to an end pretty soon


----------



## paddy328 (Mar 4, 2007)

I there was anyone on here that i thought would buy some, it would be you. I too am going to get some at some point.


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Macmini said:


> I agree with you there, Dave - both are LSPS which should protect the paint, but a nice carnuba wax will always look different on a well prepared surface than a sealant thats the main difference to me. Your favorite Zaino will leave a "sharper" maybe "edgier" finish whereas a nice nuba will give a "warm" and "glossier" one.


Well I can't see it then.

In all honesty, I have seen Vintage applied and applied it myself to a nicely polished panel and you know I can tell absolutely no difference the first day.

I remember watching one of the Zym ol chaps apply Vintage to a newly polished panel and as soon as he buffed off, all the people were proclaiming, wow that is amazing, it looks great etc.

I kept my mouth shut because I could not perceive any enhancement at all.

After a day I believe I can see a depth increase in the paint and it looks nice, I also feel the same way when I used Best of Show, nothing for me immediately but a subtle enhancement the next day.

Zaino delivers more for me immediately after I have applied the second layer and the day after it also looks better.

All in all I fall down on the Dave KG side of things, I just cannot see enough enhancement to spend much over £100 these days on an LSP.


----------



## visor (Sep 8, 2007)

same here for BoS and Destiny nothing on the 1st day but 2nd i could see a difference.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Macmini said:


> I agree with you there, Dave - both are LSPS which should protect the paint, but a nice carnuba wax will always look different on a well prepared surface than a sealant thats the main difference to me. Your favorite Zaino will leave a "sharper" maybe "edgier" finish whereas a nice nuba will give a "warm" and "glossier" one.
> Which one of these you fancy more is up to you, but I think - to come back to my initial statement - when you want to compare or find out how crystal rock stacks up against Zaino you should stay in the range/segment of sealants (which Zaino is) and compare it with lets say Jetseal or whatever.
> I have seen a short HD quality video sequence of the finish CR gave on a Porsche 997 which is absolutely impressive and really speaks for the quality of this wax.


As with Neil, I cannot really perceive a lack of gloss of warmth to the Zaino finish over a 'nuba one. Indeed, the glassy gloss nuance of Zaino is what struck me over every other LSP - its the only one that really offered something to the eye over the well prepped finish, but again this something is every so slight. But unlike near every other LSP I have tried, at least it was there. This is why I have singled it out. Regardless of what it is made of, it should rightly be compared to any other LSP on the market. Splitting into sealents and waxes, I cannot understand why one would wish to do that, as with my afore mentioned comments they are designed to do exactly the same job. You dont split shampoos up because one is a wash and wax, the other is a wash and seal and the other is a wash... they are all shampoos. And the same is true for sealents and waxes, they are all LSPs. There's not two tiers to it - they are all designed for the same purpose, so should be considered alongside each other... is my take on it at least, and to that end I will always consider them all together, sealents and waxes, and compare them with each other. As when finishing polishing and prepping, I reach for an LSP - what its made of, I care not. What it does, I care more about.

The only test for me really for any LSP, of which Crystal Rock or Zaino are both examples, will be how well they protect the paint - how long do they last... And for looks, I would need to see two identically prepped cars side by side to really be able to comment. Which would be great, I mean I would happily do all the prep work on two identical cars myself over however long it took me to allow this test to happen - all I need is a location and the cars!



Tyrrell said:


> I have to agree 100% with what Dave KG said, basically i don't think that in a blind trial anyone would tell the difference and for this reason *i can't see how alot of waxes justify their massive price tags.*
> 
> I used to swear by using a nuba based wax as a LSP however i've recently been using AG EGP and i have to say i find it easier/quicker to apply and i find the finish fantastic, and this is from a sealant that is of a very low price tag, i've also heard great things about jetseal109 and think that i'll try that next time.
> 
> Personally i would never spend £500 + quid on a tub of wax, not because i couldn't but in my mind i can't see what i'd be getting that was better for my money, apart from a nice pot??


Considering performance alone here, they can't quite simply. As you have found. And quasi-blind trials have showed this consistently at meets - but as above, I'd love to perform a full scale blind test and as PJS has suggested, three cars involved: one with say Crystal Rock, one with Collinite, one with Zaino and then play spot the difference. The results would be a real eye opener I reckon, and lift the veil on the LSP part of detailing and prove once and for all just what the differences are.

However, if we stray away from performance of product and on to, let us say "bragging rights", then we see one advantage the more expensive waxes have... Thats rather cynical of me of course, and the nicer side would also be keen to point out the "feel good factor" of having expensive waxes, many people really enjoy them and all credit to them. They have disillusioned me personally, but then that is just me, and it has simply shaped my views and methods in the world of detailing.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

PJS said:


> Certainly nothing more than the statistical average - you'd have a 50% chance of guessing which was wearing what.
> Better to involve a 3rd car, and then you'd see a truer reflection - no pun intended.


I just need the cars and a location, as this is a test I'd love to do... but will the results from it be taken at face value, or will those with a vested interest find all the little holes to pick in it? Will anyone believe them?


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> I just need the cars and a location, as this is a test I'd love to do... but will the results from it be taken at face value, or will those with a vested interest find all the little holes to pick in it? Will anyone believe them?


Dave you're more than welcome to do the 'Litmus test' on site here. Might be a little to far for you to come down though?


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

stargazer said:


> Dave you're more than welcome to do the 'Litmus test' on site here. Might be a little to far for you to come down though?


Oh I'm willing to travel to do a test like this! 

Just need the cars...


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> Oh I'm willing to travel to do a test like this!
> 
> Just need the cars...


I don't mind you using my BMW just as long as you put Crystal Rock on there :lol:


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Dave KG- I stand firm with you on this one, i would love to see you lift the vail on this part of detailing, because i absolutly hate it !!! 

I would love to see if Mr Dalton is confident in his product and see if he could tell which car was wearing his wax??? This would be good wouldn't it, if he declines an offer to be a judge in the competition it wouldn't say much for his own confidence in his product would it ? 

Dave KG you need to organise a DW test and invite Dalton to be a judge it would be great!!!


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Hot off the press

http://www.swissvax.co.uk/


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

stargazer said:


> I don't mind you using my BMW just as long as you put Crystal Rock on there :lol:


:lol: Just need to find two identically mint E30s in the same colour...

I reckon it'll need three practically new cars, in either dark red or black etc as these are the colour folks claim the biggest differences on... I reckon getting that would be dreaming, but a dealer would get three of their cars prepped for them...? :lol:


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> :lol: Just need to find two identically mint E30s in the same colour...
> 
> I reckon it'll need three practically new cars, in either dark red or black etc as these are the colour folks claim the biggest differences on... I reckon getting that would be dreaming, but a dealer would get three of their cars prepped for them...? :lol:


Was worth a try Dave


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> I would love to see if Mr Dalton is confident in his product and see if he could tell which car was wearing his wax??? This would be good wouldn't it, if he declines an offer to be a judge in the competition it wouldn't say much for his own confidence in his product would it ?
> 
> Dave KG you need to organise a DW test and invite Dalton to be a judge it would be great!!!


Like that would ever happen.

An anology i like is, how people used to perceive motor oil when fully synthetic oil (sealants) first came onto the market, everyone was saying NO NO we must stick with mineral oil (nuba waxes), where as now who would dream of putting mineral oil in their car?

Nuba is old school technology whereas sealants are the future :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

drive 'n' shine said:


> Like that would ever happen.
> 
> An anology i like is, how people used to perceive motor oil when fully synthetic oil (sealants) first came onto the market, everyone was saying NO NO we must stick with mineral oil (nuba waxes), where as now who would dream of putting mineral oil in their car?
> 
> Nuba is old school technology whereas sealants are the future :thumb:


:lol: I doubt very much he would want to judge such a test... prob doesn't have the time anyway... But such a test could be done, if enough people wanted to and were willing to help organise it, although as I said above, those with a vested interest would quickly try to rubbish any such test.


----------



## paddy328 (Mar 4, 2007)

I bet you could organise a few black ranges to do the test on. There seems to be enough about.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

paddy328 said:


> I bet you could organise a few black ranges to do the test on. There seems to be enough about.


Yeah thats true - but do you know how much trouble I have getting to the middle of bonnets and roofs on them?! :lol::lol:


----------



## paddy328 (Mar 4, 2007)

lol. you could rig up some kind of pulley system or just get bry to do it


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

paddy328 said:


> lol. you could rig up some kind of pulley system or just get bry to do it


Well, for yesterday's range over, I just got Bryan to do it... but now you mention a pulley system, I think it would be quite funny to be dangling from a building roof machine polishing! :lol:


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Well, for yesterday's range over, I just got Bryan to do it... but now you mention a pulley system, I think it would be quite funny to be dangling from a building roof machine polishing! :lol:


The mission impossible scene springs to mind with tom cruise abseiling in from the ventilation vent:lol:


----------



## RaceGlazer (Jan 10, 2007)

A couple of random thoughts...

1. You don't get a flash container for your £500 with this product, yet do for even Mystery, so thats likely to look more impressive if bling on the shelf is your thing

2. PD will only receive a very small part of the sales value, its SV who will be making by far the lions share of the money. It is therefore they who have to convince the market as they have most to gain. So their future advertising will be interesting...

3. In the non-DW world, where people who have seriously expensive cars, and like to wax them, and can be persuaded to use a pre-wax and even clay soemtimes, they don't / won't machine polish themselves, so are looking / expecting the wax to procure the shine. Perhaps therefore the carnuba content argument will wash more strongly with them, who have the deepest pockets, than DW types who know its mostly in the prep. This is therefore their target market in my view. But PDs name means nothing to most of them unless they refer to him as the '5 grand valet' man, who used Zym0l.....

4. Most people I speak to in the trade don't have such an exalted opinion of the man so can't see them rushing out to buy his signature product. If you don't do interiors, how can it be a proper job ?

I'll be fascinated to see who buys this first and admits to it on here...I have a shortlist which I'm keeping to myself...might even open a private book on it...


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

I think another analogy is that its like painting a panel 95% of getting a good finish is in th prep (polishing) and the other 5% is the painting(LSP) if your prep is crap you wont get a good finish. 

Basically i think dave KG will agree that its the polishing that is the important bit, the LSP just helps protect it. With this product i doubt you get anymore protection from 'Crystal Rock' than you would from the £20 bottle of AG EGP that i use, if fact from a users point of view i find using a sealant far easier than using wax.

Oh and dave kg i fully agree with you analogy of oils, its exactly the same scenario.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> I think another analogy is that its like painting a panel 95% of getting a good finish is in th prep (polishing) and the other 5% is the painting(LSP) if your prep is crap you wont get a good finish.
> 
> Basically i think dave KG will agree that its the polishing that is the important bit, the LSP just helps protect it. With this product i doubt you get anymore protection from 'Crystal Rock' than you would from the £20 bottle of AG EGP that i use, if fact from a users point of view i find using a sealant far easier than using wax.
> 
> Oh and dave kg i fully agree with you analogy of oils, its exactly the same scenario.


What I believe - its the prep, and the wax is for protection and any subtle nuance you get, and they are mighty subtle, is a bonus 

The oil anaology was drive 'n shine's though, and a good analogy it is too :thumb:


----------



## THUG (Mar 21, 2008)

In reply to the previous comments I am with the Miracle that is Paul Dalton right this minute sat in his facility whilst he carries out the Miracle that is Swissvax Crystal Rock on my X5 having carried out a similar job with Royale 6 months ago for me he simply is the best and this new wax is the Dog's the car always was commented on before at Shows I am sure this Sunday it will draw even more top remarks.


----------



## swordjo (Sep 17, 2006)

THUG said:


> In reply to the previous comments I am with the Miracle that is Paul Dalton right this minute sat in his facility whilst he carries out the Miracle that is Swissvax Crystal Rock on my X5 having carried out a similar job with Royale 6 months ago for me he simply is the best and this new wax is the Dog's the car always was commented on before at Shows I am sure this Sunday it will draw even more top remarks.


So you think you will notice the difference between the Royale and this new wax then?

You will probably find that the comments would be down the to the great prep work i'm sure he does (as Dave KG has said on many occasions), you could probably stick a coat of budget wax on and not be able to tell the difference fully in real world terms.


----------



## visor (Sep 8, 2007)

nice1, any pic?


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

THUG said:


> In reply to the previous comments I am with the Miracle that is Paul Dalton right this minute sat in his facility whilst he carries out the Miracle that is Swissvax Crystal Rock on my X5 having carried out a similar job with Royale 6 months ago for me he simply is the best and this new wax is the Dog's the car always was commented on before at Shows I am sure this Sunday it will draw even more top remarks.


Would you say the finish is deeper?, glossier?, wetter?, shinier?, more reflective?

I'm interesting in the particular nuiance this wax is leaning towards

cheers Jon


----------



## paddy328 (Mar 4, 2007)

pm glyn. He was using the pre production version at swiss uk.


----------



## THUG (Mar 21, 2008)

Epoch said:


> Would you say the finish is deeper?, glossier?, wetter?, shinier?, more reflective?
> 
> I'm interesting in the particular nuiance this wax is leaning towards
> 
> cheers Jon


Crystal rock produces a more wetter glassy look over the Royale, with deeper and clearer reflections. :thumb:


----------



## paddy328 (Mar 4, 2007)

what about compared to divine?


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

THUG said:


> Crystal rock produces a more wetter glassy look over the Royale, with deeper and clearer reflections. :thumb:


Thanks

It will be interesting to see this, as traditionally the pure glassy look is the domain of optically clear sealant type LSP's (Zaino for example) however they tend to loose some of the depth and wetness because of this.


----------



## THUG (Mar 21, 2008)

Epoch said:


> Thanks
> 
> It will be interesting to see this, as traditionally the pure glassy look is the domain of optically clear sealant type LSP's (Zaino for example) however they tend to loose some of the depth and wetness because of this.


No loss in depth with Crystal rock, its a lot more clearer than the Royale.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

paddy328 said:


> what about compared to divine?


I'd say Devine offered a much deeper look to Royale.

So maybe the Crystal rock has given some of the depth to add the glassy refective look.

We shall see


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

THUG said:


> In reply to the previous comments I am with the Miracle that is Paul Dalton right this minute sat in his facility whilst he carries out the Miracle that is Swissvax Crystal Rock on my X5 having carried out a similar job with Royale 6 months ago for me he simply is the best and this new wax is the Dog's the car always was commented on before at Shows I am sure this Sunday it will draw even more top remarks.


My god you really love him !! lol. How is wax a miracle ??

I'm sure he does a great job, i'm not denying that PD is a great detailer but i'm sorry polishing is what makes things shiney, coating things (wax) protects them maybe adding a little depth in shine to a already polished surface.

If i'm wrong and CR really is a miracle and makes unpolished surfaces look polished then i'll buy a tub, but if as i suspect its no better than any other sealant/wax and just protects your polished paint then i'll stick to AG EGP.

Post some pics of you X5 when its done, i'd be interested to see it.


----------



## THUG (Mar 21, 2008)

RaceGlazer said:


> A couple of random thoughts...
> 
> 1. You don't get a flash container for your £500 with this product, yet do for even Mystery, so thats likely to look more impressive if bling on the shelf is your thing
> 
> ...


Why do you think he doesn't do interiors? Of course he does interiors, on nearly all the cars he details.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

THUG said:


> No loss in depth with Crystal rock, its a lot more clearer than the Royale.


That's the interest for me, the higher the carnauba (having a natural hugh itself) inherently the more difficult it is to achieve the pure clarity.

Devine achieves this by leaving a VERY thin layer due to it's natural hardness in resting state and the evaporants used.

I doubt pictures will show the differences so i'll have to see if for myself


----------



## swordjo (Sep 17, 2006)

here we go again....


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> My god you really love him !! lol. How is wax a miracle ??
> 
> I'm sure he does a great job, i'm not denying that PD is a great detailer but i'm sorry polishing is what makes things shiney, coating things (wax) protects them maybe adding a little depth in shine to a already polished surface.
> 
> ...


I personally think you will need to see the car in the flesh. Photo's are difficult to determine a car's true finish


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

swordjo said:


> here we go again....










....:lol:


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> My god you really love him !! lol. How is wax a miracle ??
> 
> I'm sure he does a great job, i'm not denying that PD is a great detailer but i'm sorry polishing is what makes things shiney, coating things (wax) protects them maybe adding a little depth in shine to a already polished surface.
> 
> ...





stargazer said:


> I personally think you will need to see the car in the flesh. Photo's are difficult to determine a car's true finish


Spot on, pictures will and do not show the true state of paint let alone the subtle effect of an LSP.



swordjo said:


> here we go again....


As you say probably better to use this thread to discuss the wax rather than the "always ends in a slanging match" topic Miracle


----------



## clintmarcel (Mar 12, 2007)

RE: The identical car test, why not approach a large dealer where there is a strong likelyhood there will be identical cars in stock? I saw two black A4s at my local Audi garage last weekend (only difference being the badges on the rear)

I'm more than confident they'd accept such a proposal.

All you have to do now is get your hands on a pot of CR......


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> My god you really love him !! lol. How is wax a miracle ??
> 
> I'm sure he does a great job, i'm not denying that PD is a great detailer but i'm sorry polishing is what makes things shiney, coating things (wax) protects them maybe adding a little depth in shine to a already polished surface.
> 
> ...


As above, it really is all in the machine prep work, the LSP adds little extra - just by virtue of the fact that at the end of the day, the amount of whatever is in it (carnauba wax, that old chesnut, shared with just about every other wax on the market in varying quantities) left on the paint is tiny and very thin... Physically speaking, its nigh on impossible for a thin layer to create a macroscopic optical effect along the lines of what is often claimed. I stress this simply represents my opinion, for what it is worth. 

I'd like to see a wax change this, but I just dont see it happen, regardless of how state of the art or big a miracle it may be... have to see it in the flesh, and ultimately, the full car test and spot the difference must be carried out to prove unequivocally by experiement the true effects of waxes - as to be completely honest, there's so much marketing and spin surrounding them these days that the veil really has to be lifted and the claims proven either way by hard fact. Come on, lets organise this test, lets see it happen!  If there are huge differences and manufacturers of LSPs are confident of this, then this test will only serve to prove this and justify their products... if not, well... we'll see, eh 



clintmarcel said:


> RE: The identical car test, why not approach a large dealer where there is a strong likelyhood there will be identical cars in stock? I saw two black A4s at my local Audi garage last weekend (only difference being the badges on the rear)
> 
> I'm more than confident they'd accept such a proposal.
> 
> All you have to do now is get your hands on a pot of CR......


Its what I am hoping, and with enough backing and support to make a test like this happen then I'm sure we could get two or three equivalent cars to do a detail on - just needs to be same car and colour, other specs are largely irrelevant.

I'm willing to dedicate a week of my time to this (if someone helps chips in for my hotel bill if I do this away from home), a summer holiday for me to answer a burning question about LSPs and see once and for all, just what there is behind it


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> Physically speaking, its nigh on impossible for a thin layer to create a macroscopic optical effect along the lines of what is often claimed. I stress this simply represents my opinion, for what it is worth.
> 
> I'd like to see a wax change this, but I just dont see it happen, regardless of how state of the art or big a miracle it may be...


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Epoch said:


>


:lol: :thumb:


----------



## swordjo (Sep 17, 2006)

but that be a polish.. not a wax :lol:


----------



## Gandi (Dec 18, 2007)

swordjo said:


> but that be a polish.. not a wax :lol:


I must see the rest of you Avatar


----------



## swordjo (Sep 17, 2006)

Gandi said:


> I must see the rest of you Avatar


thats for swordjo's eyes only :thumb:


----------



## Gandi (Dec 18, 2007)

swordjo said:


> thats for swordjo's eyes only :thumb:


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

swordjo said:


> thats for swordjo's eyes only :thumb:


Please let me have a look at them....Just a few more seconds, pleaseeee?? I'll swap you for some CR? :lol::lol:


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> I just need the cars and a location, as this is a test I'd love to do... but will the results from it be taken at face value, or will those with a vested interest find all the little holes to pick in it? Will anyone believe them?


If you were to put it to the test using average members of the public as well as those who detail, then yes.
Bear in mind, all cars would need to be the same colour for the test to be fair, and to expand on that further, if you had 3 further sets of cars of different colours, inc. white for example, it'd be interesting to see whether the light vs dark aspect changes anything, or if the statistics are no better than random chance (guessing), which in effect, is what everyone will be doing.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Yeah thats true - but do you know how much trouble I have getting to the middle of bonnets and roofs on them?! :lol::lol:


To be fair, you'd really only need the bonnet, wings, boot, and 1/4 panels done.
Areas where the light would hit at various angles, otherwise a couple of scrap panels sprayed up would serve as the test bed.


----------



## L200 Steve (Oct 25, 2005)

Nice one for Paul, well done mate.


----------



## Jakedoodles (Jan 16, 2006)

To be honest - the fact that it's Paul Dalton means bot all to me. I mean that in the sense that, if it's a good wax, it's a good wax. And bare in mind Swissvax have developed it, not Paul, and they are *proper* good at making waxes. Paul has has his input, and has been there along the whole process doing testing etc, but he doesn't have a lab in his living room, and ultimately this is a swissvax product. I have no doubts at all it will be very very good. What sort of nutter would do a bugatti with a wax that wasn't top notch?! 

I won't be buying it though - cos I'm going to make my own, and it will contain 101% carnauba; the most of any wax ever. You 'll get the wax, and a packet containing 20g of carnauba flakes. Simply put the wax on, then apply the additional %age of carnauba to your tongue and lick the paintwork. It'll be amaaaazin. You just wait. I will be the king of the wax world.


----------



## visor (Sep 8, 2007)

Wonderdetail said:


> I won't be buying it though - cos I'm going to make my own, and it will contain 101% carnauba; the most of any wax ever. You 'll get the wax, and a packet containing 20g of carnauba flakes. Simply put the wax on, then apply the additional %age of carnauba to your tongue and lick the paintwork. It'll be amaaaazin. You just wait. I will be the king of the wax world.


nice 1 Paul looking forward to it :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

PJS said:


> To be fair, you'd really only need the bonnet, wings, boot, and 1/4 panels done.
> Areas where the light would hit at various angles, otherwise a couple of scrap panels sprayed up would serve as the test bed.


Yeah, though I was thinking of just doing a full car for each one so folks can peer and look and see any panel or angle they want... I want to make the test as open as possible, as strong as possible...


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> Yeah, though I was thinking of just doing a full car for each one so folks can peer and look and see any panel or angle they want... I want to make the test as open as possible, as strong as possible...


I think if this test comes about it be very interesting indeed. 'The ultimate wax test'. Just think Dave you'll be re-writing the history book of detailing!


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Yeah, though I was thinking of just doing a full car for each one so folks can peer and look and see any panel or angle they want... I want to make the test as open as possible, as strong as possible...


I would imagine that any garage would be happy to have 3 of their cars proffessionally detailed saving them £000's ??

TBH what about asking a manufacturer that has already got test houses if the can already lift the vail?? I'm sure that AG could answer all our questions on the subject of LSP ??? but saying that i suppose none of them would want to risk telling the complete truth.

I personally find the concept simple to understand-

polishing makes your surface shiney 
LSP protects it

How undifficult is that ????


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

stargazer said:


> I think if this test comes about it be very interesting indeed. 'The ultimate wax test'. Just think Dave you'll be re-writing the history book of detailing!


Also he would be saving people from spending loads of cash.

This whole expensive wax thing is just a marketing thing, people assume that if something is really expensive and has the right label its really good, i'd put money on the fact that if someone got all hyped up and sold on having a new LSP on there car but unbeknown to them the detailer actually put on some cheap wax, they would never know the difference and would also faunicate over how wonderful it is, they would never know the difference and thats because you can't tell.

The simple fact of the matter is with LSP you can't possibly tell what LSP a car has on it by looking, in my mind the only thing that can differeciate LSP's could be durability, but has anyone ever tested them for durability???, also i don't really know how you could do a fair test.

Just my veiw.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

stargazer said:


> I think if this test comes about it be very interesting indeed. 'The ultimate wax test'. Just think Dave you'll be re-writing the history book of detailing!


Particularly if T Cut by hand followed by Simoniz Paste wax is the unanimus favourite :lol:

How about we make this slightly more competive

If you want to go and be part you have to pay £20, the money raised pays for two or three "top" detailers to attend and polish using their favourite/prefered/signature brands.

100 people pays £2k which should be enough and a great meet, the option to watch the "best" at work

Blind vote after the polishing and then a second blind vote after the wax application 

Two results.

Or

Pay one guy to polish all three using the same techniques and products (I know Dave has offered but it does cost him petrol etc anyway) and then put the rest of the money into buying the waxes. The people who bought tickets can then all be in a draw to win the waxes bought.

1 an a 100 or 1 in 50 if two bought etc chance of winning a top wax isn't bad odds


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Epoch said:


> Particularly if T Cut by hand followed by Simoniz Paste wax is the unanimus favourite :lol:
> 
> How about we make this slightly more competive
> 
> ...


The reason I suggested one person doing all of the polishing (and I am more than happy to do this for a contribution towards my diesel costs, none of this petrol rubbish :lol is to cancel out the variable that is the final polishes result... if all the cars look the same after polishing, done by the same detailer then that means that there can be no argument over one car having a better or worse preparation than the other for the wax to go on...

I really think if folk were willing to give this a go, then it has the potential to be a cracking test and one that will allow those to draw their own conclusions from it... naturally, there will always be the doubters who will rubbish such a test with various intriguing arguments about its flaws... fair enough, but I would openly present the exact processes and after folk have voted, the waxes or sealents used and then people can make their own decisions based on the evidence presented to them... I dont intend to draw hard and fast conclusions and say them as gospel, but rather give folks the opportunity to judge for themselves seeing cars in the flesh


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

Why isnt this test done say the day before a national dw meet or large county meet and then marks cars A and B and get everyone who turns up to vote on the best looking vehicle....

Surely that is proof in the pudding through the iris.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Cool Dave i thought i could be two birds with one stone on the "whose the best finisher" etc

Save me having to risk choosing whose going to do my car next seeing as Steve is very busy with work at the moment


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> The reason I suggested one person doing all of the polishing (and I am more than happy to do this for a contribution towards my diesel costs, none of this petrol rubbish :lol is to cancel out the variable that is the final polishes result... if all the cars look the same after polishing, done by the same detailer then that means that there can be no argument over one car having a better or worse preparation than the other for the wax to go on...
> 
> I really think if folk were willing to give this a go, then it has the potential to be a cracking test and one that will allow those to draw their own conclusions from it... naturally, there will always be the doubters who will rubbish such a test with various intriguing arguments about its flaws... fair enough, but I would openly present the exact processes and after folk have voted, the waxes or sealents used and then people can make their own decisions based on the evidence presented to them... I dont intend to draw hard and fast conclusions and say them as gospel, but rather give folks the opportunity to judge for themselves seeing cars in the flesh


Its sounds brilliant.

It would be the best test ever, i think that it'll **** of certain manufacturers, and would open peoples eyes, you should see if you can get sponsership from one off dodo juice as there products are resonably priced it would actually benefit their business.

It would be one of the best write ups ever!!!

can't wait !!


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> , you should see if you can get sponsership from one off dodo juice as there products are resonably priced it would actually benefit their business.
> !!


Might be a little less than impartial though

The might of DW is the sponser


----------



## dominic84 (Jan 27, 2007)

It's clear that an LSP isn't going to make much difference to paintwork that has been polished to an almost mirror finish but that doesn't seem like a 'real word' test to me. 

The reason I say that is because you would expect an LSP to have little effect in such a situation but I would imagine the difference between LSP's on paintwork that has just been polished with SRP for example to be relatively enormous.

The example that springs to mind is EGP, which when Polycharged and applied to paintwork that hasn’t been polished to a mirror finish is substantially more glossy than EGP alone.

Therefore I would like to see how different waxes fair against each other on paintwork that has been finished to a more 'common' standard.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

dominic84 said:


> It's clear that an LSP isn't going to make much difference to paintwork that has been polished to an almost mirror finish but that doesn't seem like a 'real word' test to me.
> 
> The reason I say that is because you would expect an LSP to have little effect in such a situation but I would imagine the difference between LSP's on paintwork that has just been polished with SRP for example to be relatively enormous.
> 
> ...


I think that you might be missing the point.

The argument is that you can't tell the difference between LSP's as its the polishing stage that creates the finish not LSP.

LSP simply protects the polished surface.

The point of the test is to prove that LSP's can't be told apart and therefore don't warrant GIGANTIC price tags.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

dominic84 said:


> It's clear that an LSP isn't going to make much difference to paintwork that has been polished to an almost mirror finish but that doesn't seem like a 'real word' test to me.
> 
> The reason I say that is because you would expect an LSP to have little effect in such a situation but I would imagine the difference between LSP's on paintwork that has just been polished with SRP for example to be relatively enormous.
> 
> ...


In which case there is likely to be scope for two tests....

But the main aim of my initial idea is to seriously see what the additions to a perfectly polished finish are, as many claims suggest big differences made by certain brands of waxes, and I would love to see once and for all whether or not there is any substance to these claims. Or whether it really is all in the prep...

Anyway, I apollogise to the OP here as I have dragged this thread heavily off topic so I will create my own thread now and see if we can get this organised as a serious test for the summer, and as mark suggests in the lead up to a big detailing meet to get the results out to as wide an audience as possible.


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

I can see what some of you chaps are thinking, but at the end of the day, some people will always be able to tell a difference and some won't, it is just opinion, and because 32 out of 45 people say one car looks better, doesn't mean that the other 13 are wrong, it just means they appreciate different facets of the finish.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> In which case there is likely to be scope for two tests....
> 
> But the main aim of my initial idea is to seriously see what the additions to a perfectly polished finish are, as many claims suggest big differences made by certain brands of waxes, and I would love to see once and for all whether or not there is any substance to these claims. Or whether it really is all in the prep...
> 
> Anyway, I apollogise to the OP here as I have dragged this thread heavily off topic so I will create my own thread now and see if we can get this organised as a serious test for the summer, and as mark suggests in the lead up to a big detailing meet to get the results out to as wide an audience as possible.


I think that the implications of this test are massive and i think that all manufacturers shall be showing an interest, i also think that the audience will be huge. i'm really excited about it !!!


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

It's funny but the overall finish to me is just a part of what makes up the LSP, I like the kind of buttery feel the Vintage gives to my paintwork over a sealant, I like the fact the Zaino sealants really resist dirt and the car looks great, even when it is dirty. I love the beading and water falling off the car with alot of the Z waxes, I love the tubs of alot of the expensive waxes and the funny bag you get which makes you feel kind of special when you use the product. I love the slick feel I get when I've removed the layer of Zaino residue etc. etc.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Neil_S said:


> It's funny but the overall finish to me is just a part of what makes up the LSP, I like the kind of buttery feel the Vintage gives to my paintwork over a sealant, I like the fact the Zaino sealants really resist dirt and the car looks great, even when it is dirty. I love the beading and water falling off the car with alot of the Z waxes, I love the tubs of alot of the expensive waxes and the funny bag you get which makes you feel kind of special when you use the product. I love the slick feel I get when I've removed the layer of Zaino residue etc. etc.


Pervert!

Thats the last time i leave you alone with the Vintage :lol:


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

Maybe we can test it in a windy dusty field like all the guys at Modified Nationals were doing on their cars...Some fantastic tea towel prep work and bizarre shapes going on on their bonnets...


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Epoch said:


> Pervert!
> 
> Thats the last time i leave you alone with the Vintage :lol:


:lol:

I can detect that buttery feel when I wash the car, it is really rather strange, but it feels like the car has something on it, which is great.

The complete other end of the scale for me is the GTechniq Nano Crystalline which feels like absolutely nothing is on the paint, it really feels wrong!


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Neil_S said:


> I can see what some of you chaps are thinking, but at the end of the day, some people will always be able to tell a difference and some won't, it is just opinion, and because 32 out of 45 people say one car looks better, doesn't mean that the other 13 are wrong, it just means they appreciate different facets of the finish.


Its all to do with the power of marketing, some people just see what they want to see.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Neil_S said:


> :lol:
> 
> I can detect that buttery feel when I wash the car, it is really rather strange, but it feels like the car has something on it, which is great.
> 
> The complete other end of the scale for me is the GTechniq Nano Crystalline which feels like absolutely nothing is on the paint, it really feels wrong!


SSShhhh i know exactly what you mean Neil, just don't tell anybody


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Tyrrell said:


> Its all to do with the power of marketing, some people just see what they want to see.


I know what you mean and I do believe that the power of suggestion does make a difference, i.e. you'll trigger more emotion saying that this wax is 10 grand, made from hens teeth and is really rather special, compared to this 10 quid wax which is mass produced in Basingstoke!

But it is not for me to say if somebody is right or wrong, it is up to them what opinion they form and ultimately we should respect other people and the opinions they have.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Really this test should involve Rubbishboys OE as it's a home made example.

It think some may be a little more than shocked


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Neil_S said:


> I know what you mean and I do believe that the power of suggestion does make a difference, i.e. you'll trigger more emotion saying that this wax is 10 grand, made from hens teeth and is really rather special, compared to this 10 quid wax which is mass produced in Basingstoke!
> 
> But it is not for me to say if somebody is right or wrong, it is up to them what opinion they form and ultimately we should respect other people and the opinions they have.


People are always entitled to there opinions,

however once that the vail is lifted and there is concrete evidence to prove that LSP is just a protector and that polishing is what creates the finish, people won't have to have an opinion because it will just be a case of fact proven by Dave KG.

Then i would like to see if people still pay ridiculous money for wax which costs pence to make ???


----------



## Jaygo (Apr 7, 2008)

Neil_S said:


> ……….But it is not for me to say if somebody is right or wrong, it is up to them what opinion they form and ultimately we should respect other people and the opinions they have.


I don't think it's a question of being right or wrong.

Arguably the issue relates to the widespread belief in the subtleties of the Emperor's new clothes being recommended to those who haven't yet had the opportunity to see them, or should that be to buy them.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Jaygo said:


> I don't think it's a question of being right or wrong.
> 
> Arguably the issue relates to the widespread belief in the subtleties of the Emperor's new clothes being recommended to those who haven't yet had the opportunity to see them, or should that be to buy them.


The Emperors new clothes is exactly what i was thinking !!! :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Neil_S said:


> I can see what some of you chaps are thinking, but at the end of the day, some people will always be able to tell a difference and some won't, it is just opinion, and because 32 out of 45 people say one car looks better, doesn't mean that the other 13 are wrong, it just means they appreciate different facets of the finish.


True Neil, but the purpose of the test I am looking to carry out here is to give people the opportunity to see for themselves without needing to spend ££££ and then find it offered nothing more... Some may spot a difference, and seeing the test blind would be very interesting so as there are complete unknowns... I'd like folk to describe the finish they see on each, the different nuances each person sees in their own eyes as this could all be comapred... neither person would be right or wrong, but if there's consistencies then its hard evidence for an effect being there, randomness in results points more to the fact that its simply not relevant what LSP you choose as the random population wont perceive a difference... if that makes sense.

Its not me trying to write gospel or right and wrong... merely trying to form a basis based on experiment for folk to judge for themselves and make their own minds up 

'Tis the hope anyway


----------



## RaceGlazer (Jan 10, 2007)

Been busy all day but is Thug really PD ? Or his Mum ?


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

No i can vouch i spoke to Paul and Thug today about Crystal Rock and he was a customer and i think it was mx5 or x5?? Cant remember what he said.


----------



## fraz1975 (Jul 29, 2007)

Not really adding anything to the debate but am I the only one that thinks Crystal Rock sounds like something you would be offered in a nightclub / dark alley / boarded up flat in a housing estate :doublesho


----------



## S63 (Jan 5, 2007)

Tyrrell said:


> This whole expensive wax thing is just a marketing thing, people assume that if something is really expensive and has the right label its really good, i'd put money on the fact that if someone got all hyped up and sold on having a new LSP on there car but unbeknown to them the detailer actually put on some cheap wax, they would never know the difference and would also faunicate over how wonderful it is, they would never know the difference and thats because you can't tell.


Absolutley spot on post:thumb: Working for a mega wealthy employer I can vouch for this view entirely, whenever he asks me to go shopping for him and I ask what one do you want? he will nearly always opt for the most expensive. If I was not the trusted and dedicated chauffeur and righthand man to him I could sell him a tub of lard in a Watereford crsytal container telling him it was a rich concoction derived from tearducts of a hummingbird, laced with the resin from the Igotcha plant only found in the remotest part of the Himalayas all fused together with the urinal spray of a species only found in Loch Ness and all this for the bargain price of £10k.

Fortunately he's happy with what I offer for less than £25 a bottle/tin, but my point is there are punters out there willing to pay the big bucks so good luck to all that attract their custom.


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Dave KG said:


> True Neil, but the purpose of the test I am looking to carry out here is to give people the opportunity to see for themselves without needing to spend ££££ and then find it offered nothing more... Some may spot a difference, and seeing the test blind would be very interesting so as there are complete unknowns... I'd like folk to describe the finish they see on each, the different nuances each person sees in their own eyes as this could all be comapred... neither person would be right or wrong, but if there's consistencies then its hard evidence for an effect being there, randomness in results points more to the fact that its simply not relevant what LSP you choose as the random population wont perceive a difference... if that makes sense.
> 
> Its not me trying to write gospel or right and wrong... merely trying to form a basis based on experiment for folk to judge for themselves and make their own minds up
> 
> 'Tis the hope anyway


I can see some value in that :thumb:


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

recieved my pot today and will hopefully play around with it this friday (if my boss lets me go a little earlier :lol










mac​


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

You might've moved the toupee out of the way first, before photographing the jar!

:lol:


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Macmini said:


> recieved my pot today and will hopefully play around with it this friday (if my boss lets me go a little earlier :lol
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sure I can see some swirl marks on that pot :lol:

Looking forward to the pics :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Neil_S said:


> I can see some value in that :thumb:


Good - cause the test is good to go on July 27th... 

Hopefully Crystal Rock will be a part of it, and if it really is much better than its competition, it will show on test


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Good - cause the test is good to go on July 27th...
> 
> Hopefully Crystal Rock will be a part of it, and if it really is much better than its competition, it will show on test


i wonder how you'll be able to trial the "durability" side of each lsp on a single day or will the cars be driven, washed and maintained by one person for the next - lets say 6 months  ? shine and "bling" is one thing - durability the other!
i should do a similar test with focus on durability of each of your favored products on my old E36 station waggon which is a daily driver and which permanently stands outside!
i could divide the bonnet into 4 parts, properly polish it and use divine, zaino, crystal rock and colli 476s afterwards!


----------



## visor (Sep 8, 2007)

nice1 Mac, dont forget pics :thumb:


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> recieved my pot today and will hopefully play around with it this friday (if my boss lets me go a little earlier :lol
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well i'd be interested to hear your opinion of this and if you truthfully think it adds anything to a pefectly polished surface?

I personally doubt it'll be any better than my bottle of AG EGP, in fact i'd suspect that the EGP would last longer.

Anyway i hope you enjoy your purchase, maybe do a write up for people to see, with the surface before LSP application and after would be really good making sure the camera stays in the same posistion and the lighting is exactly the same. these pics would be great !!!


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

visor said:


> nice1 Mac, dont forget pics :thumb:


no prob there


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Macmini said:


> i wonder how you'll be able to trial the "durability" side of each lsp on a single day or will the cars be driven, washed and maintained by one person for the next - lets say 6 months  ? shine and "bling" is one thing - durability the other!
> i should do a similar test with focus on durability of each of your favored products on my old E36 station waggon which is a daily driver and which permanently stands outside!
> i could divide the bonnet into 4 parts, properly polish it and use divine, zaino, crystal rock and colli 476s afterwards!


Durability is not part of the equation - it's about the looks.
In other words, does an expensive wax give anything extra to a fully prep'd surface or is it just a case of price snobbery.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

PJS said:


> Durability is not part of the equation - it's about the looks.


well, to me durability is as important as looks and it'd be a rather personal test to see how each of these meanwhile highly marketed and discussed products differ from eachother


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Macmini said:


> well, to me durability is as important as looks and it'd be a rather personal test to see how each of these meanwhile highly marketed and discussed products differ from eachother


Use Zaino then


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Well, of course durability is an important aspect too, but the point of this test was to see if other than differences in longevity, what extra do you get for your money when you start putting a string of 0's at the end.
Do you get more depth, more reflectivity, more shine, more flake/pearl 'pop', etc?
Or is it all much of a muchness, and the idea that 90% of a car's appearance is down to the prep'ing of the paintwork, and the LSP adds the final 10%, holds true?

So, if you can see no difference between a £15 wax/sealant like Vic Concours/Auto Balm, and a £500+ wax in the form of Crystal Rock/Vintage/Royale, then what's the point in spending the money they command in the first place?
If you like beading, then Collinite with its famed longevity satisfies that criteria, and if you prefer a sealant, Zaino/Duragloss and Bilt Hamber satisfies that, all at very respectable costs.
Of course, there'll always be those who have to have blagging rights, and this is where my comment of price snobbery is aimed.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Macmini said:


> well, to me durability is as important as looks and it'd be a rather personal test to see how each of these meanwhile highly marketed and discussed products differ from eachother





Neil_S said:


> Use *Bilt Hamber Auto Balm* then


Totally agree Neil. :thumb:

_edited for accuracy, of course_.


----------



## L200 Steve (Oct 25, 2005)

PJS said:


> Well, of course durability is an important aspect too, but the point of this test was to see if other than differences in longevity, what extra do you get for your money when you start putting a string of 0's at the end.
> Do you get more depth, more reflectivity, more shine, more flake/pearl 'pop', etc?
> Or is it all much of a muchness, and the idea that 90% of a car's appearance is down to the prep'ing of the paintwork, and the LSP adds the final 10%, holds true?
> 
> ...


Surely if it was just about looks then Dave just has to test against something like Megs #7, and therefore no need to polish half a dozen cars???

I don't think even if longetivity was included as part of test, that this would explain why people like PD use expensive waxes, although it does seem pretty obvious to some of us.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

PJS said:


> Well, of course durability is an important aspect too, but the point of this test was to see if other than differences in longevity, what extra do you get for your money when you start putting a string of 0's at the end.
> Do you get more depth, more reflectivity, more shine, more flake/pearl 'pop', etc?
> Or is it all much of a muchness, and the idea that 90% of a car's appearance is down to the prep'ing of the paintwork, and the LSP adds the final 10%, holds true?


dont get me wrong, i have totally understood what dave's test is or should be all about and believe that it'll be a pretty interesting experiment to see its results in the end :thumb:

but being an academic who has done an emperical study in/as my thesis some years back, I know how important the size of the "sample" is for a significant result and statement and I just doubt that some 10, 20 or 30 people who will judge the results in the end via a certain questionnaire or something similar, will be representative enough - just look at the numbers of users registered on here!? personally i'd say that this test will indicate a "trend" but definitely will not have a "winner" or "loser" in the end!


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Totally agree on sample size - but I don't think Dave's trying to use it as his manifesto for standing as a local independent MP for his constituency.
It's more a case of indicating, if the results bear out the hypothesis, that the look often attributed to a wax/sealant, is only a fraction of the overall look, if the paintwork is spot on.
It'll be designed to perhaps alleviate any newcomers' fears that they should be prepared to spend big money on an LSP (waxes specifically since they're the ones asking silly money) in order to get the best results.
In other words, if a group of like-minded individuals have trouble picking out the £15 Auto Balm from the £500 Crystal Rock, then it proves somewhat that if you get your preparation spot on, what LSP you throw on thereafter is of little consequence, save for durability.

I very much doubt you could use it to force manufacturers to change their price-lead marketing strategies, but if somehow it did, that'd be a secondary effect.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

totally am with you what you're posting, pjs, but...


PJS said:


> In other words, if a group of like-minded individuals have trouble picking out the £15 Auto Balm from the £500 Crystal Rock, then it proves somewhat that if you get your preparation spot on, what LSP you throw on thereafter is of little consequence, save for durability.


i doubt that this will happen in the end due to the small number of like-minded individuals!


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

by the way: this has become a bit off-topic now, hasnt it  ?
this thread is about mr. daltons wax so maybe we should post on our "discussion" in this thread http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=74756


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

It'll be interesting to see what the results produce, and if anything can be inferred from them, but I'm not quite understanding your comment on what you quoted by me.
Are you saying people will still gravitate to expensive waxes, or that the sampling will be too small to allay newcomers' concerns?

Indeed, and apologies to the OP for veering so dramatically off course - well, a little bit at least.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

PJS said:


> Are you saying people will still gravitate to expensive waxes, or that the sampling will be too small to allay newcomers' concerns?


all i am saying is that i doubt that there will be a significant result in the end. significant in terms of: "30 out of 33 people are saying that zaino (for example) looks better than collinite. this proves that zaino rules the world and the rest of the tested lsp suck" :lol:
i bet it'll be very balanced due to the great variety of products/lsps which will be used!


----------



## Jaygo (Apr 7, 2008)

I think the idea is to give experienced detailers and some less experienced the opportunity to see for themselves how much difference there is between wax/LSP of radically different price levels.

The rest is speculation and perhaps sarcasm?


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Macmini said:


> all i am saying is that i doubt that there will be a significant result in the end. significant in terms of: "30 out of 33 people are saying that zaino (for example) looks better than collinite. this proves that zaino rules the world and the rest of the tested lsp suck" :lol:
> i bet it'll be very balanced due to the great variety of products/lsps which will be used!


Ah, but the random spread somewhat validates that LSP's don't really add much over and beyond the fully prep'd look pre-LSP - ergo, case in point proven - big money buys you nothing more than a lighter wallet.

If, as your example shows, Zaino was 30/33, then you could infer that some LSP's do indeed add something to the looks, which can be readily seen.
Therefore an LSP is not just an LSP, irrespective of composition (natural blend or fully synthetic) or price and brand name.

Anyway, I'll shut up now.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

PJS said:


> Anyway, I'll shut up now.


and i'll do the same :lol:


----------



## ZoranC (Jun 9, 2007)

There is a fundamental flaw in this: People usually reach for car on far left, car on far right, or car in the middle, with tendency toward far right. For this not to be skewed you would need to reshuffle cars regularly.


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

I think we should do it blindfolded, just to be fair!


----------



## visor (Sep 8, 2007)

just use your sense of touch and maybe smell.


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

visor said:


> just use your sense of touch and maybe smell.


I seriously think that I could tell more about what product is on the car by touch than sight.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> dont get me wrong, i have totally understood what dave's test is or should be all about and believe that it'll be a pretty interesting experiment to see its results in the end :thumb:
> 
> but being an academic who has done an emperical study in/as my thesis some years back, I know how important the size of the "sample" is for a significant result and statement and I just doubt that some 10, 20 or 30 people who will judge the results in the end via a certain questionnaire or something similar, will be representative enough - just look at the numbers of users registered on here!? personally i'd say that this test will indicate a "trend" but definitely will not have a "winner" or "loser" in the end!


As an academic i'm sure you must realise that LSP just protects the already polished and finished surface and regardless of the cost its just adding protection.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> all i am saying is that i doubt that there will be a significant result in the end. significant in terms of: "30 out of 33 people are saying that zaino (for example) looks better than collinite. this proves that zaino rules the world and the rest of the tested lsp suck" :lol:
> i bet it'll be very balanced due to the great variety of products/lsps which will be used!


I strongly suspect that people aren't gonna see any difference in the cars regardless of which LSP they are wearing, which will hopefully prove that expensive LSP is just a waste of cash then the only argument left for using one would be its durability so i can see we will end up having a durability test i'd suspect that collnite will win that, so then i think that these tests will be hugely important in lifting the vail on the hugely over priced waxes.

After all would you spend £500+ on a wax when you can get better protection from collnite and you know it been proven that LSP doesn't enhance looks??


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Tyrrell said:


> As an academic i'm sure you must realise that LSP just protects the already polished and finished surface and regardless of the cost its just adding protection.


i totally disagree, or would you say that for example zaino only delivers protection and no out-popping-flake  ? just read dave's or anyone elses posts on zaino...



Tyrrell said:


> (...) so then i think that these tests will be hugely important in lifting the vail on the hugely over priced waxes.


if the sample size would be large enough (lets say >300 as its going to be a questionnaire) these tests or this event could be very helpful in doing so, but i doubt it will keep people off buying expensive waxes if they want to 



Tyrrell said:


> After all would you spend £500+ on a wax when you can get better protection from collnite and you know it been proven that LSP doesn't enhance looks??


as i said, i disagree that the lsp doesnt enhance the look or add anything to the finish at all and only adds protection, no matter if its colli, nattys or zymöl royale!


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> i totally disagree, or would you say that for example zaino only delivers protection and no out-popping-flake  ? just read dave's or anyone elses posts on zaino...
> 
> if the sample size would be large enough (lets say >300 as its going to be a questionnaire) these tests or this event could be very helpful in doing so, but i doubt it will keep people off buying expensive waxes if they want to
> 
> as i said, i disagree that the lsp doesnt enhance the look or add anything to the finish at all and only adds protection, no matter if its colli, nattys or zymöl royale!


I think that you'll find 'flake pop' comes from the polishing stage, a small amount of swirl or marring on a surface will mute the flake, polishing reveals the flake in the paint as it shines and clears the appearance of the laq (like cleaning a smeared window, you'll see through it better) . The more LSP you put on a polished surface regardless of product will mute the flake, this is why sealants let the 'flake pop' more bacause they can be applied thinner to the already flake popping surface.

What you need to think about is that the flake is in the paint UNDER a coat of laq, putting a LSP on paint doesn't suddenly magically make the flake appear !!! the thinner and clearer the LSP the more the flake shows as it isn't muted, this is why sealants are better because they aren't as heavy and thick as wax. Like cleaning a dirty window to let you see through it better, polishing the clear coat and removing swirls and marring lets you see through it better and lets the flake show IN THE PAINT


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Tyrrell said:


> I think that you'll find 'flake pop' comes from the polishing stage, a small amount of swirl or marring on a surface will mute the flake, polishing reveals the flake in the paint as it shines and clears the appearance of the laq (like cleaning a smeared window, you'll see through it better) . The more LSP you put on a polished surface regardless of product will mute the flake, this is why sealants let the 'flake pop' more bacause they can be applied thinner to the already flake popping surface.
> 
> What you need to think about is that the flake is in the paint UNDER a coat of laq, putting a LSP on paint doesn't suddenly magically make the flake appear !!! the thinner and clearer the LSP the more the flake shows as it isn't muted, this is why sealants are better because they aren't as heavy and thick as wax. Like cleaning a dirty window to let you see through it better, polishing the clear coat and removing swirls and marring lets you see through it better and lets the flake show IN THE PAINT


i know what's happenin during the polishing stage, that the paint or metallic layer is underneath the clearcoat (with modern paint systems) and that we're basically removing swirls and scratches in order to provide a scratch and defectfree surface before we apply the lsp, but if this is your opinion that the lsp - no matter if its a sealant or wax - only adds protection to the paint and that there arent products/lsps out there which (definitely) are able to bring out the flake more than others, how you can say that you strongly suspect that people aren't gonna see any difference in the cars with regards to the lsp they're wearing then?


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> i know what's happenin during the polishing stage, that the paint or metallic layer is underneath the clearcoat (with modern paint systems) and that we're basically removing swirls and scratches in order to provide a scratch and defectfree surface before we apply the lsp, but if this is your oppinion that the lsp - no matter if its a sealant or wax - only adds protection to the paint and that there arent products/lsps out there which (definitely) are able to bring out the flake more than others, how you can say that you strongly suspect that people aren't gonna see any difference in the cars with regards to the lsp they're wearing then?


You have raised a good point, in fact if you think about it we have just confirmed that manmade LSP's (sealants) are far better than waxes as they can be applied thinner and let the flake pop!!!, further strengthening my case that expensive waxes not only are a rip off but also mute your flake !!! they actually make the finish worse. !!!

Thankyou for pointing this out and highlighting another case against expensive waxes !!!!! This was a aspect that i hadn't considered.

It just shows the importance of discussion !!! just from our discussion we have concluded that sealants are better than waxes !!!

I agree that people will tell the difference between the finishes because they'll see that the £20 sealants look better and have 'flake pop' its great that the test is being done on matalic black cars !!!!

I think that a better LSP is one that offers maximum protection in the thinnest coat, i believe this will be a sealant !!!


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

actually i havent raised a point, concluded or confirmed anything, i have just asked you a question  
but anyways...great discussion in a/the wrong thread  !


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> actually i havent raised a point, concluded or confirmed anything, i have just asked you a question
> but anyways...great discussion in a/the wrong thread  !


dave 1 macmini 0

:thumb:


----------



## tdm (Feb 2, 2007)

been watching this thread with interest, it seems now that some people are on some sort of mission to prove that anything thats wax and over £100 is basically a waste of money, and that the buyer has been sucked in by marketing?? zaino seems to have a cult following now..

if everything expensive and extravagent is just a waste, then i guess theres not much point in me ever trying to own a porsche or ferrari? 

does it really matter that much if sealents can look as good as a wax and outlast it?? to some i think the answer is yes, and to others no. 
they will carry on buying the £500+ waxes as they offer something alittle more exclusive than other cheaper lsp. and in their view (not anyone elses) it will probaly be a worthwile purchase.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Tyrrell said:


> dave 1 macmini 0
> 
> :thumb:



as long its germany 1 portugal 0 tonite i'm happy


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

tdm said:


> been watching this thread with interest, it seems now that some people are on some sort of mission to prove that anything thats wax and over £100 is basically a waste of money, and that the buyer has been sucked in by marketing?? zaino seems to have a cult following now..
> 
> if everything expensive and extravagent is just a waste, then i guess theres not much point in me ever trying to own a porsche or ferrari?
> 
> ...


Not everything expensive is a waste of money some products like porsches are obviously better, anyone can see this, for arguments sake a 911 is far better than a 1.4 escort anyone can see this the price tag is justified!!! I also know this as i have a 911 and have owned an escort, escort was an ok car but obviously not a 911, i can't really see your point in bringing this up ? and there is always a point in wanting to own a Porsche or a Ferrari !!!

I respect other peoples opinions and agree that if some people despite knowing that they can have a better product for £20 want to spend £500 on a product that isn't any different or maybe even worse for whatever reason 
then thats there choice. the point of the test is just to expose the truth then people can make their choice and its up to them. I can honestly say that if there is a wax that is £500 's worth better than my AG EGP than i will buy some but i personally can't see what can possibly be that much better ???

Just my opinion.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> as long its germany 1 portugal 0 tonite i'm happy


I'm only playing mate, i'm glad you can have a laugh. :thumb:

I think that we are just both intersted in seeing the results, i don't know about you but i'm quite excited about it !!

I must admit i'd prefer Germany to win tonight as i just can't stand Ronaldo!!

Dave


----------



## tdm (Feb 2, 2007)

''the point of the test is just to expose the truth then people can make their choice and its up to them''

people allready do just that, which is why you probaly own sealents and macmini has crystal rock??

re: the cars..my point is why bother owning a porsche, when you could own a caterham or lotus which offers the pretty much the same performance for a fraction of the cost?? i suppose it has nothing to do with who made it?


----------



## spooj (Mar 29, 2008)

the other side to the wax's prices that are very very high is this.
if you can comfortably afford a top end porsche or ferrari,zonda etc.then a pot of this wax wont strain you finacially too hard.

does it make it better if its £500+ a pot? no it might not translate at all in those terms but if you have to ask how much it is,you simply cant afford it lol as my dad would say when asking about aston martin prices and other supercars.

same as when you see some manage 8mpg.if you can afford it,this wont phase the bank account that much.

i can see it having allure to exotic car owners on several levels and at least there dabblings with different wax's shares a similar passion that ours do,but on a more pricey level lol


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

Tyrrell said:


> I'm only playing mate, i'm glad you can have a laugh. :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Okay - the reason I wish to do the test is to simply allow people to see various LSPs applied to identically prepared cars so that they can make up their own minds about what is offered by different products... That the test will be blind is simply to give me some information about what other people's thoughts are and allow myself and others to draw their own conclusions - nothing more, nothing less.

As implied by many posts above, particularly those of PJS and Tyrell, I am in now way intending to use the test as gospel and start saying expensive waxes are a waste of money, as for many there are other factors and indeed bragging rights does seem to be the main one, so a test on looks here is largely irrelevant. My purpose is to give people the opportunity to see and judge for themselves in an environment where a good amount of testing can be done so that I can get a handle on people's thoughts.

Re: sample size, perhaps the 50+ is not representative of 10,000 members - very small percentage but that to me is a poor use of that particular statistic. 50 random people can present a lot of very useful data, especially in a blind test... now if one LSP is significantly better than the rest, as maketing and indeed price suggests, then out of 50 people you will see a clear trend to prove this in the favoured product as well as consistency in people's descriptions of it. No problems at all. Okay, its not every member here, but its far better than just one opinion which at the end of the day is totally subjective. 50 opinions will allow a good amount of conclusions to be drawn on the thoughts of the 50 people, but it does not take much to extend these results to draw general conclusions about the general opinion of different LSPs. If there is no real difference, the results will be completely random, for example 30 preferring one, 20 the other: thats more of a random distribution. Furthermore, one could see the average position in the rankings of each LSP... if its consistently mid range with a small deviation, or whether there are large deviations in people's opinions which suggest a more random opinion and to me point to there being little in the looks other than personal subjective opinion. This is the point of the test, and one doesn't need 1000+ results to see this. 50, although small, will give a good first indication at the very least.

As I have pointed out previously, if certain waxes are as good as their manufacturer's claims and hype, then this test should highlight this even with a small sample set. We'll see a clear trend. And the manufacturers have nothing to worry about from a little test like this - indeed, they have little to worry about anyway as there will always be a market for these waxes and my intention is not to take this market away... My intention is to present to people a set of cars identically prepped and then with different LSPs to allow folks to make their own minds up, and to see the thoughts of others on the looks to see if there is anything to the _looks_ that warrants the price tag. How people use these results is entirely up to them, how people read them is entirely up to them. I dont doubt that many will seek to pick holes in the test, taking it beyond the face value at which it is presented - fair enough. I suspect that if those picking the holes have a brand-loyalty then people will be able to draw conclusions from that - again, that will be their own conclusions, and I know what mine will be 

But at the end of the day, here is a test which is being organised for people to take part in... Many see it as valuable, including myself which is why I've gone to organise it. Read the results, take out of them what you will.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

tdm said:


> ''the point of the test is just to expose the truth then people can make their choice and its up to them''
> 
> people allready do just that, which is why you probaly own sealents and macmini has crystal rock??
> 
> re: the cars..my point is why bother owning a porsche, when you could own a caterham or lotus which offers the pretty much the same performance for a fraction of the cost?? i suppose it has nothing to do with who made it?


I'm not sure people can do this to that level... in that, how many times are 5+ identically prepped cars placed side by side for a side by side comparison? And indeed, how many people can afford the expensive waxes to try them and see if the make a difference or not? This test will give people the opportunity to see both of these, and for many (including myself) it will be the first time seeing them side by side on identical cars which, for judging the looks properly, is essential in my eyes.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

tdm said:


> ''the point of the test is just to expose the truth then people can make their choice and its up to them''
> 
> people allready do just that, which is why you probaly own sealents and macmini has crystal rock??
> 
> re: the cars..my point is why bother owning a porsche, when you could own a caterham or lotus which offers the pretty much the same performance for a fraction of the cost?? i suppose it has nothing to do with who made it?


Its not a good analogy i'm afraid mate, there is alot more to why a porsche is more expensive than performance, if you drove all those cars that you mention you will see what i mean, in fact you only would have to sit in a Porsche and then a Lotus and you would see what i mean, there is alot more than just performance that makes a Porsche a Porsche and therefore worth the money. I know because i drive a 911 and have been in a Lotus, both cars are priced fairly for what they are,

The Lsp issue and the test will show that there is very little difference if any between a £20 product and a £500 product therefore whats the point in spending £500 ???

I'll ask you a simple question- If you were offered 2 products (any products) and they both did the same thing and one would cost you £20 and one would cost you £500 which one would you buy ???

In my mind the answer is simple.


----------



## trhland (Sep 22, 2007)

dave you should also have one car with no lsp . also it would be funny if someone said it had crystal rock on .


----------



## ayrshireteggy (Dec 13, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> Not everything expensive is a waste of money some products like porsches are obviously better, anyone can see this, for arguments sake a 911 is far better than a 1.4 escort anyone can see this the price tag is justified!!! I also know this as i have a 911 and have owned an escort, escort was an ok car but obviously not a 911, i can't really see your point in bringing this up ? and there is always a point in wanting to own a Porsche or a Ferrari !!!


I think your argument here actually backs up tdm. For you, the extra cost of a Porsche is worth it, but for many people a car is simply something you use to get from A to B. Therefore, for them, a Porsche is a waste of money.

The point being that choosing waxes, cars and pretty much anything, comes down to personal choice. If you're happy with Collinite then great. If Vintage is your thing then good for you ('ahem' and if you have a sample then...oh, my bad).

I look forward to the results of this test though. Excellent work, Dave. :thumb:


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

ayrshireteggy said:


> I think your argument here actually backs up tdm. For you, the extra cost of a Porsche is worth it, but for many people a car is simply something you use to get from A to B. Therefore, for them, a Porsche is a waste of money.
> 
> The point being that choosing waxes, cars and pretty much anything, comes down to personal choice. If you're happy with Collinite then great. If Vintage is your thing then good for you ('ahem' and if you have a sample then...oh, my bad).
> 
> I look forward to the results of this test though. Excellent work, Dave. :thumb:


No it doesn't,

A Porsche is priced fairly for the car that you are getting!!! Sit in a an Escort and tell me you don't get your monies worth with a Porsche, both completly different product however they are priced in a fair way for what they are.

LSP is LSP i can't personally see how one product can be £500 better than a £20 product that does exactly the same thing, with arguable differences, differences so small that i suspect peolple will struggle to notice them if they can notice them atall.

Dave


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

anyone wants some


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> anyone wants some


just reminded me time for lunch lol

Then i better actually do some work today before i get sacked lol


----------



## tdm (Feb 2, 2007)

dave KG, none of my comments are aimed at your test mate, and i have no interest in seeing the waxes win, so to speak. infact im quite the fan of zaino.

i was just trying to make a point that there seems to be a trend in that those that have bought expensive waxes get put down , because they could of got the same results for 20 quid. 

tyrell, i agree with your comments on a 911 vs a lotus. i too would prefer the 911 and be prepared to pay for it. perhaps were getting a little too hung up on the types of car...what im trying to get across is that there are many instances where there are two products which offer the same, but one is priced significantly higher..

and there are many people who would percieve that the higher priced item is worth paying for , perhaps because of who its made by, the packaging , what its made from. its handmade?

what we shouldnt do is look apon them as being daft for spending the extra on what they think has been a good purchase.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

trhland said:


> dave you should also have one car with no lsp . also it would be funny if someone said it had crystal rock on .


Planned


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Macmini said:


> anyone wants some


Thanks but no, I've brought my own.....








Er...actually, I think I will. Pass it over.


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

PJS said:


> Thanks but no, I've brought my own.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


sure - go have some


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

tdm said:


> dave KG, none of my comments are aimed at your test mate, and i have no interest in seeing the waxes win, so to speak. infact im quite the fan of zaino.
> 
> i was just trying to make a point that there seems to be a trend in that those that have bought expensive waxes get put down , because they could of got the same results for 20 quid.
> 
> ...


i would never want to make people feel bad about what they have purchased and people have the right to buy whatever they want to buy

HOWEVER

I feel and i think that most people including yourself would agree that in this particular product market place (LSP) there is little information and very little evidence for people to base their purchase decision on, they assume that if they buy the most expensive product they are getting the best product, this is simply not the case IMHO, it could also be suggested that manufacturers could use this lack of consumer knowledge in this field to their advantage and put extortionate price tags on their waxes.

It is for these reasons that i think that DaveKG should be commended for his efforts in organising and conducting his test and giving the consumer some sort of information for them to base there LSP purchase decision on, if the results of the test show that noone can tell the difference or that a £20 product wins hands down and people still want to go and spend £500 on a expensive wax that offers nothing extra than thats their choice and i fully respect that, however i think that a huge number of people will be massively grateful for the information and for saving themselves alot of money, which i'm all in favour of.

I think that the £500+ waxes are a huge demonstration of the power of marketing, but thats just my opinion and i respect everyone elses.

Dave


----------



## tdm (Feb 2, 2007)

^^^good post. some very valid points.. all i can add to that at the moment is i think sometimes the purchase of higher priced waxes is not nessacarily all about the looks and durability.

when you buy ***** or swissvax you are buying into the brand as well, and for a while i dont think any other manufacturers are going to be able to match the prestige image they have. this alone is going to be worth paying out for in many peoples eyes.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

tdm said:


> ^^^good post. some very valid points.. all i can add to that at the moment is i think sometimes the purchase of higher priced waxes is not nessacarily all about the looks and durability.
> 
> when you buy ***** or swissvax you are buying into the brand as well, and for a while i dont think any other manufacturers are going to be able to match the prestige image they have. this alone is going to be worth paying out for in many peoples eyes.


The only thing is who is going to know by looking at your car what brand wax its got on it ???


----------



## trhland (Sep 22, 2007)

its the same thing as the ladies buying the (coach ) hand bags. for 500 us. 
trust me there not worth it . my wife has one . its not even leather!!! but it has the (coach) name....


----------



## ayrshireteggy (Dec 13, 2006)

Tyrrell said:


> No it doesn't,
> 
> A Porsche is priced fairly for the car that you are getting!!! Sit in a an Escort and tell me you don't get your monies worth with a Porsche, both completly different product however they are priced in a fair way for what they are.
> 
> ...


Fair point, Dave. :thumb:

Having re-read your post, I do agree that although the Escort and Porker will both ultimately get you from A to B, it is unquestionable that the Porsche justifies a higher price tag. Whereas, with waxes, there is currently no obvious evidence that the top-end ones are significantly better.


----------



## tdm (Feb 2, 2007)

Tyrrell said:


> The only thing is who is going to know by looking at your car what brand wax its got on it ???


did you buy your 911 to impress other people? to show them you could afford one??? or because you wanted one... who said people buy expensive lsp's simply to impress others.


----------



## trhland (Sep 22, 2007)

mostly it is bragging rights . when most of us buy expensive waxes whats the first thing we do ? post it on the sites. me included. and thats ok.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

tdm said:


> did you buy your 911 to impress other people? to show them you could afford one??? or because you wanted one... who said people buy expensive lsp's simply to impress others.


I drive a 911 because they are awesome !!! just so happens that most normal people think they are awesome too!!! I bought it because they are a proven product that does exactly what its supposed to really well and is worth every penny that i've spent on it..Actually Porsche are the most undestated sports cars, if i wanted to show off i'd have bought a Lambo but i just like Porsches, i can't see what you are trying to get at??

In my opinion LSP is LSP, its applied the same way regardless of what brand or price and does the same thing regardless of price and brand, what could possibly make you feel better by just spending more money ??? Please explain what is so much better about applying an expensive wax, i've applied loads of LSP's and it feels exactly the same each time ,i did have a slightly more expensive one once and i didn't feel any different??? maybe it only works on certain people ?? lol 
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Macmini (Aug 9, 2007)

the most important thing to mention:

germany 3 portugal 2


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

Portugal had shiniest goal posts though...Ner Ner..


----------



## ayrshireteggy (Dec 13, 2006)

Macmini said:


> the most important thing to mention:
> 
> germany 3 portugal 2


Best team won. :thumb:


----------



## CupraRcleanR (Sep 2, 2007)

Zaino give a tangeble improvement over Waxes IMHO and for £100 you can get the most important bits.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

tdm said:


> ^^^good post. some very valid points.. all i can add to that at the moment is i think sometimes the purchase of higher priced waxes is not nessacarily all about the looks and durability.
> 
> when you buy ***** or swissvax you are buying into the brand as well, and for a while i dont think any other manufacturers are going to be able to match the prestige image they have. this alone is going to be worth paying out for in many peoples eyes.


The Escort/911 thing is a bit misguided for a simple reason - it all comes down to value for money.

A 911 is a great sportscar as at 50k GBP a 996 GT2 may be an expensive car to the average punter, but feck me that's value if you want to annoy owners of Lambos and Ferraris costing 2x or 3x more. I drove a poorly one (albeit RUF tuned!) I was looking after with 'only 490bhp' and it was as quick as you need on the road. It got fixed up and did 619bhp on the dyno a few weeks later. So expensive yes. But good value also (in the eyes of some).

I think what it comes down to is what represents good/poor value for money.

We made a shampoo in small batches with a high dosage rate and out of the best ingredients, put it up for sale at 8.95 GBP and the web was ablaze with comment about what a 'rip off' it was. Despite the fact it probably costs us 10x to make compared to a big volume manufacturer knocking up the same amount of shampoo and selling it to the market for half the price. So again, it's a question of expense, but may actually be reasonable *value* when you look at what has gone into it and how it's made. Some may find it worth paying for, others won't... but it's not based on what the label says, it's based on what went into it and how it was made. Tangible stuff.

My personal issue with expensive waxes is that you should really know what you're getting so you can judge if it's good value. We transparently sell Supernatural with an 'expensive' wooden container for 30 GBP of the overall cost, so you know that there's a 65 GBP wax in a 30 GBP container. With a lot of R&D behind it, and a few more special ingredients, you could justifiably charge maybe 3-4x that amount for the wax. But ultimately, once you get over a few hundred quid there generally has to be a large amount of packaging costs or brand issues going on. I quite liked Zed's free refills for life as it made very high costs seem justifiable (buy it as a baby then pass it on to your grandchild!) but it is (IMO) unworkable as a scheme in reality so not something we would ever do. We'd rather say, OK guys, it's a 200 GBP wax in a 500 GBP container and it'll cost 150 GBP to fill her up. Or something like that.

So the question is... what do you get for your mega money? Nice packaging. A warm feeling of buying into a boutique brand. More carnauba? And there's the problem. Some of the brand image has been built up through marketing that may or may not reflect reality... I have explained in this forum how you can choose to publicise a higher carnauba percentage by measuring them by dry volume. If you're spending the money for more carnauba, make sure you damn well get it. Test it against a cheaper product. Discover why you want this pixie dust so badly... read up on it. Don't listen to the marketer's talk of 'purple carnauba extracted from the Bolivian carnauba mines by local virgins'. Test the durability of the wax yourself, see how it shines. See if it is worth the extra money as a wax, see if the packaging is worth the extra money... see if you get "value for money".

Because I think you could argue that you get value for money when you buy a Rolls Royce Phantom because of the tangible quality and status. But what if you bought a Sony TV and found a Matsui badge underneath the Sony one and it was the same model but twice the price? What if the reputation and marketing was based on just a bit of showmanship?

And that's what you have to watch out for.


----------



## spooj (Mar 29, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> 'purple carnauba extracted from the Bolivian carnauba mines by local virgins'.


you just coudnt put a price on that could you lol :lol:

seriously,if you find any ill buy it.:lol:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> The Escort/911 thing is a bit misguided for a simple reason - it all comes down to value for money.
> 
> A 911 is a great sportscar as at 50k GBP a 996 GT2 may be an expensive car to the average punter, but feck me that's value if you want to annoy owners of Lambos and Ferraris costing 2x or 3x more. I drove a poorly one (albeit RUF tuned!) I was looking after with 'only 490bhp' and it was as quick as you need on the road. It got fixed up and did 619bhp on the dyno a few weeks later. So expensive yes. But good value also (in the eyes of some).
> 
> ...


So are you coming along to take part in our wax test, Dom? Its likely one of your "brood" will be on test...


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

I would love to but I am at the Devon and Cornwall car show on that day  Being the main show 'n' shine sponsor means it would be remiss to pull out, but then again maybe it's good I'm not around from the manufacturers' guild so you guys can be completely independent


----------



## Harley (Oct 19, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> I would love to but I am at the Devon and Cornwall car show on that day  Being the main show 'n' shine sponsor means it would be remiss to pull out, but then again maybe it's good I'm not around from the manufacturers' guild so you guys can be completely independent


Fair play to you Dom :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> I would love to but I am at the Devon and Cornwall car show on that day  Being the main show 'n' shine sponsor means it would be remiss to pull out, but then again maybe it's good I'm not around from the manufacturers' guild so you guys can be completely independent


That is true... but in a blind test, I dont think there would be risk of moving away from that.

Pity you cannot make it, but completely understandable as to why...


----------



## Jaygo (Apr 7, 2008)

This goes from bad to worse.

Even if you feel it's worthwhile paying for one of the better waxes it seems you have to pay 30% just for the container.

I must be getting too old for this but if I want a fancy box to put on display I buy a fancy box.

If I want wax, I want wax in a container suitable for the purpose and no more.

I guess it's down to the customer at the end of the day and what they expect but I'm not inclined to pay more for the smart box than I could pay for a 'tin' of good quality wax which may not be far behind the dearer wax anyway - with or without a fancy box.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

That is the whole point. We will introduce Supernatural in a plastic jar and if people want a nice container they can buy it. It is pretty naive to think that packaging is worthless as part of a product... it's about 95% of the cost of a jar of perfume, for example 

What I am saying is how much value for money is a wax that costs many hundreds or even thousands of pounds giving you? If you are complaining about 30 GBP for a hand turned bespoke container, I'm sure you wouldn't approve of a lump of crystal acrylic if you realised the ingredients cost of the wax within.

Strip away packaging, strip away BS factor and you're left with the product. Does it perform better or not. Is that performance worth the extra money? If many hours of R&D and some rare and special ingredients have boosted the price of the wax, I would suggest it could not boost it *that* high. So what else are you paying for?

Interestingly, you don't have to pay 30% for the container if you don't want to. You could buy Glasur or BoS instead of Supernatural, and they come in plastic containers for a little more money. Say you end up paying 3% for the container... would that make you happier? Or you could buy Crystal Rock in a swarovski container (rrp 560 GBP) for 20x the cost of the normal version, although you will get more wax and a few extras thrown in. For some, a visit from PD and whatever else he does for that price may be worth the extra 9.5k GBP. For others it may not be such good value for money.

It always comes down to value for money at the end of the day.


----------



## Jaygo (Apr 7, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> That is the whole point. We will introduce Supernatural in a plastic jar and if people want a nice container they can buy it. It is pretty naive to think that packaging is worthless as part of a product... it's about 95% of the cost of a jar of perfume, for example
> 
> What I am saying is how much value for money is a wax that costs many hundreds or even thousands of pounds giving you? If you are complaining about 30 GBP for a hand turned bespoke container, I'm sure you wouldn't approve of a lump of crystal acrylic if you realised the ingredients cost of the wax within.
> 
> ...


Thanks Dodo.

I suspect I'm not totally alone in my belief that packaging should normally form a minor part of the total cost.

It can be important with some products, not least in terms of ongoing storage, but not to me in terms of wax, although everyone wouldn't share that view.

I agree at the end of the day you have to decide if the total cost is worth it for the perceived benefit you gain.

Personally I would be far more inclined to buy SN for example if you put it in a plastic container and the cost presumably was reduced by a significant part of £30.

I may be alone in that - which would reduce somewhat the likelihood of it happening  But I suspect I'm not.

You mention BoS for example and I could be tempted, if I thought the cost was justified by the benefit.
I've no idea if it would be, even though they have 'saved' money on the box.

Would SN be a 'better' wax with the money spent on the contents rather than the box.
I assume so but I'm not sure how much better - ignorance and or naivety on my part.

Perhaps it's my upbringing, perhaps I am too naïve or perhaps I'm just not into paying for expensive packaging if I can avoid it.

My comments were not intended to be directed specifically at Dodo or yourself for whom I have considerable respect.

I may not be delighted, but may be willing, to effectively pay £30 for one of your boxes, but I can safely say I would not pay what I imagine some of your competitors effectively charge for their containers, or the contents within.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Macmini said:


> the most important thing to mention:
> 
> germany 3 portugal 2


I think that this was a great result !!!!:thumb:


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Jaygo said:


> Personally I would be far more inclined to buy SN for example if you put it in a plastic container and the cost presumably was reduced by a significant part of £30.


This is exactly what we are going to do (already said so above and on previous threads), and it will be reduced by approx 30 GBP. No profiteering at our end ;-)



Jaygo said:


> Would SN be a 'better' wax with the money spent on the contents rather than the box.


In short, no... the actual ingredients cost per ml between supernatural and the world's most expensive wax would be very similar; maybe a few pence in it. Again, it is an illusion that the contents drive the cost. This is not true. It is mainly in lab time and R&D. The results we've achieved with a reasonable R&D cost have been comparable to much more expensive waxes. If we were to spend another 6 months in the lab we would have a better product, for sure, but maybe only by a negligible amount. Would you pay double for a wax that is just one or two percent better? Say if we did Supernatural Plus for 200 GBP in a utilitarian container? That's a couple of per cent better than normal Supernatural but no one can really spot the difference apart from one or two more weeks of durability?

BTW, thanks for your comments, they are really interesting and take the thread into interesting territory. I like to hope to use my position within the wax manufacturing industry to be the 'masked magician' and educate and explain. After all, just over a year ago, I too was a punter with a pot of ***** carbon and was believing all sorts of stuff... like how stones would embed themselves in a layer of wax and not chip the paint!!! Daft 

Your comments on packaging do reflect a good half of the market, which is why we will do Supernatural plastic version. We also felt it important to do the cheaper panel pots so people could try a 95 GBP wax before spending that kind of money on it. The problem is that if you spend a few hundred or couple of grand on a wax, you are in an exclusive group of customers - all of whom want to believe they have made a good purchase.

All the best
DF


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> This is exactly what we are going to do (already said so above and on previous threads), and it will be reduced by approx 30 GBP. No profiteering at our end ;-)
> 
> In short, no... the actual ingredients cost per ml between supernatural and the world's most expensive wax would be very similar; maybe a few pence in it. Again, it is an illusion that the contents drive the cost. This is not true. It is mainly in lab time and R&D. The results we've achieved with a reasonable R&D cost have been comparable to much more expensive waxes. If we were to spend another 6 months in the lab we would have a better product, for sure, but maybe only by a negligible amount. Would you pay double for a wax that is just one or two percent better? Say if we did Supernatural Plus for 200 GBP in a utilitarian container? That's a couple of per cent better than normal Supernatural but no one can really spot the difference apart from one or two more weeks of durability?
> 
> ...


Thankyou for your posts on this subject, i find them very useful and you have got the knowledge/experience to back up what you say which is great.

I'm glad you brought up the cost of raw materials, it really annoys me when expensive wax manufacturers talk about nuba as if its more precious than gold !! I'm sure that the costs ot the raw materials to make wax are minimal, i think that manufacturers like yourselves have nothing to worry about with this test, if anything people will turn to your products as they are reasonably priced and work!!

I'm in full support of reasonable priced products. What i'm not in support of is manufacturers that produce a product that is no better than say one of your products but stick a gigantic price tag on it ?? If anything i think its profiteering from peoples lack of knowledge on LSP's !!! Which in my mind is unethical, I'm hoping that DaveKG's test will give the consumer some knowledge and help people realise that there is very very little if any difference in say one of your waxes and one of the massive price tag products. I think that alot of people will take a keen interest in the results of the test.

Dave


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Absolutely Dave... that's bang on the money.

We had a choice when we started out. Either 'join the club' and price our products exorbitantly, waffle on about carnauba percentages and mine those Bolivian carnauba seams with our taskforce of Peruvian virgins, or we could try and be a bit more realistic about it. Everyone loves expensive and awesome looking products, whether it's a Brietling or a Bugatti. But you want authenticity and value from them, at whatever price they are. Dodo Juice can never be the cheapest company out there as we make products in small volumes to bespoke recipes (if we bought in third party products and rebranded them they could be half the price) but we're doing what we like doing, including packaging them as nicely as we can... because we feel it adds to the experience. Try levering off a Colly lid and you'll know what I mean. However, we don't want to profiteer or BS the market. If we do a mega expensive wax in a glamorous container, we'll be fairly transparent about where the money is going due to the refill cost for that product. I would be happy if half, or even more than half, or the cost of the product was in the container, as long as people knew that they were buying some nice packaging from us with some lovely wax thrown into the deal. We can't promise to be cheap, but we do promise to be as authentic, open and honest as we can be


----------



## Jaygo (Apr 7, 2008)

Thanks DF

My suspicions about the wisdom of buying some of the more exotic, or should I simply say more expensive, offerings from some of your competitors has not been diminished.


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> Absolutely Dave... that's bang on the money.
> 
> We had a choice when we started out. Either 'join the club' and price our products exorbitantly, waffle on about carnauba percentages and mine those Bolivian carnauba seams with our taskforce of Peruvian virgins, or we could try and be a bit more realistic about it. Everyone loves expensive and awesome looking products, whether it's a Brietling or a Bugatti. But you want authenticity and value from them, at whatever price they are. Dodo Juice can never be the cheapest company out there as we make products in small volumes to bespoke recipes (if we bought in third party products and rebranded them they could be half the price) but we're doing what we like doing, including packaging them as nicely as we can... because we feel it adds to the experience. Try levering off a Colly lid and you'll know what I mean. However, we don't want to profiteer or BS the market. If we do a mega expensive wax in a glamorous container, we'll be fairly transparent about where the money is going due to the refill cost for that product. I would be happy if half, or even more than half, or the cost of the product was in the container, as long as people knew that they were buying some nice packaging from us with some lovely wax thrown into the deal. We can't promise to be cheap, but we do promise to be as authentic, open and honest as we can be


Well just from your comments i will be willing to support DODO next time i need LSP !!! As far as i'm concerned LSP is just for protection and i think that DaveKG's test will prove that very point. I think that from the sounds of it your company takes pride in its products and has strong ethical values and doesn't profiteer from peoples naivity and lack of knowledge and further more you are willing to pass on your knowledge and help the customer which i think is commendable!!

What one of your waxes would be good for my lapis blue paint and why ??

Thanks

Dave


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Hi Dave, it would drag it even further off topic (worth a PM or post in Dodo section really) but two answers... two layers of Supernatural is the best LSP we currently do and should look great; but for less money I'd do 2x layers of Blue Velvet... we have recently taken the liberty to tweak the recipe when the new plastic jars came out and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised


----------



## trhland (Sep 22, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> Hi Dave, it would drag it even further off topic (worth a PM or post in Dodo section really) but two answers... two layers of Supernatural is the best LSP we currently do and should look great; but for less money I'd do 2x layers of Blue Velvet... we have recently taken the liberty to tweak the recipe when the new plastic jars came out and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised


after reading Doms posts. over the past several months ive been a member to this site. i have great respect for you Dom !! and dodo wax. although never have tryed yet . i will soon.. thankyou .

TOM......


----------

