Consumer Reports Tests Car Wax...

Consumer reports wouldn't know what a dog was, even if it came up and bit them on the arse!



Wifey bought a Panasonic vaucum cleaner that CR rated as #1.



The damn thing would go through a drive belt for the beater bar in a month.



The cost of the drive belt was $5.



$60 a year to maintain an upright vaccum cleaner?



The piece of crap broke for good exactly two weeks after the warranty ran out.



I have zero faith in Consumer Reports.



:hairpull :angry :furious:
 
My favorite qoute from the article was: "With the advent of the clear coat you aren't likely to improve the shine on any new vehicle." Yeah right.
 
It seems to me that the people that wax cars for CR, dont like to wax cars. To them its useless. They would rather test exotic cars, or expensive audio equipment. The last car wax test was the same way, hap hazzard.
 
I've never been unsatisfied with any product CR has recommended. Ever.



Their car reviews get unfairly criticized. Care to guess the 3 highest rated vechicles in CR's history?



1. M3

2. S4

3. Boxster



Black Magic is going to sell warehouses full of wax because of this report. I'll certainly try some.



Expensive is not always better. Not in wine, not in bottled water, and as we've found, not in waxes.
 
602rwtq said:
...Expensive is not always better. Not in wine, not in bottled water, and as we've found, not in waxes.
Click to expand...



I don't know what you're drinking but with wine, expensive is almost always better. Try drinking Two Buck Chuck, MadDog or a jug of Gallo and compare it to a $40-$80 bottle and then tell me that you don't notice the difference. :rofl



With water and wax I do agree with you though. :bigups
 
ive got 3 quarters of a bottle of bm liquid wax you can have lol. i bought it four years ago i think i used it twice......twice.
 
I just read the CR article. What BS! And what was that crap about there not being any real polish anymore? They expect wax to clean and protect or it's inferior. And where they stated that you can't add any extra gloss to a new paint job; All you can do is protect it. That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. My truck is a year old and the paint looks way better than it did when it was new on the lot, because of real polish and wax. Now all these people with new cars will read that article and think they don't need to wax their car for a while.



And they tested the cleaning ability of the wax. As far as I'm concerned, wax is not supposed to clean. It's to protect.



P21S was rated in the middle of the pack, under Turtle Wax. Unbelievable.

:har:



They could have at least mentioned claying before waxing. CR just waxed over top of contaminants. :rolleyes:
 
jfelbab said:
I don't know what you're drinking but with wine, expensive is almost always better. Try drinking Two Buck Chuck, MadDog or a jug of Gallo and compare it to a $40-$80 bottle and then tell me that you don't notice the difference. :rofl



With water and wax I do agree with you though. :bigups
Click to expand...



His statement was "Expensive is not always better" which means all that he has to do is list one inexpensive wine like say, Trader Joe's French Market Merlot ($4, which I use as a table wine) and compare it to an overhyped winery churning out overpriced reds, like say Gainey, and he is 100% correct.



In my wine tasting experience, wineries tend to specialize in a couple of varietals, yet turn out a full range of wines. The wines that they don't specialize in tend to be way overpriced. Because of that, and the fact a well regarded winery might have had a poor crop of grapes one year, more expensive doesn't mean better.



Back to the topic, wine is like car care products, and most things on this earth. One manufacturer may make great wax and poor detail spray. They may make great polish and mediocre wax.
 
Studdg said:
His statement was "Expensive is not always better" which means all that he has to do is list one inexpensive wine like say, Trader Joe's French Market Merlot ($4, which I use as a table wine) and compare it to an overhyped winery churning out overpriced reds, like say Gainey, and he is 100% correct.



In my wine tasting experience, wineries tend to specialize in a couple of varietals, yet turn out a full range of wines. The wines that they don't specialize in tend to be way overpriced. Because of that, and the fact a well regarded winery might have had a poor crop of grapes one year, more expensive doesn't mean better.



Back to the topic, wine is like car care products, and most things on this earth. One manufacturer may make great wax and poor detail spray. They may make great polish and mediocre wax.
Click to expand...





Actually you just proved my point. TJ's FM Merlot is not even in the same league as Gainey's Merlot. Gainey's 2002 Merlot may be over-hyped but it is leagues better than TJ's. Gainey's Merlot comes from their own estate vineyards. The Gainey Merlot exudes tons of stone fruit, plum and blackberry with a fresh nose and a lengthy finish. TJ, OTOH, literally sucks. I wouldn't even use this for cooking. The aromas don't conform to this varietal and the best thing I can say about it is that I didn't get sick after drinking it.



I tasted the 2004 of TJ and 2002 Gainey Merlot (the Gainey twice)
 
I read the report at my Dad's today (he is a subscriber) and what a joke! How can they downgrade P21S for poor cleaning ability when it isn't made with any cleaning ability? If they had read the instructions that come with the wax, they'd have known it was not a cleaner wax and that if used on paint more than 6 months old, it should be polished first for best results.



How can you rate a product lower when you expect it to have an attribute it doesn't have and you don't follow the manufacturer's recommendations?
 
Logically speaking, it is impossible for me to prove your point (which was countering that sometimes a cheap wine is better than more expensive wine) without a list of every single wine and where it ranks. Unless every higher priced wine ranks higher than every lower priced wine, your original criticism was wrong. According to The Wine Spectator, you are wrong, as there are many cheaper wines that are better than several of the higher priced counterparts.



From my many tastings in Santa Ynes and Santa Maria, Gainey's reds are some of my least favorite reds in the over $15 category. After living in Santa Barbara for 5 years and tasting wines at least 3 times per year, Gainey may very well make the most unspectacular wines produced in the Santa Ynez Valley. Perhaps me and my wine tasting friends are simpletons, but I never met a single person in Santa Barbara that was impressed with Gainey.
 
Scottwax said:
I read the report at my Dad's today (he is a subscriber) and what a joke! How can they downgrade P21S for poor cleaning ability when it isn't made with any cleaning ability? If they had read the instructions that come with the wax, they'd have known it was not a cleaner wax and that if used on paint more than 6 months old, it should be polished first for best results.



How can you rate a product lower when you expect it to have an attribute it doesn't have and you don't follow the manufacturer's recommendations?
Click to expand...



CR typically writes it's reports for people who lack any knowledge of the products. In this case the reviewers also demonstrated that trait. I believe too many people buy that CR line and make that their sole source of information on purchase decisions.



In other words, I wouldn't wrap my garbage in this CR review and I'm now much more suspect of any of their reports.



I mean how could they recommend a product that they claim instills scratches.



CR Credibility Index (CRCI) = Zero
 
How can they downgrade P21S for poor cleaning ability when it isn't made with any cleaning ability?
Click to expand...



That's the problem with CR. They knonw just enough to be dangerous and they can't set up an appropriate test to be fair. There audio reviews are even worse.
 
SilverLexus said:
That's the problem with CR. They knonw just enough to be dangerous and they can't set up an appropriate test to be fair. There audio reviews are even worse.
Click to expand...





And just think.... someone got a paycheck for that "review."
 
Interesting thread, and I hope my reply isn't the one to make it explode, but I have a few comments.....



- For a turtle wax scoring higher than P21S in gloss, if the subject turtle wax was the older carnauba I would say it is debatable, but if the turtle we are talking about is platinum ultra glos, then yes, turtle wax IS glossier than P21S. I have said it several times, and I will say it again, P21S/S100 is overhyped. I would take the turtle ultra easily.... Not in the souveran class, but right there with Megs #26 and nattys blue



- Just because a product wears a turtlle wax or eagle one doesn't mean is bad. In fact, TWPUG is an excellent product, as is nanowax. Their durabiliy stinks, but the look they leave will please even the autopian crowd. Come on autopians!



- I am not surprised to not see mother in the winners circle. While the reflections line is undisputably the best you can get OTC, the cleaner ability of advanced car wax is very mild, and top coat has no cleaners.......



- To all those of you who say CR should be trusted only for ovens, you are wrong.... they shouldn't be trusted even for ovens. But regardless, in some things thay are worse than in others. For cars, computers and wax they are basically worthless.



- Inconsistent results. If cleaning ability matters, mothers cleaner wax should have been in the winners. If it didn't matter that much, how is possible to have TWPUG and P21S in the podium?





Spend your money in a different suscription.







Alex
 
AlexRuiz said:
- I am not surprised to not see mother in the winners circle. While the reflections line is undisputably the best you can get OTC, the cleaner ability of advanced car wax is very mild, and top coat has no cleaners.......
Click to expand...

According to Forrest from Mothers, their admin made a booboo and failed to get samples to CR. They sound a bit embarrassed. :o
 
autobahn said:
durable/endurance isn't what we're looking for :)
Click to expand...



By golly......... It just so happens that MY main desire regarding goop placed upon conveyances to protect the paint and keep the critter at least partially shiny IS durability and endurance.
 
Alfisti said:
According to Forrest from Mothers, their admin made a booboo and failed to get samples to CR. They sound a bit embarrassed. :o
Click to expand...



That doesn't sound right. One thing that CR does do is buy everything themselves no different than a consumer -- even cars they buy from dealers. They don't take samples, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top