Consumer Reports Wax Test

I would put absolutely no stock in that test. It's already five years old, they did not test any of the Meguiar's Professional products (it's not like you can't find places besides auto body supply shops that sell the Meguiar's Professional series - Pep Boys carries some of them national, and Murray's AUto Parts does regionally inthe upper Midwest), nor did they test some of the other products Like Klasse and Zaino which are easily purchased over the internet.
 
I don't take much stock in comsumer reports, at a pro level. I used to work in the lawn/tree industry as a summer job, and the trimmers/chainsaws that they reccomended were mediocre at best. I feel the same way about their wax tests. They oughta stick to dishwashers, IMHO.
 
Guys, guys...CR isn't writing with the obsessed detailer or professional arborist in mind, but instead, your normal everyday consumer who wants to keep their car looking good or, on the other hand, take out a few trees on an infrequent basis.



Are their results completely invalid because they didn't test all the waxes/polishes/cleaners/etc. out there that are popular with the Autopia crowd?
 
it's funny that the zymol cleaner wax won, that stuff is terrible, leaves a hologram like residue, chalky, but it does smell good.
 
Blake said:
They are out of date for one thing. You wouldn't read tests on a 2000 Honda.
Click to expand...



Not to play "CR Defender" here, but of the waxes tested, how many can you buy the exact same thing of today?



Now, how many cars from 2000 have remained the same?
 
tabinha said:
Get yourselves a copy of Guru report wax issue. It is eye opening.
Click to expand...



:nixweiss Not so sure now that it is a couple years old, new products have been introduced and old ones have been reformulated. Great primer on exterior detailing though.
 
I think it's a great OTC test, at least some effort went into it. As for all the companies that don't mass market like winners in the G tests like Zaino/Klasse/P21s, it's their own fault for not mass marketing, they clearly have a quality product that would do well in the market place. Maybe some day a big company will buy one of these smaller boutique shops and expand them into the mass market. Guru tests defintely should be updated and stick to an all synthetic test IMO.
 
Wow, they sure put a thick layer of wax on the vehicle in the first picture! Yahoo that's thick!'



They even goes as far to say that waxing is "drudgery." Huh? Waxing is quite possibly the easiest part of the detailing process, especially with something like Pinnacle Paste Glaz.
 
Given improper technique, waxing is terrible. I remember how it used to take me 2 hours to wax my car, and that was if I didn't get too much on the trim. Non-staining waxes, thin coats and quality MFs go a very long way towards making waxing easy - I put a coat of Natty's on in 15 minutes including hazing, and you can put a coat of Optimum on while you're drying for 2 minutes or so of extra work.
 
I somehow think this will devolve into a flamefest, but IIRC, that Consumer Reports had a lot more scientific methodology, with identical test plates, instrumented bead height/angle measurement, etc. The guys who do these tests at CR may be weenies and dirndlskirts, but they ARE engineers.
 
I have never found a Consumer Reports test worth reading. Every "test" they do is merely mediocre and conducted by people who have no clue what they are doing.



If you are going to compare waxes.....you need to have a detailing professional doing it.



If you are going to compare cars.....you need someone who evaluates cars for a living.



These guys, engineers or not, don't have a damned clue what they are doing half the time.



My 2 cents.



PS: I thought Nu Finish was pretty good stuff........12 years ago!~
 
Setec Astronomy said:
I somehow think this will devolve into a flamefest, but IIRC, that Consumer Reports had a lot more scientific methodology, with identical test plates, instrumented bead height/angle measurement, etc. The guys who do these tests at CR may be weenies and dirndlskirts, but they ARE engineers.
Click to expand...



I agree that they went about the "objective" tests in a kind of scientific manner, which is as it should be. However, their "subjective" evaluations were sometimes surprising, i.e. their "rankings" for #16 and Blitz Wax.



It's easy to be a critic, and I know they worked hard on that project, so I don't want to be too negative; the Wax Test has its merits and actually introduced me to P21S (actually, I now use S100).



However, Steve's past comments to Mike Phillips and about certain Meg's products, make me believe he (for whatever reason) had some kind of axe to grind; but that doesn't mean the Wax Report doesn't have merit. (And I'm not at all a regular Meg's user, except for occasional applications of #9 and #16).





Todd
 
I've seen enough flaws in past CR testing methodology that at this point I have no faith in their ability to report accurately, objectively, and without pre-conceived biases. Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top