guru reports

J

jch217

New member
Did anyone see the top ten list from the Guru reports. I currently use the Menzerna 3 step process. I am satisified with it but was wondering if there is a better wax out there. If anyone has or seen the report a summary would be greatly appreciated.

:wavey
 
The results are copyrighted, so if you want a complete listing, you have to purchase the report.



The report is now a couple years old, and several new products have been introduced, so when you get the report, you may want to try a few of the top finishers along with some of the newer product lines and decide for yourself what you like best.
 
jch217- Welcome to Autopia!



A few ideas that come to mind are:



4-Star UPP looks nice and gives incredible slickness.



Meguiar's #16 is a nice "old school" carnauba that lasts a long time and beads like crazy.



Pinnacle Souveran gives a special look that is really quite unique (but it doesn't last long- easy to apply though).
 
Scottwax said:
The results are copyrighted, so if you want a complete listing, you have to purchase the report.



The report is now a couple years old, and several new products have been introduced, so when you get the report, you may want to try a few of the top finishers along with some of the newer product lines and decide for yourself what you like best.
Click to expand...



I agree.



The report is good though. It gives nice tidbits on proper application and how each surface behaves.
 
Zaino, p21s, Klasse, are tops and is common knowledge at this point. You wouldn't believe 4th if I told you, and 5 and 6 are expensive nuba products. AS for #16, it was in the test and didn't make the top 25, I'm not saying that's a bad product just that Guru wasn't that impressed. UPP wasn't in the test but has been compared very closely to two other products that have been tested and one was in guru tests and didn't finish in top ten and the other scored very low in a mini test that's not official yet. I can't wait until the new tests come out in 2005, but the old tests can steer you in the right direction. I have thrown away too many detailing products and I am always going to do thorough research before buying others. I usually look at polls, posts by long time enthusiasts (more than pro's), and more importantly Guru tests. If in 2005 they put a different product on top I will defintely buy it, now that's power. I wouldn't be suprised if the top product stays the same either.

http://www.autopia-carcare.com/inf-klasse.html



Yes, it is an out dated test, but the top product Zaino (only one to score an A grade) has even improved itself with the new Z2pro, and the others in the top 5 are the same formulation as the tested product if I'm not mistaken. The reason I like Guru testing is because you know they were unbiased and they know how to test waxes. They have tested these newer fad sealants and they still aren't as durable as Zaino. Guru reports can be bought for 7 bucks now at sportcarcare.com. It also depends on what your looking for, if you want durabilty Zaino would be hard to beat. They started the super synthetic sealants and they are light years ahead of the rest. Instant cures and better formulations keep them upfront. I'm the kind of person who is always looking for something better, it's my nature, but everytime I try to find a product better than Zaino, I fail. However, if you want something to fill in imperfections, p21s would be a better choice, if you have an older car that needs oxidation removal AIO and SG would work good together. I'd recommend any of these three before any other product. Funny thing I've been using 2 of these (Z and P21s) long before the Guru tests came out and it was no suprise to me they finished 1-2. I added klasse and it's good stuff too, especially AIO (which should be in everyones detailing tools whether you use SG or not).

Are you currently using FMJ? Or is your 3 step IP, FPII, then Glaze. Might be dumb question, but FMJ is a pretty good choice too, I'd defintely finish that bottle.
 
Burlyq-just FYI, 7 of the 10 cars on the back cover of the Guru Reports are my pictures...and all those vehicles were waxed with Meguiars #26. ;)
 
#26 was in the top 25 and they rated it higher than #16. Can you sign my copy? Which 7? Many nuba's will make your car look better than the synthetics, but the durabilty of the synthetics is why they ruled the test. If you were going to wax your car every week I'd stick with a nuba myself. But I think the sythetics look real nice too and of course last about 6 times longer.
 
Burlyq said:
#26 was in the top 25 and they rated it higher than #16. Can you sign my copy? Which 7?
Click to expand...



They also made a scoring error on #26 in durability, so it should have ranked even higher. I understand they put the corrected score in the glass cleaning issue.



I don't know why (at least durability-wise) #26 did better, because I get noticably better durability and beading with #16. When it comes to appearance, that is subjective.



I don't have my copy right in front of me, but the Bentley, Diablo, 66 Mustang, M3, S600 are my customer's cars. I can't remember the other two off hand.



I think me signing your copy would make it worthless on EBay in 50 years. ;)
 
The one thing that disappointed me about the test was the snow and freezing rain that seemed to kill most of the products. I know that this real world and it was also about durability but i was left with a slight ' what if ' after reading.

I was also surprized about the "cheap" wax that finished in the top five, especially now that they say it is no longer sold (they might be kicking themselves for taking it off the market)
 
"I think me signing your copy would make it worthless on EBay in 50 years"



Lol, this publication will be worthless when the next one comes out, I here in 05. I disagree with a lot of the rankings, just not the top 3. I can't wait until next issue, I hope they have Autoglym, new sonus?, poorboy's, wolf, UPP, TS clear, and many others that weren't in this one, but that are very popular. I think there is great public interest in a new test that is unbiased with all the new products. If it does come out in 05 I'd encourage every Autopian to pick up a copy.



let me ask you this, what do you like better #16 or Natty's and why, just curious?
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Really? I found their methodology to be surprisingly unscientific.
Click to expand...



The purpose of the report was to take the product out of the lab and test in real world environment and report the results in a manner everyone could understand. Steve has explained this over and over again. Steve also states that Guru Reports is not a bible but only a guideline.



I can see why Steve is tired of explaining himself and the testing method over, and over, and over, and over...
 
Burlyq said:




let me ask you this, what do you like better #16 or Natty's and why, just curious?
Click to expand...



As a topper, I like Natty's more because it looks so wet. I prefer #16 as a stand alone LSP because of the durability. Looks a little deeper than Nattys but not as wet.
 
Well I would not get too excited about #26 wax. I used it for 6 years on my prior Lexus and it can't hold a candle to P21S or the Pinnacle products. #26 imparts a yellow tint to the color. Pain in the butt to remove if it hazes up too much.



I think Guru did a great job because they applied a very objective methodology and looked at results over a long period of time. You can tell by their process that the editors know quite a bit about detailing.



Steve L is still doing wax tests over at Roadfly and he posted a new test with a select and small group of waxes there recently.



I like #16 and Natty's both but durability is less of a big deal for me. This is my logic:



1. No carnauba is going to last much past 2 months in any event.

2. The new waxes like P21S and Nattys and Souveran are so easy to apply and buff out that re-applying is no big deal.



Just my view of the world. :)
 
Well I'm not sure why anyone would complain about them being unscientific. What they did was follow the manufactorers instructions to a tee, even if it meant using many products. If a product like klasse said use our cleaner first, then they used the cleaner. If a company like blackfire suggested three products, they used all three cleanser, polish, then deep gloss spray. So if there's a problem it is with manufactorers recommendations. Also measuring bead size over time is a pretty smart way to do it. I really like natty's too but prefer to go to collinite as a stand alone, but I still want to try #16. Out of all the products I think only three were beading after 8 weeks, Zaino, klasse, and collinite. Suprising a nuba has that kind of durabilty, I have to go back and check what they said about 16 I don't remember...Actually 26 was still good at 8 weeks and 16 made it close to 8 weeks, I checked.
 
dternst said:
The purpose of the report was to take the product out of the lab and test in real world environment and report the results in a manner everyone could understand. Steve has explained this over and over again. Steve also states that Guru Reports is not a bible but only a guideline.

I can see why Steve is tired of explaining himself and the testing method over, and over, and over, and over...
Click to expand...

I totally concur it's just a guidline. People should put whatever they want on their car and the differences aren't that big of deal. I think the value of the test comes for people who are looking for durabilty as the biggest factor. It is also a very good publication for the begginer to get real good info and tips. I think the next guru tests will have a lot of closer results with all of these new companies making better and better products, we'll see.
 
Burlyq said:
Well I'm not sure why anyone would complain about them being unscientific.
Click to expand...



How about for starters, that not all the test panels were identical? "close" to the same color (except for the one that WAS a different color). All 8 were trunklids that came from a junkyard, so they would all be in different condition, or at least not known to be in the same condition. That's not very scientific to me.



I don't want to get into a drawn-out debate on this, because obviously what's "scientific" to me is not to some of you, and some of you seem to have some acquaintance with the authors, and want to stand up for them. So I will retire from this thread, although I think the salient point about the report was, apart from the top finishers and the bottom, was that, in large measure, there was no noticeable difference between the products...which kind of means we are ARGUING OVER NOTHING.
 
LOL, dude I think you are under the impresion I have some kind of problem with you. It just happened that you put out that statement with no clarification. Now, you expanded on you problem with the report but still didn't get into enough detail for me. There certainly was differences between products, some lost beads in one to two weeks, and some not for 7 months. Also, all the panels where polished (same three polishes on all the panels), so they were as close to identical you can get w/o putting all 46 polishes on the same car. I don't know any of the authors and only bought the report when it was heavily discounted and many years old. I wasn't arguing with you I was trying to get at what the issue was. Your first post was vague at best. Relax a little and make your point., because this statement tells me nothing.



Setec Astronomy said:
Really? I found their methodology to be surprisingly unscientific.
Click to expand...
 
Setec Astronomy said:
How about for starters, that not all the test panels were identical? "close" to the same color (except for the one that WAS a different color). All 8 were trunklids that came from a junkyard, so they would all be in different condition, or at least not known to be in the same condition. That's not very scientific to me.



I don't want to get into a drawn-out debate on this, because obviously what's "scientific" to me is not to some of you, and some of you seem to have some acquaintance with the authors, and want to stand up for them. So I will retire from this thread, although I think the salient point about the report was, apart from the top finishers and the bottom, was that, in large measure, there was no noticeable difference between the products...which kind of means we are ARGUING OVER NOTHING.
Click to expand...





With all due respect, I'd suggest that if you don't like the way things are done... do it yourself. Develop your own test plan, collect the samples, and perform your own test. Plain and simple.



Guru Reports, like the information shared here at Autopia, is meant only as a guideline. The methods provided on Autopia aren't always the most scientific either, but you take it for what it's worth and move on. You can be in a flock but don't always have to follow the flock. Know what I mean...
 
Are the Guru Reports perfect? No

Is it time they were updated? Yes ...please Steve!

Is it a very good GUIDE to a large number of LSP's? Yes

Was it worth every penny I spent on purchasing it? Yes

Do I value the opinions expessed in the Guru Reports over those expressed by product shills, forum hacks, vendors etc. YES I DO!



dternst says it very well, if you do not like the Guru reports 'step up to the plate' and carry out your own tests, until then I'll be a regular reader of the Guru Reports and Steve's mini tests; I recommend that anyone else who is really interested in the comparative testing of LSPs do the same :xyxthumbs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top