Zymöl Vintage... what do you charge?

[Less]

As I continue to do more and more research about Carnauba, I'm becoming more and more convinced that ZV is, in fact, a superior product.



From what I've learned so far, (and some of what I knew previously), carnauba is extremely hard, is NOT readily soluble, has an extremely high melting point, and can not be broken down by water.



That sounds like something I want on my car paint, doesn't it??



However, those properties make it nearly impossible to get pure carnauba from the Brazillian Carnauba Palm Tree, onto your car. Oils and solvents, and mixing carnauba with other, more forgiving waxes makes it easier.



Therefore, as the content of pure carnauba goes up, the oils, solvents, and other waxes need to work harder in order to make the product more spreadable. Or, they need to be higher quality oils, solvents, and waxes. However, when these products evaporate from the surface of the car all that's left is carnauba.



This also explains the "hand" application of ZV. Heat is known to aid in the breakdown of carnauba wax. Therefore, since ZV contains such a high volume of such a resilient product, the introduction of heat aids in the application process. How is this accomplished? From what I've read, ZV contains certain enzymes that interact with your own body head and act as a catalyst to aid in the application of the wax.



Furthermore, the 61% by volume shouldn't be so difficult to understand. Since carnauba is what's left behind after the evaporation of the solvents, it stands to reason that a higher carnauba content would leave a thicker, more durable protective coat. For example: if Brand X contains 5% carnauba and ZV contains 61%. Then it stands to reason that applying 1oz of Brand X will leave your car with .05 oz of carnauba protection. Whereas 1oz of ZV will leave .61oz of carnauba protection. Since your car is a finite size, that means that the protective coating must be thicker and harder when using ZV.



And, since the ZV coating is thicker, it stands to reason that it is more durable. Just like a large chunk of ice takes longer to melt than a small chunk, .61oz of carnauba will take longer to break down than .05oz given the same driving conditions.



This is all basic info I know. I got it from wikipedia and wisegeek.com. I'm still learning, but it seems that this information supports the idea that a 61% carnauba formula should cost more. 1) It takes higher quality, more specialized ingredients to make it work. And 2) It seems logical that it would perform better than Brand X because it leaves behind MORE protective wax.



Please don't come back at me with "Why does more = better" I just attempted to explain it, and I think I did a pretty good job.

 

[GoudyL]

That is, unless you care to share your expert knowledge of wax manufacturing. I'm very anxiousl to learn why you call carnauba a meaningless ingredient when it serves as the core of EVERY single car wax on the market.

I said that the claim of "most carnauba" is vague/meaningless in the context of product(s) that is a mixture of functional ingredients.



That's because is a product that is a mixture of functional ingredients, it is the relative ratio of the ingredients to each other that is important, and not the absolute amounts.



If someone want's to say Carnauba is the predominent wax in the Zymol formula, that's fine. It could very well be.



Your statement that Carnauba is the core of every single car wax on the market is silly. There are any number of synthetic waxes that contain no carnauba, to say nothing of waxes that are based on other wax ingredients such as Polyethylene/PAO waxes, montan waxes, and silicone waxes/resins, PDMS etc.

Your "guess" isn't a fact. It's just a thinly veiled opinion. And it was established that the 61% is by volume. Therefore, I would expect that a 22oz tube of Vintage contains just over 13 oz's of pure No1 Brazillian white carnauba.

Link to where it was shown that ZV is 61% by volume of the entire formula?



IMHO it's more likely to be 61% of the wax composition, and that wax composition is a fraction of the total formula, compared to things like water, solvents, silicones etc.

And throwing around your familiarity with fine chemical engineering isn't?

It's more relavent, and grounded in reality.

Could you at least acknowledge that there are OTHER posssible motivations for buying the product? Or are all Zymol users just manifesting this "pathological need"

There could be other motivations, for example the untrue belief that zymol is measurably better than other competing waxes in its class.

There's that jealousy again. You're presenting your opinion "people with money don't know how to act with it" as fact.

Just ask the "Dean of Wall St", Bernie Madoff.

And since you're not rich, you must not be as smart as they are.

And if you're so rich, why aren't you smart? :sign



Less, looking at this from the other side, you appear to doing a great job of projective identification claiming that other people suffer from your repressed insecurities about wealth, intelligence, and penis size. You are acting this out, by claiming that people who don't share your views about your idealised car wax are resentful haters.



Also a good argument could be made that at the extreme tail end, very smart people are less likely to be rich, since they are attracted to fields/professions that don't pay much/have much opportunity for wealth creation such as the sciences/humanities and then teaching/research positions therein.

Examples don't necessarily explain general truths or trends.

But they do just fine for knocking down theories that can't explain them. :rules:

 

[Less]

Alright Goudy, you and I are done.



You have yet to demonstrate to me that you actually have a knowledge of chemical wax manufacturing. You keep representing your opinions as fact and I'm just not buying it.



Surely you know that Bernie Madoff does not represent the entire wealthy population. What you're doing is 'spinning' the truth. And I can see right through it.



You can claim 'projective identification' all you want. But I don't see PhD after your name. But the woman sitting next to me has one, and she says you're wrong.



More importantly though, calling me dumb and insulting my penis size just brought this whole conversation down to a level to which I'm not willing to lower myself.



By resorting to name-calling and insults, you've only proven my theory about insecurity and ignorance.

 

[CocheseUGA]

while i agree with your OPINION CocheseUGA, as I wouldn't be able to justify the price, it is quite simple that this wax is worth that price simply because someone will pay that price for the goods.

This isn't a 2+2=5 situation. This is more of a Picaso painting situation. Surely paintings didn't take 1 million dollars to make. So why should a painting be worth a million dollars?

Carnauba percentages have been proven over and over to be worthless in high end detailing other than as a bragging point. With high grade raw 'nuba costing under 10 bucks a pound, there's not much special about having a wax with an extremely high nuba content, other than it makes it that much harder to apply IMHO.

Surely you have to give them credit for development and marketing, and if nothing else the cost is due to the product being exclusive. Maybe not worth a few select ingredients, exclusivity, and the developing cost to you: but if they're target consumer group is willing to pay 2k, then it's worth 2k

Good response. I'm not a big believer in one person justifying it = justification, but I can understand the point. And yes, that, just like everything else I've said, is merely my opinion.



And to be somewhat on-topic, I would recommend any upcharge done be made clear is for the application, not the product.

 

[Less]

Right, you did “research on detail forums” (don’t know what that proved?) and went off of AutoGeek’s advertisement on how great it is because they’re so reputable. I agree, they are a reputable & successful company, but they’re trying to move product just like every other company. You’d figure they’d try to pump up their high end wax to the max when their profit margin is most likely expotentially greater that all the others they offer.

David - I'm not sure what your point is. If you're being critical of my decision to purchase Fuzion, that's fine. You can have your opinion. HOwever, I would like to point out that this is your second post where you ignored the most important and compelling factor in my purchase decision - I got a sample, tried it myself, and loved it.



Also, your points about marketing and profit margin are well taken. And I don't doubt that there is an obscene profit margin on many high end waxes. However, this is predicated on two things 1) Volume. More expensive products usually sell less because somewhere in the market there is a line where the product is prohibitively expensive. 2) There are significant development costs in creating the formula and setting up manufacturing facilities. And these costs need to be recouped within a reasonable amount of time.



Knowing this, I used an opportunistic approach in my purchase decision. I took advantage of the BOGO offered on the sample jar a few weeks back. (This alone should tell you that there's significant profit margin in the full-price product). I also took advantage of the concurrent sale on the mini-conniseur kit.



I realized that I could get 12 oz of Fuzion for $100. (2 x 3oz @ $50)xBOGO = 4 3oz sample jars for $100. On top of that I could get the mini-kit for $80, which included another 3 oz jar for a total of 15oz of wax.



Regular price for 16oz of Fuzion (8 oz jar + 1 refill) was $180



However, by taking advantage of the sales, I spent the same $180 and I got a wash soap, a pre-wax cleaner, a sealant, applicators, and towels along with my wax. The only tradeoff is that I got 1 less ounce of wax (15 oz vs 16 oz) and I didn't get the sexy wooden box. Altogether I think it was a pretty good deal, and that certainly influenced my buying decision as well.

 

[Less]

And to be somewhat on-topic, I would recommend any upcharge done be made clear is for the application, not the product.

Why? The product represents a $2,100 investment!! Isn't he entitled to recoup that expense?

 

[imported_Jakerooni]

Why? The product represents a $2,100 investment!! Isn't he entitled to recoup that expense?

Yep he sure is... And I think the answer and concencious on the matter of the OP's question is a $100 upcharge is a fair estimate for a wide variety of reasons. Hopefully he can get more than 21 cars out of a tub in which he may or may not get refills on based on how he uses the wax.



Everything else in this thread is just filler garbage of a difference of opinions.



I honestly think Zymol gets this bashing alot because there's simply no other company I know of making $2100 and up wax. I know there's a $1000 wax from a competing company which is considered super high end. But with Zymol a mere $1000 breaks you into their mid grade stuff (or so it seems) And anyone with half a brain that can think for themselves clearly has to ability to ask.... Why???.



You have this notion that 61% nuba means something special. I can go out in my shop and pull half a dozen waxes off the shelfs that claim that and higher. ( a few claiming 100% right on the bottles) No I know it's a bunch of bull. I know pure Nuba isn't usable. But the claim is right there on the lables of many waxes... And it all means exactly jack crap to me. A good wax is a good wax. It dosen't need to cost much. Most of my waxes (all but one) cost less than $30. I've personally compared these to the $100+ waxes I've gotten to sample and it's simply no concernable difference and thus a waste of money to spend the big dollars. If I actually had clients that wanted "Brand X" and asked for it so be it I would then look into getting some of "Brand X". However right now I present my wax as 2 options. 1 Paste wax or 2 Liquid wax. I've never had anyone ask anything above that. 99% of the people just don't care. They just want a nice looking car. Which is why I go back to the hobbiest. If they want it by all means go buy it and have fun with it. but to most people it dosen't make any sense. You seemed to be beyond obsessed with it for some reason. Rest assured I'm not jealous of Zymol by any means. I can get great cars looking great without it just fine. Even if I had the means to plunk down there's just nothing about it that appeals to me.

 

[GoudyL]

From what I've learned so far, (and some of what I knew previously), carnauba is extremely hard, is NOT readily soluble, has an extremely high melting point, and can not be broken down by water.



That sounds like something I want on my car paint, doesn't it??

Not really, there are many other aspects a substance needs to have in order to be a good ingredient in a car wax.



The fatty alcohols in Carnauba wax, cause it to be slightly hydroscopic, and the linear structure of its molecules means it doesn't form stabilising entanglements within itself. It's not detergent resistent either.



A reactive aminosilicone that bonds to the paint and to other components in the formulation is going to be much more durable.

However, those properties make it nearly impossible to get pure carnauba from the Brazillian Carnauba Palm Tree, onto your car. Oils and solvents, and mixing carnauba with other, more forgiving waxes makes it easier.

Not exactly, disolving carnauba in solvents would require strong solvents, and leave behind a wax film that would be streaky and too hard to buff.



So what you do, is you soften the carnauba by combining it with oily substances, and further combine the carnauba with emulsifiers/emulsifying waxes, thus forming a colloidal dispersion of softened wax microparticles, in a continious phase.



The emulsifying waxes are critical, which is why you see oxidised waxes used. These waxes have acid groups (acid value) which make them polar, and easily emulsifable. Classically people use montan wax's (Luwax or Licowax) or various oxidised polyethylene/PAO waxes.



Further a good formulation will contain silicone oils which lubricate the movement of the wax microparticles in the emulsion and film. This helps form a level film of wax on the surface. Of course the silicone oils contribute additional functionality because they are very glossy, hydrophobic, and slick/non-tacky.



When you spread the wax on the surface of the car, the emulsion breaks (due to the shearing and evaporation of solvents), the wax microparticles form a thin film layer, and are further "smooshed" together when you buff the wax.

Therefore, as the content of pure carnauba goes up, the oils, solvents, and other waxes need to work harder in order to make the product more spreadable. Or, they need to be higher quality oils, solvents, and waxes.

Not exactly, welcome to the world of emulsions and colloids.

However, when these products evaporate from the surface of the car all that's left is carnauba.

Along with emulsifiers and lubricants and all other non-volatile solid ingredients in the wax.



In the case of emulsifers, you don't want things in the film that make it more soluble. Thus car wax formulators would prefer not to use ingredients that require emulsifers or retain their emulsification abilities in the final film.



This is one of the reasons that the actual amounts of wax in a formulation tend to be quite low.

This also explains the "hand" application of ZV. Heat is known to aid in the breakdown of carnauba wax. Therefore, since ZV contains such a high volume of such a resilient product, the introduction of heat aids in the application process.

Not at all, the carnauba wax is happily inert at body temperatures. All that's happening is that the solid emulsion has a softening point around body temperature. Heat makes both the microparticles and the continious phase more energetic, Same idea as butter softening at room temperature.

How is this accomplished? From what I've read, ZV contains certain enzymes that interact with your own body head and act as a catalyst to aid in the application of the wax.

How? By what mechanism?

Furthermore, the 61% by volume shouldn't be so difficult to understand.

Maybe it's much more complex than you are aware of? Remember that the wax film is 100% solids. So 61% by solids means the wax film will be 61% carnauba wax. 61% by volume means the wax film will be more more than 61% carnauba by volume.

Since carnauba is what's left behind after the evaporation of the solvents, it stands to reason that a higher carnauba content would leave a thicker, more durable protective coat.

Absolutely not. What matters is how well that coat bonds to the paint, and how well it bonds to itself; how thick it is a secondary consideration.



Only the first layer of molecules in the wax film can bond/interact with the paint surface. The next and subsequent layers can only interact with the layer of molecules that are interacting with the paint.



This is why straight mineral oil would be a poor wax, the first layer binds nicely to the paint, but the later layers have so much less interaction with each other that they come right off.



Now when we have a wax that contains reactive aminosilicones, these will bond to the paint, and to other reactive ingredients in the wax, thus forming a cross linked network throughout the film. Even better if that film contains things like highly branched compounds and hard particles that form stabilising entanglements or stiffen the film by restricting movement within the film.



In contrast, the molecules of carnauba wax, are mostly linear, with only perhaps slight bending due to ester linkages etc.



Where thickness is a consideration, is in the optical distiortion that the wax film creates. The thicker/less uniform carnauba film, creates a "wet look" because of this. But you can get the same or better effect by using bulky polymers to create a thick synthetic film. This is also why sealants look better on metalic cars, less distoration allows the metalic flake to shine better.

For example: if Brand X contains 5% carnauba and ZV contains 61%. Then it stands to reason that applying 1oz of Brand X will leave your car with .05 oz of carnauba protection. Whereas 1oz of ZV will leave .61oz of carnauba protection. Since your car is a finite size, that means that the protective coating must be thicker and harder when using ZV.

No. The thickness of the film is limited by the waxes ability to bind with itself. The waxes will form films of roughly equal thickness, and durability of the film is much more influenced by the other ingredients.



Again, in a product that is a mixture, what is important is the relative proportions of the ingredients, not the absolute amounts.

And, since the ZV coating is thicker, it stands to reason that it is more durable. Just like a large chunk of ice takes longer to melt than a small chunk, .61oz of carnauba will take longer to break down than .05oz given the same driving conditions.

No because again you are making the faulty assumption that thickness = durability which is not the case. And further you are assuming that the wax coat is abraded off, or degrades due to scission rather than being washed off or falling off in microscopic flakes.

This is all basic info I know. I got it from wikipediaand wisegeek.com.

Here's a wikipedia article for you.



Dunning-Kruger effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm still learning, but it seems that this information supports the idea that a 61% carnauba formula should cost more. 1) It takes higher quality, more specialized ingredients to make it work. And 2) It seems logical that it would perform better than Brand X because it leaves behind MORE protective wax.

Seriously, the expensive ingredients are things like functional silicones/polymers, not waxes or emulsifiers. Basic waxes and emulsifiers (aka soap) are bulk chemicals. Carnauba wax costs less than $10/lb.



Again, for someone not in the chemicals industry, you have no idea how silly the idea of a car wax that costs $2100 for 22oz is. I doubt the total cost of ingredients is more than $25 per tub.

Please don't come back at me with "Why does more = better" I just attempted to explain it, and I think I did a pretty good job.

Your explanation was naive (Evian?).

You can claim 'projective identification' all you want. But I don't see PhD after your name. But the woman sitting next to me has one, and she says you're wrong.

She's married to you, and I hope you aren't expecting an honest response to a question that is the male equivalent of



"Honey, does this dress make me look fat"



"No of course not."



"Sugerplum, do I project my male insecurities onto other people"



"No, Tiger, of course not"

Surely you know that Bernie Madoff does not represent the entire wealthy population.

How about his clients? :2thumbs:



He built $65 Billion dollar business built entirely on rich people too stupid to understand why what he claimed to be doing was impossible.

 

[Less]

Jake, your % carnauba argument has been explained in this thread and others many many times.



I think it's pretty much common knowledge that the 100% 'nubas refer to the wax content. In other words, 100% of the wax used is carnauba. They don't use montan or beeswax, or any other wax.



ZV's claim is 61% by volume. That means, just over 13 of the 22 total ounces are pure carnauba wax.



Also, this quote bugs me:



"I've personally compared these to the $100+ waxes I've gotten to sample and it's simply no concernable difference and thus a waste of money to spend the big dollars."



You're presenting your opinion as fact. It's entirely possible that someone may see a difference where you see none. And, as I've mentioned, there are often intangible factors that determine price and have a value to SOME people (ie. packaging, refills, brand recognition, piece of mind, customer service, etc.). Furthermore, your conclusion that big dollar waxes are a "waste" of money is YOUR opinion, based on your own perceived utility of money.



Like others in this thread, you've also fallen into the trap where you're presenting your own opinions as fact as a means to cope with your own insecurities.

 

[Dsoto87]

I need to find that thread where over a certain percentage, the wax is just unusable.



I think its from ben @ rubbishboys.



I'm not on any side, but its funny how hard you argue from one side when you've never even used the product

 

[Less]

Congratulations Goudy, you finally made a sensible argument. Though you've continued to hurt your own credibility by calling me incompetent; albeit in a roundabout way. There's even another knock at my penis in there.



I think this is an interesting debate. Let's try and handle it like adults.

 

[Less]

I'm not on any side, but its funny how hard you argue from one side when you've never even used the product

And it's funny how hard you insist on making this about the PRODUCT.



It's not about the product. It's a question of economics, cost accounting, and human behavior.

 

[Apollo_Auto]

I need to find that thread where over a certain percentage, the wax is just unusable.



I think its from ben @ rubbishboys.



I'm not on any side, but its funny how hard you argue from one side when you've never even used the product

It's 70% After that it's hard as a brick...

 

[Less]

It's 70% After that emulsion is impossible...

If that's true, and I have no reason to believe it isn't, then why did Zymol only use 61% for their Vintage wax?



Maybe Goudy knows, since he's the resident expert on chemical manufacturing



I'll venture a guess though.



Maybe because they found that at 70%, they saw some degradation in other aspects of the wax's utility. Perhaps it was more difficult to apply. Perhaps it's shelf life was affected. Perhaps it didn't interact with teh other ingredients in a desirable way.



Who knows? Zymol probably does. I doubt very much they just pulled 61% out of a hat. That's the kind of thing you figure out through diligent scientific testing. The kind of testing that costs money. the kind of money a company might want to recoup by charging more for their product.

 

[imported_Jakerooni]

Also, this quote bugs me:



"I've personally compared these to the $100+ waxes I've gotten to sample and it's simply no concernable difference and thus a waste of money to spend the big dollars."



You're presenting your opinion as fact. It's entirely possible that someone may see a difference where you see none. And, as I've mentioned, there are often intangible factors that determine price and have a value to SOME people (ie. packaging, refills, brand recognition, piece of mind, customer service, etc.). Furthermore, your conclusion that big dollar waxes are a "waste" of money is YOUR opinion, based on your own perceived utility of money.



Like others in this thread, you've also fallen into the trap where you're presenting your own opinions as fact as a means to cope with your own insecurities.

Less. I'm going to go out on a limb here and put this out there for all to see. You say I'm using my own opinion as fact and it shouldn't be listened too because we all have our own opinions. However I'm a professional that has been doing this for many years now. I've seen a LOT of products come and go through my hands. If your sick and you go see a Dr. and he tells you after a quick examination that it's nothing go home and just sleep it off is that just an opinion of a trained professional? Do you then just go home and sleep it off or do you book appointments with dr's until you find one that tells you something you want to hear?



Now it may be my opinion. But my opinion is based on years of experience of what I've seen work and what I've seen is nothing more than hype. Not just weekend warrior stuff. And I see a lot of the other professionals seem to have the same or very simliar opinons as me. Now I've never stated Zymol didn't work. It is a quality product from all rights. However as my opinion of being a professional in this business for many years Zymol's price tag is nothing more than Hype because it's not any better than most other quality waxes on the market. I don;t feel the opinions of the professionals on this board should be tossed aside so easily just because they are opinions. There are a lot on this board that are sponsored or somehow represented by certian companies that may pitch those instead but I assure you I'm not one of those. My opinion is completely unbiased and based on my own testing of what has came through my doors. Zymol simply isn't any better than any other quality wax out there. If you can't see why then we'll just agree to disagree from this point on.

 

[CocheseUGA]

Less. I'm going to go out on a limb here and put this out there for all to see. You say I'm using my own opinion as fact and it shouldn't be listened too because we all have our own opinions. However I'm a professional that has been doing this for many years now. I've seen a LOT of products come and go through my hands. If your sick and you go see a Dr. and he tells you after a quick examination that it's nothing go home and just sleep it off is that just an opinion of a trained professional? Do you then just go home and sleep it off or do you book appointments with dr's until you find one that tells you something you want to hear?



Now it may be my opinion. But my opinion is based on years of experience of what I've seen work and what I've seen is nothing more than hype. Not just weekend warrior stuff. And I see a lot of the other professionals seem to have the same or very simliar opinons as me. Now I've never stated Zymol didn't work. It is a quality product from all rights. However as my opinion of being a professional in this business for many years Zymol's price tag is nothing more than Hype because it's not any better than most other quality waxes on the market. I don;t feel the opinions of the professionals on this board should be tossed aside so easily just because they are opinions. There are a lot on this board that are sponsored or somehow represented by certian companies that may pitch those instead but I assure you I'm not one of those. My opinion is completely unbiased and based on my own testing of what has came through my doors. Zymol simply isn't any better than any other quality wax out there. If you can't see why then we'll just agree to disagree from this point on.

:xyxthumbs



Based on your professional experience, cost not being a factor, where would it be ranked compared to others?

 

[02zx9r]

Seems to me that Jakerooni clearly said in "his" opinion and experiences, it is not worht it. He did not say it was not worth it for everyone else, as did others, in their opinions.



Not everyone has a PhD in their corner to give them big words to use and how to say stuff.

 

[imported_Jakerooni]

CocheseUGA From what I've seen I would easily put it up there with any other quality wax. But you can get the same results out of a $100 tub of wax as you can out of there wax.





I'll swing this around and see if I can help make sense of it all.



I'm not saying to not buy ZV. If you have the chops to do so go for it. But buy it because you love Zymol Products, You love what the company stands for, You think the presitige of having the name on the label means you can upcharge the customers (very good business mind you regardless of opinion) for the presitige of having that name on your car. Buy it for all the advantages you can think of owning a $2100 tub of wax will bring you. But DON'T buy it thinking it's any better than 99% of the other quality waxes out there. Don't get fooled into that foly. If it is any better the differences is so minute that side by side comparions I will most certianly say you'd never be able to tell the difference. If you like it and have the cash to splurge on it... Go for it.. Zymol will love you for it..

 

[SuperBee364]

CocheseUGA From what I've seen I would easily put it up there with any other quality wax. But you can get the same results out of a $100 tub of wax as you can out of there wax.





I'll swing this around and see if I can help make sense of it all.



I'm not saying to not buy ZV. If you have the chops to do so go for it. But buy it because you love Zymol Products, You love what the company stands for, You think the presitige of having the name on the label means you can upcharge the customers (very good business mind you regardless of opinion) for the presitige of having that name on your car. Buy it for all the advantages you can think of owning a $2100 tub of wax will bring you. But DON'T buy it thinking it's any better than 99% of the other quality waxes out there. Don't get fooled into that foly. If it is any better the differences is so minute that side by side comparions I will most certianly say you'd never be able to tell the difference. If you like it and have the cash to splurge on it... Go for it.. Zymol will love you for it..

There are several of us that have (for the most part) been hiding in the background, not offering our experiences/opinions for fear of furthering the flame war. Well, I can't stand it any more. I'm going to say the following things, and you guys are welcome to discuss it and flame it til you're blue in the face. I'm not gonna respond or say anything more than the following...



Vintage *is* really good wax. It looks phenomenal. It has the very best environmental protection of *any* LSP I've ever used, be it wax or sealant. It is by *far* the easiest-to-clean LSP I've ever used. And for those of you that follow my car washing theories, you know how much weight I put on that particular quality. Vintage's durability isn't the best, but it is certainly not bad at all when compared to other carnauba-based LSP's. The cost per tub will average out to 78 bucks each over my life time, which is reasonable for a high-end carnauba. I get to bequeathe the refill rights to an heir, who will also get refill rights for life.



I do not regret buying Vintage one bit.



And watching Vintage bead and repel water (which it does better than any other LSP I've seen) is a fun past time, too.



Vintage is right for some, wrong for others. Does it *really* need to be more complicated than that?

 

[imported_Jakerooni]

SB I'm not sure if that is somehow supposed to discredit my statement but to me it actually supports my point 110%. I'm glad you find it to be a great wax (Which I never claimed it wasn't) and that you're more than happy with the purchase of it (again for the reasons I stated)



I do find it absoultly halraious that you get to hand down this wax per some agreement with Zymol (can you imagine that at the reading of the will.... Umm wax?? I get wax for my inheritence?? WT bloody F!?!?!?!?!!!!!) I would never consider wax as some sort of family herlium or anything. Glad Zymol thinks it's really that important. But in that regard I digress. To each their own. I stand by all my statements. It's a great wax but it's not greater than any other high end carnuba out there. especially that the cost difference margin. Most people will justify it in their own regards. And most will say it was a great purchase. (I mean you kind of really have too right?) I just don't think it's $1700+ better. Certianly dosen't add any value to the car it gets put on. Neither does any other wax. And I can go through a ton of C&B's and find absoultly flawless finishes from much cheaper wax.... From a hobbiest stance it's a great thing to have. but from a practical (and we all know zymol is far from practical) it dosen't make any sense... But again to each their own.. Dosen't effect me any if people go out and buy it and are happy with it. Kudo's to everyone that has.