Has anyone got it yet? and is it any good?

Dear Guru Reports Customer:

We'd like to take a moment to say thank you for purchasing our Wax Test Report. It is our
sincere hope that you appreciated and enjoyed the report - we've had a lot of positive feedback
from folks just like yourself and we really appreciate the comments and suggestions.

We're writing today to inform you that we've just released our second report, The Glass Cleaner
Test. This new report is a whopper - we've put 25 glass cleaning products through their paces,
testing them on everything from smoked-in interior glass to bug-splattered windshields. We
tested the products using the same no-nonsense objectives and methodologies that you've come to
expect - there's no bull here, it's all 100% unbiased, impartial and practical information.

In addition to the test results, we have more than 10 pages of glass cleaning tips and tricks,
glass polishing articles, frequently asked questions and other glass cleaning goodies that are
certain to make your next detailing session more rewarding (and easier)!

Perhaps the best news about the new report is that it's currently being offered at an
unprecedented price - it's just $3.95. Better yet, it's only available as an electronic
download, so there's no shipping fees and no waiting on the post office to deliver your report!

We truly believe that you'll be impressed with this new report - we've put a lot of hard work
in to brining you a report that's easier to read, packed full of more information and more cost
effective to deliver. Please click the link below to order your copy today - you won't be
disappointed!
http://www.gurureports.org/store/

Again, thanks for your past support and we hope that you enjoy the new report!

Best wishes and happy detailing,
Guru Reports


Steve Litscher
Editor-in-Chief
Guru Reports


PS: Don't forget to pre-order the Wheel and Tire Care and Cleaning Special Report. It's on sale
now for 50% off!

:confused: :confused:

 

I have both the wax and the glass cleaner report and have the tire & wheel cleaner test pre-ordered. By far the best literature on detailing that I have read in a while. I would definatly check them out.

 

I found the Wax Test to be highly flawed, and more subjective than scientific. The panels were similar, all panels were pretreated with same chemicals from different lines, and grading based on bead size as well as availibility is subjective at best. A good indicator, but far from exact.

 

ANYONE READ THE REPORT :confused:

 

Yes, in addition to the testing of the different waxes, there are some good articles on synthetics vs. carnubas and detailing technoiques and tools. I believe that it is also on sale for $9.95($10 off retail).

 

Do you have a more comprehensive wax/polish test? Please share it with us. I have not seen anything even close to the lengths that the Guru report had gone to for testing.

 

Other than an old one the Consumer Reports did years ago, and without the benefit of these wax choices, no. If you carefully read the Wax Report you will see many subjective issues, and I believe it to be a great indicator of some of their favorite products.

In order to fairly evaluate any product, the test material must be exact. Looking at similar, like, and branding (pg 6) would be invalid in a scientific setting. I dont want to bash it because it was a very reasonable and subjective test, but I would look to all the top 10 products not their specific rating, especially when they were graded on availabilty and ease of use.
(Ask anyone who has used Zaino , P21S, and Pinnacle, and which one goes on and comes off easier, yet Pinnacle scored lower than both and does not need the drying time of Zaino or the extra wipes of P21S)

Im not hear to sell products, as some of the other's are. I have no stake in Pinnacle or any other detailing company, but I have secured and used over 20 waxes with results that make this report highly suspect as a true scientific test of the BEST WAX, but better an indicator of some of the best waxes on the market.

 

Hi Scott - not sure why you're set on bashing the report on various forums, but I think I should chime in to help clarify a few misconceptions and potential misunderstandings that may be taking place. The misconceptions are usually a direct result of people incorrectly interpretting portions of the report, or there's an alterior motive and they try to nit-pick the report.

I'll be the first to admit that we learned a lot from our second official wax test, and I can only say that the third release will be bigger and better as a result of our continued learning.

Anyway, I'll address some of your comments below:


Consumer Reports does a fine job with their publication, but several major news agencies have uncovered and reported on the fact that CR may not be as unbiased as they claim. Furthermore, their test conditions are simulated - they simulate the wear and exposure to the elements, and they paint their own test substrates. Hopefully we're all aware of the many variances that can take place in paint jobs (Maaco vs. House of Kolor, for example)...


We went back and forth on this decision, and ultimately, we decided that our readers would be most interested in "real world" test conditions. We concluded that people typically have a car that is new, fairly new, or used - therefore, the paint is not brand new and perfect, and it's certainly not "paint booth fresh" (like would happen if we had prepared our own test substrates).

Plus, we'd have gotten bashed for all sorts of things like using the "wrong" paint, or not baking the finish like factory's do, etc., etc., etc. Preparing our own panels would have opened an entirely new can of worms.

Therefore, we decided to prepare the panels like any enthusiast detailer would. We washed, clayed, compounded and glazed the panels. We re-washed them after the glazing to remove any excess oils. What we were left with were 8 nearly identical panels - our gloss meter indicated that all were within about 5% of one another, in terms of initial gloss. All of the panels were dark blue, with the exception of a red panel that was used as a "control" piece - top waxes were reapplied to the panel for comparison with the blue panel.

Agreed, and you'll find that we openly comment that many of the test criteria were subjective. But, I'll be darned if I can find a way to objectively measure an emotional response - to the best of my knowledge, there isn't an "ease of use" meter or a "depth enhancement" meter...it's all highly subjective. Thankfully, our panel of 10 testers were performing the test blind - they had no idea which products they were evaluating each week...the test patches were simply labeled as "1A, 2A, 3A, 4A, 1B, 2B, etc"

We also had to wrestle with readability and trying to take "boring" info and make it usable and readable for most folks. Writing a true, scientific, whitepaper style report would have almost guaranteed we'd have no readers other than a handful of true wax junkies. :D

We purposely didn't label any one wax as "The Best." I refused to do this, despite having a few knock-down-drag-out fights with the publisher over it. He wanted us to label one, single product as "the best," but I told him we couldn't do that, simply because people have different budgets, time constraints, etc. He wound up putting in the chart that's on page 42 in an 11th hour move.

The chart causes more problems than it solves because people immediately flip to the chart and proceed to get their panties in a bunch. There's so much more to the information than that blasted chart...I had one guy e-mail me to complain that Mothers Cleaner Wax finished 2 spots higher than the Mothers California Gold. He was absolutely certain I was an idiot, and went to great lengths to explain it as such.

I replied to him that there was less than 0.01 points difference between the two products, and that rounding could have played a factor in determining positions 8-10. All of a sudden, he felt better, and I was no longer an idiot. :)

So, don't get upset if Pinnacle finished "5th and 6th" - they are FINE products and I absolutely love them. Ultimately, I was not the only tester, and when 10 people graded products that they didn't know which ones were which, Pinnacle ended up in the positions it did. Had it been slightly more durable, it may have wound up 2nd and 3rd...who knows?

in closing, I apologize for the novel, but I felt I needed to clear up some potential misconceptions. I would have loved to have included all of this info in the report, but space was at a premium, as was reader attention...who'd want to sit through another 3-4 pages of explanations like this one, when ultimately only a handful of people would even care to hear the explanaition. :)

I'm happy to discuss this further if you'd like - but I hope it cleared up some problems.


[Modified by thewaxtest, 6:28 PM 7/10/2003]

 

I have both the wax and glass cleaner test, and the wheel & tire cleaner test on order and I think you guys did a fine job. :yesnod: Nowhere else can you get such a sampling without buying and testing the products yourself. I have tried about 8-10 of the products in the report and my findings were pretty much "dead on" with those in the report. Read the report and then draw your own conclusions based on your needs and preferences.

 

Steve, thanks for the clarifying remarks. I've seen a few posts here and there on several forums bashing your test, but most of their arguments seem baseless, including the ones posted on this thread. The most ridiculous one I've seen was the person who (on Autopia) deemed your test 'invalid' because not every single wax on the face of this planet was tested. Also, to the person who bashed gurureports on this thread, I challenge you to show me ANY other test done on waxes that is more informative and less biased than GuruReports.

Steve, I, like many other detailing enthusiasts, applaud your efforts and thank you for your significant contribution to this hobby.

(OK, so now am I a zaino zealot for defending the Guru Reports test???) :rolleyes:

 

[QUOTE] Agreed, and you'll find that we openly comment that many of the test criteria were subjective [QUOTE]

I believe you summed up my thoughts on your test adequately. It was more of a subjective test than a scientific test, and as such is a good indicator of the top 10 waxes out there. (Read my comments again)

I not slamming it, and didnt on any other board. I did post my validations for finding it more subjective and I believe you have been made well aware of it by others based on your response. That does not mean that you have not also provided some valid responses that should have been included, no matter how boring.

I have to fall back on my original teachings at that is to believe 1/2 of what you read and the proof is in the pudding. I have used, not one but over 15 of your test waxes and had similar and yet different results on many. I stand by the Wax Report as a good indicator but not necessarily the bible of waxes. I still dont believe one to exist, and why I stated 'NO" when someone asked above. I await your next report, and will disect it once again. :leaving:

 

I completely enjoyed the Wax Test. I had personally used a number of the tested products and agreed 100% with the Guru evaluation.

I also have the Glass Cleaner Test. Again, I have used many of the tested products and agree with the ratings. However, I was disappointed that the Gurus did not include my personal favorite product in the test: "Window Finish" from http://www.liqui-tech.com. By my experience, it is better than the top rated products in the Guru report.

I have pre-ordered the Wheel Cleaner Test and will eagerly await its release.

My comments above notwithstanding, Steve and the Gurus do a great job.

 

GREAT EXPLANATION STEVE!

I enjoyed your test and look forward to the next one.

 

Well said. I'd only add that if a scientific test were to be done it would need to contain data from far broader demographic than a tiny region of the country and subject each vehicle to various driving conditions...... but the cost of such a test is prohibitive so the Wax Test is probably your best bet up to this point.

 

Quote "Agreed, and you'll find that we openly comment that[b] many of the test criteria were subjective[b]. But, I'll be darned if I can find a way to objectively measure an emotional response - to the best of my knowledge, there isn't an "ease of use" meter or a "depth enhancement" meter...it's all highly subjective. "

:yesnod: :yesnod: :cool: