Quote:
Originally posted by forrest
Hugh, the biggest difference I see is quality control. You needn't be too concerned with QC when making a product that sticks a piece of paper to the wall or a refrigerator - if it sticks, the product works. That gives them much more latitude regarding quality of components, the blending of same, and the consistency of the finished piece. It's easy, in that instance, to change from one supplier to another to save a penny or less per unit. If there are minor difference in the component, so what.
However, your paint is a different surface, and the makeup of the clay is more critical. Changes in the components could cause marring of the paint or worse.
In addition, I KNOW automotive detailing clay is different from the tacky clay you refer to, regardless of what you may believe from reading an MSDS sheet. If you believe it's the same, have at it and good luck. But, I'd suggest autopians not be penny wise and dollar foolish when it involves the paint on customer's, and their own, vehicles. |
Hi,
Thanks for the reply, I've been in manufacturing long enough to fully understand the QC/application/savings trade-off that arise and your are correct without tight controls in these areas you never know what might in the final product.
Regarding the MSDS documents and my beliefs. After reading the ingredients in MSDS the only thing I believe is the remarkable similarities between the two, but my familiarity with the purposes of MSDS also has me thinking there very well be more to the story. I guess the purpose of my query was to shed some light and facts on the actual differences between the two and remove the possible $$ costing variable which you refer as "luck". I see you represent a manufacturer so it would be natural for you not to divulge what the differences are nor would I expect you to. In this case proof is in tasting the pudding and I will try your product in the near future.
Thanks again.