Roadfly's wax review / test

Did any of you "experts" take the time to read the disclaimer?



Note: This was NOT an official Guru Reports Test. Your results may (and probably will) vary. All testing was performed on my own time and does not reflect Guru Reports or its testing methodologies - this test was 100% independent and conducted under blind conditions with 3 people providing their own, personal opinions of the waxes for their appearance, performance, ease of use and durability. Do not allow any portion of this test to influence your potential buying decision - it's simply a comparison based on observations, opinion and personal experience in my unique environment.



It's seems to me that he covered everyone's concerns.
 
I am not an expert and did read the disclaimer......still was surprised at the 2 weeks and "done" results.



IMHO, a lengthy disclaimer does water down the results considerably (kind of like fine print)....perhaps even to the extent of wondering what's the point in doing the work to begin with?
 
The point of doing the work was to share results and opinions of popular products with others. It's the same reason Autopia exists. If it bothers you that much, don't read anymore of his tests in the future.



Steve has to write the long disclaimers to avoid personal pissing contests between product camps, like you see in this thread, and from getting 3,000 emails telling him how stupid he is. :down
 
The only tests i rely on, are my own....Sorry folks, i find them all irrelevant in my own little world......

Long live BF and Plat......
 
BradE said:
The point of doing the work was to share results and opinions of popular products with others. It's the same reason Autopia exists. If it bothers you that much, don't read anymore of his tests in the future.



Steve has to write the long disclaimers to avoid personal pissing contests between product camps, like you see in this thread, and from getting 3,000 emails telling him how stupid he is. :down
Click to expand...



Well said, Brad, well said.
 
softball nut said:
I am not an expert and did read the disclaimer......still was surprised at the 2 weeks and "done" results.



IMHO, a lengthy disclaimer does water down the results considerably (kind of like fine print)....perhaps even to the extent of wondering what's the point in doing the work to begin with?
Click to expand...



I'm trying to understand your point. Is you problem with the length or the test or that your favorite product didn't do so well?



BTW, thank you for making my point by posting the disclaimer. So why bother arguing about the results? Either you believe or you don't believe.



Another response to your statement was provided by BradE:



The point of doing the work was to share results and opinions of popular products with others. It's the same reason Autopia exists. If it bothers you that much, don't read anymore of his tests in the future.B]



EDIT: Apparently everyone else felt the same way I do. LOL
 
BradE- the "work" did not bother me in the least. I was just surprised at the results and was responding about my opinion of lengthy disclaimers (in general) and that there can be a point where they can pretty much negate the work. Maybe not in this case...I guess there is alot of politics involved.



When someone affliated with Guru or who is an experienced detailer provides advice/pointers I listen. Sure, I don't always get the same results.....but I am open minded. Tap on the brakes.
 
I think a primary reason Steve wrote the disclaimer is to put a legal barrier between himself and Jump Media Group (parent company of Guru Reports and Roadfly.org). It's easier for a wax mfr to sue a corporation than an individual simply posting their opinion. I think this is a concept most here can understand.



If y'all read the hate mail he gets everytime he posts a product test, you'd be stunned out of your undies. There are a lot of people out there that do not want the truth exposed and will try to obstruct it at all costs.
 
As an "enthusiast" detailer and not an "expert", I may have over stepped my bounds when I responded to the disclaimer post. In fact, originally, I did not think much of the disclaimer until it was brought up as a post as an "answer" to all. Most every post is implicitly understood as an "IMO".



I purchased the Guru Wax report a year ago and based on it, purchased/tried Zaino and P21S....both excellent products(IMO).



After the disclaimer issue was brought up, I was puzzled about the reason..... was it to stop comments, why wasn't a simple "IMO" not enough. I was educated that this disclaimer serves more of a legal/political purpose.



IMHO, I also forgot that the "review" was passed on from another board and not initiated here. My bad.



I do love motherhood, apple pie, America, and Autopia...please forgive me.
 
bretfraz said:
There are a lot of people out there that do not want the truth exposed and will try to obstruct it at all costs.
Click to expand...



Not the least of which is that even Steve says that the truth is different for everyone, and to use the report as a starting point only.



I think part of the situation that gets overlooked is that to be an Autopian is to be a perfectionist, and as perfectionists we don't like to hear things like "different for everyone"; there should be a hard and fast ANSWER to the question "which is best".



But there isn't. The hard and fast answer is that the car either shines FOR YOU or it doesn't; a wax either lasts FOR YOU or it doesn't. Our truths are our own.



Like any review, try to judge how you line up with the reviewer; do you usually agree with him, or do you think he's full of it? If you think about it, either way he's served the knowledge base by writing his review and telling what he's observed. If you disagree with him, then use him as a "negative indicator".



I dunno. It's fun to talk about for a while I guess. I'm going home in about 5 minutes. I think I'll wash & wax the car. Maybe I'll try the UPP this time.







Tom
 
Mosca said:
Like any review, try to judge how you line up with the reviewer; do you usually agree with him, or do you think he's full of it? If you think about it, either way he's served the knowledge base by writing his review and telling what he's observed. If you disagree with him, then use him as a "negative indicator".

Click to expand...



Likewise, relativeness works. Scott, for instance, gets weeks of durability from any product, which I assume, is the result of QEW. We also have different methods of determining durability. But when he says that Product X beads for three months, and that Product Z beads six months, I get an idea that Product Z has better durability than Product X.



Mosca said:
Not the least of which is that even Steve says that the truth is different for everyone, and to use the report as a starting point only.



I think part of the situation that gets overlooked is that to be an Autopian is to be a perfectionist, and as perfectionists we don't like to hear things like "different for everyone"; there should be a hard and fast ANSWER to the question "which is best".



But there isn't. The hard and fast answer is that the car either shines FOR YOU or it doesn't; a wax either lasts FOR YOU or it doesn't. Our truths are our own.

Click to expand...



Still, Steve's testing should be considered, even if one doesn't agree with the results. Steve goes through all the trouble of trying hundreds of products with procedures we cannot duplicate. Professional journalism exists for this same reason. A reporter can thoroughly road test a car for things normal people never think about.
 
BW said:
Still, Steve's testing should be considered, even if one doesn't agree with the results. Steve goes through all the trouble of trying hundreds of products with procedures we cannot duplicate. Professional journalism exists for this same reason. A reporter can thoroughly road test a car for things normal people never think about.
Click to expand...



BW,



I prefer to withhold judgement on that point. I believe that it is a valuable addition to the body of knowledge. Otherwise, it has not passed the scientific standard of repeatability, even if the reason for that is that no one else has tried to repeat it.



Nevertheless, the results are there, and I have no doubts that the results reported are the ones he got.



Oh yeah, and it started raining on the way home. :(





Tom
 
2001civicex said:
Dang! I have been gone for a while and this thread took off! haha
Click to expand...



I started a thread that showed how much EX-P sheeted compared to other products (Wolfgang in this example) and I couldn't believe the grief I got in that thread. I made no assumptions on which was better or preferred, just that I thought it was interesting. :nixweiss
 
Scottwax said:
I started a thread that showed how much EX-P sheeted compared to other products (Wolfgang in this example) and I couldn't believe the grief I got in that thread. I made no assumptions on which was better or preferred, just that I thought it was interesting. :nixweiss
Click to expand...



EX-P is weird. It wasn't beading after a days rain, but I washed it the next day and it beaded :confused:
 
BW said:
Likewise, relativeness works. Scott, for instance, gets weeks of durability from any product, which I assume, is the result of QEW.
Click to expand...



Actually, since at one office I use their pressure sprayer and water deionizer, that is only partially true. I think a bigger factor is the lack of acid rain and industrial fallout in the Dallas area. QEW does help though, seems to be extremely gente on wax.



BTW, I only get 3-4 weeks max of beading with 3Ms Perfect-It Paste Wax and Zymol Cleaner Wax and maybe 3 weeks with Wax Shop's Super Glaze (and that was before they got bought out!). I no longer use those products. ;)
 
Corey Bit Spank said:
EX-P is weird. It wasn't beading after a days rain, but I washed it the next day and it beaded :confused:
Click to expand...



Maybe you had parked under a tree before it rained (or even during) and got sap on the car the rain didn't wash off. I parked halfway under a tree a few weeks ago and the part under the tree was not beading at all but the part not under the tree was beading just fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top