Still no good clay available?

toyotaguy said:
dang it....I was just over there for a week, I should have picked some up and mailed it to myself...no way I was getting it on the airplane looking like a block of C4...maybe it would be worth it to buy a bunch....group buy?
Click to expand...



If I understand my patent law, they can't legally ship that to the US. Better to get an Aussie member to buy it and ship it here. Wonder how that AUS $25 compares to US? Oh, and LOL about the C4...
 
I don't know HOW they are going to know about it, I just know that you can't sell an infringing product in a country where there is a protecting patent, even if there is no patent in the country where the product is made (or sold from I guess in this case). That's to protect the patent holder's rights, if you could import a product from another country legally, you could skirt the patent. You have to apply for patents in each country individually (although there are some groups, like Europe, etc.), so it costs more to add more countries, you have to decide where you think you might sell the product. The AutoMagic patents are Japanese and US (maybe more, I don't remember). Of course, the patent or the restraining order against Kucala and their distributors didn't seem to stop anyone here from selling leftover Erazer clay.



The funny thing is, Kucala might have been able to keep producing clay for foreign markets where the AutoMagic patents don't cover, but they violated the restraining order and got shut down. Anyway, I guess if that Austrailan company will ship it here, they are the ones that would have the problem, not the consumer.



Any of you remember when Polaroid won the patent suit against Kodak on the instant cameras? Kodak had to pull all the cameras and film out of stores everywhere, so you couldn't get any film for your Kodak instant camera. I think Kodak was buying the cameras back for a while, I don't remember if that was their show of good will, or if it was demanded by the court judgement. I know this is hard to understand for a lump of clay, but patent infringement is pretty serious legal business, it was billions of dollars IIRC in Kodak's case.
 
I missed out on the discussion of when the clay world changed, so I do not fully understand this thread regarding the elastic vs. ?????. So, I have two questions:



1) Can someone point be to a thread that talks about it (lots of threads about clay)



2) What kind of clay is Mequiar's C-2100. That is some good clay....
 
Malachi said:
I missed out on the discussion of when the clay world changed, so I do not fully understand this thread regarding the elastic vs. ?????. So, I have two questions:



1) Can someone point be to a thread that talks about it (lots of threads about clay)



2) What kind of clay is Mequiar's C-2100. That is some good clay....
Click to expand...

I'd imagine a search on "clay" and "legal" would turn up some threads about the case. Basically, Automagic cracked down on their patent rights.
 
TigerMike said:
Yes, Erazer was one of the best out there and supplied to many of the top tier retail brands a while back. I'm thinking that some people never had a chance to use the elastic clay and therefore think that AutoMagic's offering is just as good. Sure, the Claymagic works, but the Erazer elastic was just better, in quality and performance. Like many things in life, you just had to see to believe I guess.
Click to expand...





Wow! I started this thread a week back and didn't get a chance to view the responses till now. This (above) post was the second response I read and it echo's my sentiments exactly. I've used other bars to remove heavy rust contamination and have got some pretty heavy scratching as a result...requiring multiple polishing steps to remove (which isn't good if you're only getting paid for a single polishing step)!



But the good news is I'm moving and just found 3 brand new bars of opti-clay stashed away in my garage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
a.k.a. Patrick said:
Agreed, and for me, there was nothing like the Opti clay, that i had ever used. It was THE clay, for which I measure all others......
Click to expand...



R.I.P :sadwavey: :woohoo:
 
Um...I found this interesting recent quote while wandering around the internet...this from the principal of Optimum products...



"Clay is still a touchy subject to us since the patents that AutoWax & Illinoise Tools have are invalid, however, this needs to be demonstrated in court. We do offer Opti-Clay outside of US and Japan at this time.



One of the factors that make Opti-Clay work better than Clay Magic is that it is based on crosslinked polybutene resin which is more durable, more elastic, and has a great deal more tack than the resin used in Clay Magic. In fact Clay Magic breaks down very easily and leaves residue behind since the resin has no intergrity."
 
Just for thought:



- what is DIFFERENT ENOUGH?



A stretchy, chemically stable clay which is gentle yet effective, always keeps its consistency, and safe - even with heavier pressure



or



an acceptably effective, but clumsy clay, which has to be re-knead (instead of pull and refold, which is far quicker and simpler - and errrm ...different) and it usually falls apart soon after it gets in contact with car soap and can/may cause *marginally* heavier marring with increasing pressure?



I personally think that they are WORLDS apart. The methodology behind them is utterly similar, but wouldn't you hate Mercedes-Benz when they'd banned the manufacturing of cars after they made the Patent Motorwagen???



For me it is disgusting discrimination - as the perceived qualities/attributes are different enough for (some of) us to be able to talk about two entirely different animals.



Is it the bar-form? The methodology? The kneading action? (What about pull & refold?)Should AWC ban/sue everything that can be pulled back & forth on certain "vehicular surfaces" to remove contamination. Other hard or painted surfaces OK? Oh, and what about paper with pencil marks? Is it the exactly specified surface? Strictly cars? Bikes? Sue every kid for stealing the genial method behind AWC clay? Can we let kids erasing drawings (aka contamination on a flat surface), or will it be illegal? How illegal is the new foam block "clay"? It is similar in form, dimensions, the cleaning motions you have to do with it, the lubrication, etc. The difference is that the sticky and/or abrasive layer is not a clay in its entirety. But again, what attributes does the exact, patented clay have? Is it just roughly "soft and pliable, kneadable mass" or exactly defined (see the two archetypes above)?



Someone should sue AWC. Really. Is this intellectual property so unique or unexampled...? No, it is not. And the real patent belongs to the ancient people who cleaned their skins, wooden cutting board & 1000 others with fine sand which was suspended in thick, wet clay, lifted from loamy, argillacerous lakeshore or riverside waters. Yes, they were using utterly similar body motions...



KEL or Optimum should market a fridge, glass, (or tile; dunno) cleaner "ball" or "roll" (no similar form), which - as an alternative use - can be physically altered (you can not sue the user for doing that) to form an amorphous mass to one's liking; used for whatever specific purpose the individual wants it... Maybe the material could be foamed up to be really, even optically different.



...or someone should market a new Blu Tack-like substance with countless alternative uses (see WD-40's X-hundred uses) - incl. hard surface decontamination - and yes, I mean strictly washing machines. Just as fine textile detergent for leather interiors.



PS: it wasn't supposed to be a really cohesive writeup - verbally at least..., but I think it can be good for general thought-provocation, and maybe for new ideas. And David Ghodoussi's words are spot-on.
 
Bence said:
KEL or Optimum should market a fridge, glass, (or tile; dunno) cleaner "ball" or "roll" (no similar form), which - as an alternative use - can be physically altered (you can not sue the user for doing that) to form an amorphous mass to one's liking; used for whatever specific purpose the individual wants it... Maybe the material could be foamed up to be really, even optically different.



...or someone should market a new Blu Tack-like substance with countless alternative uses (see WD-40's X-hundred uses) - incl. hard surface decontamination - and yes, I mean strictly washing machines. Just as fine textile detergent for leather interiors.
Click to expand...



:goodjob :goodjob :werd:



Exactly. I have the same feelings you do. Someone should make something, not "detailing clay" but something .... and once a few users found that it may work on vehicles with great sucess, I would think that company would get A LOT of business. David B??



The old Opti-Clay and other Erazer clay is a worlds different from whats available today... good thing I have some stocked up...
 
Bence said:
.........



- what is DIFFERENT ENOUGH?



A stretchy, chemically stable clay which is gentle yet effective, always keeps its consistency, and safe - even with heavier pressure



or



an acceptably effective, but clumsy clay, which has to be re-knead (instead of pull and refold, which is far quicker and simpler - and errrm ...different) and it usually falls apart soon after it gets in contact with car soap and can/may cause *marginally* heavier marring with increasing pressure?..........



Someone should sue AWC. .........
Click to expand...
All very good points Bence and I agree with you 100%, however Kucala did sue AWC but unfortunately they ultimately lost:



Article Archives



December 3, 2003 Press Release



A lot of insiders considered the AWC patents invalid, but they have won a ton of lawsuits and have effectively put all of their competition out of business.



There is still some of the good clay around, but it is getting harder to find. I recently scored the last three bars a vendor had in stock so I hope I have enough to last until the new fridge cleaner comes to market.
 
So the old white Meg's clay (from say 2004) was the Erazer? My first clay was bought then and it was terrible...it was really hard (it actually had a crack in it), was almost impossible to knead, and had hard crusty bits. When they changed the next year to the soft white clay (still under the Quick Clay name, this was prior to the 2-bar Smooth Surface kit), I said good riddance to the Erazer clay, but after reading all this maybe I just had a bad bar (I had bought it directly from Meg's, BTW).
 
Setec Astronomy said:
So the old white Meg's clay (from say 2004) was the Erazer? ......
Click to expand...
Not sure about the Meg's clay, but it looks like Mother’s sourced clay from Kucala..... at least that is what the one article implied.
 
Eliot, yes, I'm aware of the previous lawsuits... And if not a competing company, but a consumer organization would do this "favor"?



For me the whole thing is similar to the ancient Japanese sword manufacturing. Yes, you can buy a samurai sword which looks exactly like the ancient one, but it is manufactured cheaply from a single piece of steel, instead of the painstaking, multi year stretch-pull-refold methods of the late craftsmen.

The latter is the true katana, while the other is just a laughable simulation - despite the fact that it actually looks the same (sort of), and is able to cut & kill - when used similarly.



One can make something that is 95% percent as good as the benchmark, that's true. But an individual buyer’s enthusiasm for a certain character in a clay (in this case, but we could say vehicle, knackwurst or whatever) actually depends on that last five percent of pure essence, not on manufacturing rationality or invalid claims. In this case, not AWC won, but the judges did lose when AWC's perceived relativity to reality escaped their attention.
 
Setec Astronomy said:
So the old white Meg's clay (from say 2004) was the Erazer? My first clay was bought then and it was terrible...it was really hard (it actually had a crack in it), was almost impossible to knead, and had hard crusty bits. When they changed the next year to the soft white clay (still under the Quick Clay name, this was prior to the 2-bar Smooth Surface kit), I said good riddance to the Erazer clay, but after reading all this maybe I just had a bad bar (I had bought it directly from Meg's, BTW).
Click to expand...





I don't think Meg's was using Erazer back then, and if they were it was a horrible formula. I used that clay you are referring to and it was absolutely pathetic, coming from Meguiar's. It was nothing like the Erazer offerings I have used in the past, which are the perfect clay, IMO.



I still hold that Erazer's clays are and were much better than the AutoMagic competition. If you haven't used both, you don't know what you're missing!
 
I've been using Mothers clay for years and have never once had an issue with marring -- in fact I've been seeing marring constantly mentioned on Autopia and didn't know what it meant. Last weekend I tried Blackfire gray clay with Blackfire lubricant and quickly learned what marring is. I didn't feel that it cleaned the paint very well either and overall found that clay to be (for lack of a better word) horrible.



I also had some new Zaino clay that came with a Zaino package purchase -- I tried that and didn't have an issue with marring, but didn't feel it cleans as well as Mothers and the consistency of the clay is a bit like bubble gum.



For me, Mothers can't be beat -- it is easy to use and (in my experience) simply will not mar. I saw a prior comment in this thread about Mothers being weaker than other clays, but I've yet to find a surface it doesn't make perfectly smooth.
 
Still no good clay available

Hey every bar will remove some amount, the CM red bar is a ripper for sever contamination though being very hard and causes marring. It all polishes out anyway.



Sonus green is by far the most fun clay to use, very soft and pliable
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top