Zaino banner.....

  • Thread starter Thread starter Patrick
  • Start date Start date
P

Patrick

Guest
Voted the #1 synthetic wax available by independent test magazine Guru Reports, Zaino Show Car Polish is among the best paint protection products available. When cost and time are not a factor, Zaino Show Car Polish is an excellent choice. The top rated products included Zaino, Klasse and P21S.
Click to expand...



Since when did Guru Reports matter ???

And who believes this report ? Im not bashing Davids findings, im under the assumption Autopian critics are more critical......
 
Patrick said:
Since when did Guru Reports matter ???

And who believes this report ? Im not bashing Davids findings, im under the assumption Autopian critics are more critical......
Click to expand...



:confused:



Uh, I believe it... it matters to me. Independent, noncommercial tests such as Guru Reports will usually be more scientific than our own observations.
 
Enlighten me, Im not criticising it, just not familiar with it....Its rarely mentioned on here....I understand their findings are probably more conclusive then our own, their testing procedures more elaborate etc, but the last time i bought paint to paint my house, i wasnt overly concerned about its elasticity, chemical compounds or makeup...I trusted friends and coworkers, word of mouth and their personal experience with products....Those I find to be the most valuable and independent, non commercialism testing.....my $.02....;)
 
Patrick said:
Since when did Guru Reports matter ???

And who believes this report ? Im not bashing Davids findings, im under the assumption Autopian critics are more critical......
Click to expand...



I use it as a guide, but I don't consider it to be the final, authoritative word on waxes and sealants.
 
Scottwax said:
I use it as a guide, but I don't consider it to be the final, authoritative word on waxes and sealants.
Click to expand...
Sometimes a prospective new client asks what I use vs what others have used on their vehicle & I bring out the report for them to see. I then offer to use whatever they choose from the report....It's usually about 99% effective in making a sale. People like the ability to make a choice & many choose Zaino.
 
Its just like when people cite the Consumer Reports. When people take the time to objectively review other products against similar products then those opinions should hold some weight. Certianly they aren't going to say "Held by many guys over on Autopia to be an excellent product and especially favored by Bubba in Reno, Nevada to be the shizzle on his late model black car in the shade at 10:30 pm." The guru report isn't the bible of car care products just like Consumer Reports isn't the bible of other products. Its just a detailed review of what one company observed the products to do and that review is usually what you can expect to see if you use them the same way in the same conditions. Obviously some results may vary, but I'm sure that 80% of the people would agree with the results.



Opinions of which product is 'better' isn't what Guru Reports prints. They just review which products exceled in their tests. Obviously if durability isn't what you care about then P21S may be a 'better' product in your situation than Zaino. That part is subjective and will be different for everybody. If Guru Reports were going to be subjective then it would be called the 'Geekysteve Report' or something. ;) Its just more scientific printed version of the Product Review forum on Autopia. Look at it objectively and then make your own decisions.
 
Also keep in mind that Guru Reports is not targeted towards folks who are OCD about car care products and their performance. The publications appeal to a larger, less persnickety audience who wants their cars to look nice but are confused by all the promotional claims and marketing hype.



Unlike getting opinions from friends or word-of-mouth recommendations from whoever, publications like Guru and Consumer Reports apply a consistent test methodology to each product and evaluate them on both their own merits and against their direct competitors. The end result is a far more balanced and fair comparison.



If nothing else, Autopians are plenty opinionated about their car care products and have no qualms about offering their opinions to whoever will listen. For people who have made up their mind about what they like and don't like, comparative tests might be interesting but maybe not all that educational. Buy one anyway and enjoy the info and entertainment. Who knows, ya might just learn something.
 
I think it matters. Geeky and crew did a non-scientific test that helped to qualify waxes/sealants by their characteristics. While I believe the test was flawed, it could not have been done much better without very expensive instumentation and perfect control groups. The feedback by the testers is subjective, as we would all expect it to be. It's still a good reference.



As we all [Autopians] know, the process and tools are an equal part of the final outcome. Guru Reports (or another independent) needs to do a report on detailing tools (mitts, applicators, towels, pads). You can use the very best chemicals available, but if your detailing tools are bad, the results will follow.



I get a few questions a day from Z users that are not satisfied with their Z experience. I wrote my Z page for these people.
 
Patrick said:
Since when did Guru Reports matter ???

And who believes this report ? Im not bashing Davids findings, im under the assumption Autopian critics are more critical......
Click to expand...



Well, my hat's off to the people who did the report, as I'm sure it was a lot of work, and "interesting" info.



However, in the end, unbiased or not, the report is still simply............ "someone else's opinion". :D
 
Im not bashing Davids findings, im under the assumption Autopian critics are more critical...... [/B]
Click to expand...




Patrick... I missed this in my first read. I did not publish any findings, I simply stated the results of the GR Wax Test.



In fact, I cannot agree on many of the findings of the test. I applaud the work, but my clinical background requires me to ask a simple question: where's the hard, scientific, factual data? It does not exist, so it's nothing more than subjective oppinion.



The GR Wax Test is well written, thoughtful, organized and concise. However, from any insider's point of view, it lacks accuracy. If the testers were armed with the facts, the results would be very different.



I will attempt to gain access to the necessary measurement equipment to put hard, factual data in play. Until then, all we have is "I know what I like and it's called brand X". Even after clinical data is revealed, people will continue to use what they like.



To leave you with a bit of humor, I will quote my good friend Bill Hancock, who once said "David, if you call me a GURU again I'll hit you... it means Good Understanding, Relatively Useless, and I am far more than that!" That he was.



:wavey
 
LMAO ! Very good, your response (2nd), and the info you just provided was really what i was hoping someone would step up and say......I apologise if it was construed that the test results were from your testing, i simply meant "what you had found resulting from the Guru test." As for " the hard, scientific, factual data", i think thats something that im probably not really interested in when i grab a product from the shelf....Im more interested in what fellow Autopians have to say, coworkers, and those "who have burned the fire before"....Its all interesting and valuable material, for those who it actually means something too..... but in my world its what the actual users value that i take into consideration.......:xyxthumbs
 
Patrick said:
LMAO ! Very good, your response (2nd), and the info you just provided was really what i was hoping someone would step up and say......I apologise if it was construed that the test results were from your testing, i simply meant "what you had found resulting from the Guru test." As for " the hard, scientific, factual data", i think thats something that im probably not really interested in when i grab a product from the shelf....Im more interested in what fellow Autopians have to say, coworkers, and those "who have burned the fire before"....Its all interesting and valuable material, for those who it actually means something too..... but in my world its what the actual users value that i take into consideration.......:xyxthumbs
Click to expand...



I have to disagree with this one. While I think other users experience is a great reference, I think one of the main sources of frustration in this whole art is the lack of understanding of how it all works. If we could get hard scientific evidence about layering, cleaning, and some sort of non-subjective evidence, a lot of the questions that are asked over and over, will have definitive answer.
 
Greg said:
I have to disagree with this one. While I think other users experience is a great reference, I think one of the main sources of frustration in this whole art is the lack of understanding of how it all works. If we could get hard scientific evidence about layering, cleaning, and some sort of non-subjective evidence, a lot of the questions that are asked over and over, will have definitive answer.
Click to expand...



Greg, I am going to attempt to do just that. The instrumentation (surface gloss meter, surface analyzer, micro reflectometer) is hard to come by because it is expensive. To make the test accurate it will be necessary to have a few dozen paint panels created, wet sanded and buffed all in the same manner. The panels need to be small enough to put in the equipment.
 
Sweet I'd be really interested to see a comparison like that. But like all things it always come too personal preference! Good Luck with that David that seems like a more scientific approach!
 
DavidB said:
Greg, I am going to attempt to do just that. The instrumentation (surface gloss meter, surface analyzer, micro reflectometer) is hard to come by because it is expensive. To make the test accurate it will be necessary to have a few dozen paint panels created, wet sanded and buffed all in the same manner. The panels need to be small enough to put in the equipment.
Click to expand...



Another way would be to use current production car panels (or sections) so to creat real life paintings, like some from chevy, some from vw, some from volvo, etc... Not a lab painted surface.
 
DavidB said:
Greg, I am going to attempt to do just that. The instrumentation (surface gloss meter, surface analyzer, micro reflectometer) is hard to come by because it is expensive. To make the test accurate it will be necessary to have a few dozen paint panels created, wet sanded and buffed all in the same manner. The panels need to be small enough to put in the equipment.
Click to expand...



David, wow, sounds like you're planning on introducing a whole new paradigm to product evaluation! :bow
 
I may not agree completely with the results of the Guru Report and I don't often see eye to eye with Steve, but I do believe he made a sincere attempt to perform as unbiased a wax test as possible. Appearance is subjective, but I believe the durability testing was pretty much right on and similar to my own results (I can't comment on Zaino's durability since I have never used it). It has been my experience that products like Klasse, S100 and Meguiars #26 noticably outlast products like Formula113, 3Ms Perfect-it Show Car Wax and Gold Class; and Steve's results bore that out.



Again, the Guru Report is a great guide but your results may vary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top