3D BDX vs. CarPro IronX

[PiPUK]

I found the statement from the non-technical rep on their forum-- " FerreX has a special blend of surfactants which makes it work better than solvents in removing wax and tar."

You know Dr. G is a polymer wizard (well, at least to us laymen) so maybe he threw that in to assist in the iron removal and it has some minor tar removal properties so they added it to the label blurb. It's probably better as you noted to separate out the two tasks (although if I ever get to use my Trix maybe I'll change my mind).

Since we're talking about storm drains and surface water contamination, the thioglycolates can't be very good for the fish, either.

I realise Dr G is an expert but the truth is that there is only so much that you can do. Like it or not, to hit the price points that are needed, Optimum are using the same sort of surfactants as the rest of us. They can blend them differently and may get synergy but they won't have the luxury of manufacturing a specialist surfactant that is unique to them, that is big chemistry and (unless i am missing a parent corporation) beyond the scope of detailing brands. What they may be referring to is the 'bug and tar' remover type products which are found in the US. Most (not all) are not particularly high solvent products and, being brutally honest, are useless if you have any real amount of tar. It is quite plausible that Optimum may have compared with these products and rightly found tar removal to be superior. Interestingly, Optimum choose not to name any surfactant components on their safety information. In this age of the globally harmonised system, I find this very unusual as the vast majority of surfactants are considered hazardous and thus should be noted on a data sheet, unless they are present in very small amounts.

All that said, I would love to be wrong. If someone can show me Ferrex causing a globule of hardened tar 'bleeding' the way a heavy solvent product will cause, I may well change my view!

Thioglycolates and drainage systems - I believe that thioglycolates are very good in their biodegradability so this should not be a concern. As I have said previously, many surfactants are very bad for the environment because they do not break down easily at all. I am speculating but I suspect that the EU has taken the stance of banning the use of these whilst the US has not. In place of this ban, the US continues to use these chemicals, instead choosing to ban users from putting the run off into storm drains. Personally I prefer the EU approach as we get freedom to wash our vehicles when and where we want, albeit we have to compromise on our ingredients (which, to some extent, forces development of new alternatives).

 

[Setec Astronomy]

They can blend them differently and may get synergy but they won't have the luxury of manufacturing a specialist surfactant that is unique to them, that is big chemistry and (unless i am missing a parent corporation) beyond the scope of detailing brands.

No, you're right. The closest they get is Optimum Power Clean (APC) which lists a proprietary surfactant blend at 3-8%. Is there anything in coating ingredients that can be manufactured as a unique ingredient? Something that could actually be created in a mfr's lab rather than just being formulated?

I guess I feel silly thinking that some of these companies have unique products when it seems the reality is they are just really exploring market niches. Like when all these iron-eating products came out and seemed to be a new technology, I researched the chemical and found it's been around for 70-80 years, and been used for iron removal for a long time, it's just no one ever thought us crazy car cleaners would pay the price for a wheel cleaner that contained it. So not chemistry, just marketing.

What they may be referring to is the 'bug and tar' remover type products which are found in the US. Most (not all) are not particularly high solvent products and, being brutally honest, are useless if you have any real amount of tar. It is quite plausible that Optimum may have compared with these products and rightly found tar removal to be superior. All that said, I would love to be wrong. If someone can show me Ferrex causing a globule of hardened tar 'bleeding' the way a heavy solvent product will cause, I may well change my view!

I agree those "bug and tar" removers are useless on real tar (we do a lot of "cold patch" on the roads during the winter, asphalt patch which is softened by solvents instead of heat, and so hardens by solvent evaporation. Usually it doesn't get tamped very well, and they leave it for the traffic to flatten it...it's horrible, a pile of sticky rocks, an incredible mess).

Those "bug and tar" removers do work well on some smeary black stuff we sometimes get on our cars...but I think that is probably suspension joint grease.

Interestingly, Optimum choose not to name any surfactant components on their safety information. In this age of the globally harmonised system, I find this very unusual as the vast majority of surfactants are considered hazardous and thus should be noted on a data sheet, unless they are present in very small amounts.

It seems to be a self-policed system here (in the US), and it even appears that the MSDS may not be made up until someone asks for them, rather than a prerequisite to product release.

Thioglycolates and drainage systems - I believe that thioglycolates are very good in their biodegradability so this should not be a concern. As I have said previously, many surfactants are very bad for the environment because they do not break down easily at all. I am speculating but I suspect that the EU has taken the stance of banning the use of these whilst the US has not. In place of this ban, the US continues to use these chemicals, instead choosing to ban users from putting the run off into storm drains. Personally I prefer the EU approach as we get freedom to wash our vehicles when and where we want, albeit we have to compromise on our ingredients (which, to some extent, forces development of new alternatives).

We have very strict storm drain laws here, which are largely unenforced. Your point about surfactants is well noted; it certainly has been publicized about the large-scale use of "dispersants" used in the BP oil spill in the gulf and side effects of that. As you know, our politics here is manipulated to a certain extent by big business. GE had a transformer plant 150 miles up the Hudson River from NYC, and used to dump PCB waste into the river. When the EPA insisted they clean up the river bed, they argued it would be safer to leave it undisturbed in the sediment, rather than stirring it up by removing it. They lost that argument.

I just want to say again how much I appreciate your participation on this forum. Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.

 

[PiPUK]

No, you're right. The closest they get is Optimum Power Clean (APC) which lists a proprietary surfactant blend at 3-8%. Is there anything in coating ingredients that can be manufactured as a unique ingredient? Something that could actually be created in a mfr's lab rather than just being formulated?

Coatings are much more plausible. The volumes are low and the prices are high. That being said, you can create superb coatings by blending commercially available ingredients without any need to do chemistry.

I guess I feel silly thinking that some of these companies have unique products when it seems the reality is they are just really exploring market niches. Like when all these iron-eating products came out and seemed to be a new technology, I researched the chemical and found it's been around for 70-80 years, and been used for iron removal for a long time, it's just no one ever thought us crazy car cleaners would pay the price for a wheel cleaner that contained it. So not chemistry, just marketing.

A lot of the chemical industry is just shifting things around, adding a bit of new here and there as they become available. There aren't too many instances of 'leaps'. In our case, our products do improve, year on year, but this is a gradual process and rarely do we find products which are genuinely head and shoulders better than the competition. Most of the time the biggest difference between products is the people who market them.

It seems to be a self-policed system here (in the US), and it even appears that the MSDS may not be made up until someone asks for them, rather than a prerequisite to product release.

It is the same in Europe. These things ARE obligatory but we are hindered by the people selling products think that they have something unique and that giving out safety data sheets will compromise that. To be honest, many companies over here will simple refuse to give you the sheets (and this extends to some companies which you guys will encounter, not just small ones!).

I just want to say again how much I appreciate your participation on this forum. Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.

I appreciate the comment. I really enjoy this forum and find that, on the whole, people are receptive and interested to learn. It amazes me that there is such a difference between Autogeek and the main UK detailing forum!

 

[Setec Astronomy]

It is the same in Europe. These things ARE obligatory but we are hindered by the people selling products think that they have something unique and that giving out safety data sheets will compromise that. To be honest, many companies over here will simple refuse to give you the sheets (and this extends to some companies which you guys will encounter, not just small ones!).

Yes, I've observed that. Meguiar's is very good with their MSDS, if a little hard to find on their site, Optimum posts on their forum (I guess you have to be a member), although one I asked about on a new product that is already for sale will be posted "as soon as it is finished". I went to Premium Finish Care (Four Star, Ultima, Sonus) and they have them too...I randomly clicked on a wheel cleaner that contains "Ammonium Hydrogen Flue-ride"...you can't make this stuff up.

I appreciate the comment. I really enjoy this forum and find that, on the whole, people are receptive and interested to learn. It amazes me that there is such a difference between Autogeek and the main UK detailing forum!

Weird. We (in the US) don't want to learn anything, we just want to reinforce what we already believe (hence Fox News and MSNBC). That being said, this is an amazing forum, and there certainly have been other forums that have been more parochial, but this one is not.

 

[Paul A.]

AWESOME exchange Setec and PiPUK! Very educational and considering how chemically based our passion for clean and shiny vehicles is i very much appreciate your insights.

I love the science of this stuff!

 

[808_detail_nut]

Isn't it law that any business must have SDS sheets available upon request by OSHA inspector or if you are selling it you should have it available upon customer request? No questions asked?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Setec Astronomy]

Isn't it law that any business must have SDS sheets available upon request by OSHA inspector or if you are selling it you should have it available upon customer request? No questions asked?

I think it may be a B2B thing--IIRC there was some ruffle here some years ago where they said they would only supply an MSDS on a PBMG house brand if you were a business. As far as the OSHA inspector, of course for him, but at least here in NJ we have right-to-know laws that MSDS must be available and easily accessible to employees so they know the hazards and PPE for what they are working with.

 

[builthatch]

I really enjoy this forum and find that, on the whole, people are receptive and interested to learn. It amazes me that there is such a difference between Autogeek and the main UK detailing forum!

what is the main difference you've noticed?

I think it may be a B2B thing--IIRC there was some ruffle here some years ago where they said they would only supply an MSDS on a PBMG house brand if you were a business. As far as the OSHA inspector, of course for him, but at least here in NJ we have right-to-know laws that MSDS must be available and easily accessible to employees so they know the hazards and PPE for what they are working with.

my dad was a biology teacher for 35 years and once retired, became a right to know speaker for several more years. he's in NJ too (as am i).

 

[PiPUK]

Isn't it law that any business must have SDS sheets available upon request by OSHA inspector or if you are selling it you should have it available upon customer request? No questions asked?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

At least in Europe, it is law. In our case, it is extremely rare that anyone ever does inspections or asks to see the information. As such, most people are either ignorant of this choose to ignore their health and safety obligations. Many brands are in the same boat and don't have SDS, even if prompted. It is slightly sad that, in the safe knowledge that they wont be caught, people choose to save some time and ignore potential hazards.

what is the main difference you've noticed?

The main UK forum is extremely brand militant. People are uninterested in the facts, only interested in what the brand says in marketing literature.

 

[RippyD]

Interesting review.

To clarify a few facts:

1) Iron-X DOES contain surfactants. Whether it is lacking, comparatively, in some other components or specific surfactants which make it a less potent wheel cleaner is another matter. Looking at the BDX sheet, my inclination is that they both have surfactants, albeit that those in BDX would be more potent degreasers (as a note, I am quite surprised, given the specific alcohol ethoxylates and their quantity, that there is not a greater hazard warning). BDX does have a health solvent addition which should help in general cleaning. It is also worth noting that it has a lower content of the active ingredient (for iron removal) compared to the last IX data sheet I looked at.

2) Surfactants WILL be important from the lubrication standpoint. With a water based product, when someone talks about lubricity, it will almost always be down to the surfactants within.

Final thought - someone suggested Optimum Ferrex was safer - could we get some sort of clarification as to the reasons for this statement?

You seem to be in the car car product industry. If so, can you share which products? (Apologies if this is already common knowledge.)

 

[PouncingPanzer]

Deos that bdx or iron x stain concrete driveway or pavers.when I pull up to detail a car and the driveway has pavers or a immaculate concrete driveway ,the very first thing that comes to mind is not to detail on the property.

I haven't noticed it myself. I just helped a friend with his black challenger on a concrete driveway, it wasn't brand new by any means, but it was clean. The Iron-X didn't seem to stain, nor did the Sonax Wheel Cleaner Plus, and there was a very long, very dark streams of reacted Sonax going from each wheel to the drain. No stains to be had.