Dubmix, Mixing Meg's Dub Wheel Cleaner with Glycerin and paint testing

[Mantilgh]

This is some experimenting and testing done with Meguirs Dub Wheel Cleaner and me mixing it with glycerin.

This was done for fun because today is my birthday(sorry, didn't choose 1/1) and I like to experiment with things. The truck that I paint tested it on has been abused and neglected and is now being used just as a farm truck. Door tested on is a good candidate for a repaint due to a nice dent and deep gouge.

I picked up Dub Wheel cleaner a couple of weeks ago on a forced trip to Walmart. I also grabbed some glycerin while I was there for the purpose of mixing it with the wheel cleaner.

This was done after reading some reviews here on it and noteing that some said it seemed to run a bit and they thought it should be thicker or more gel like. This made me wonder what could be mixed in to do this.

I remember having one of those big fabric loop bubble wands(makes monster bubbles, 3' diameter easy) I had a long time ago, and remembered one of the tips was to add glycerin to your soap mixture to make your bubbles last longer. I believe there reasoning was that it slowed down the evaporation rate of the mixture and provided elasticity(memory?). I thought this might work so I did a litte research and it seemed inert and safe enough to try. So I did....

Here's what I have

Plan was to see if I could thicken up Dub and/or make it more gel like and to see if I could also make an even thicker gel for spot treatment.

First I use an old small hand sanitizer fliptop bottle to mix in. I thought this would be good to store and apply my "thick" version of the gel for spot treatment.

Added 25ml Dubs then added 5ml of glycerin. No affect, no reaction as I hoped, but had to check just to be sure. After shaken and settled, I tipped the bottle around and the mixture seemed to stick to the sides a little more than before I had added it. Cool, I thought, maybe I'm on to something!

I figured it would be better to test on a large vertical panel to give me a little more feed back, so I went with the dirty Ranger doors. Although wheels do allow you to see what happens when the product runs in to iself though the Y's of the spokes and lug holes and around the outside of the rim.

I am also doing this because I wondered what the effects of a painted wheel safe cleaner would have on typical car paint and have read that it "may" be safe.

I taped off four sections to test.

From right to left;

Each test spot was done with a straight non moving spray from 10-12 inches away and several arcing/moving sprays for different effect.

Simple Green sprayer with foam piece out/in possision using my 4:1 mix on cleaned paint. This was done last as I thought that the dirt might hold the product more, and as comparison to.

Same as above. Both are being done with sprayer pickup tube inserted in top of the little bottle and completely primed before spraying on the truck.

Simple Green sprayer set to foam with straight, untouched, Dub Wheel cleaner. Sprayer cleared first and reprimed.

Dub Wheel Cleaner sprayed from original Dub spray bottle. I stopped short on my concentrated spot bucause so much comes out.

Last photo was take just after finnal application. It did take some time to switch sprayer around and clear and reprime. Maybe 5 minutes max between the very first to last. So there is a delay from first to last, just so you know.

One other reason I am trying with a different sprayer because the Meg's Dub one sprays very heavily IMO. I had tried it from the original sprayer the day before on one wheel and noticed immediately that it put out a lot of product per pump. I had to move the sprayer quickly not to completely douse the wheel. I would rather have to pump 2 or 3 times and get nice coverage than just waste product.

Initial thoughts;

Simple Green sprayer used less product per pump. Good for me, I'm not trying to work at crazy speed.

Notice the amount/coverage of product on the bottom of the Dub/Dub only picture. I was probably move at twice the arm speed of the first three but covered more area all around.

Anymore foaming action? Meh, not really.

Not too much difference in running off the panel with the addition of glycerin.?

Didn't seem to hinder anything.


While I let this dwell I dumped most of the rest of the bottle of Dubs into a graduated spray bottle and made another solution similar to the first. 18oz Dub, 4oz glycerin. This second solution was not used for this part of my test. First solution was 25% glycerin, second full batch was 22%. This was with saving about 1 1/2 oz for my little sanitizer bottle, that I made a 50/50 mix with in hope of making a spot treatment gel.

Sprayed a Subaru wheel and a Ranger wheel to test also while I waited.

I checked every 5 minutes and at about 15 minutes, both of the straight Dub test spots were drying up. The test with glycerin were not. Figured I should rinse off, just to be safe.

Have pictures of my wet/dry test finger wipe test too if wanted. With glycerin was still wet, just Dub just smeared.

Should have tested just Dub on clean test spot also.

Two with glycerin

Just Dub

Rinsed with only strong "jet" of water from a hose from house.
No touching at all, and tape pulled after rinse.

Before

After

Notes:
Did not see much bleeding from the paint, although a lighter color would show it much more. It did noticeably bleed from a chip near front door and a smaller chip toward the back. Did not look like chip was through to metal.

Both seemed to rinse off paint, bottles, and gloves quickly and easily without leaving a residue behind. Did not touch paint though.

Did one more test after this with another mixture and a two hour dwell, but should have tested straight Dub along side of it for comparison.

I should have stopped at this point and though about and just tried to find the minimum needed to add to increase dwell/dry time.

 

[Sizzle Chest]

Wow! You do like to experiment. Pretty cool!

 

[Mantilgh]

Here are the wheels.
Ranger dirty

My mix sprayed

After 5

Scrubbed and rinsed. Nothing spectacular, but were really bad to start

02 Subaru front wheel. Neglected

My mix sprayed

Dwell 2 mins

Dwell 5 mins

Scrubbed and rinsed

Waited started over again with spray, dwell, scrub, and then did it another time. Three time total.
Sprayed again

Done for now

Tools used

The "L" shaped one was broken of the red one from bending it to many times. Works great around the caliper, and in between and behind the spokes. The white one is really long and is bent back against itself

 

[Mantilgh]

Did I accomplish anything here? Maybe. Didn't really make a gel. Did increase dry time. My 50/50 mix I tried seemed no thicker than the lighter mix. Didn't seem to harm the paint.

 

[Mantilgh]

One more reason I wanted to try this wheel cleaner is because I have stopped using acid wheel cleaners some time ago. Mostly use left over wash water and/or mild APC when they do get cleaned.

Never liked acid wheel cleaners much. Hated the smell. Burns skin, and don't like the risk of it being flung in my face while doing barrels and spokes.

I though the Dub Wheel Cleaner did well on 10+ year old wheels that have never had any iron remover or clay used on them. Did try to use an older piece of clay on the other front wheel a month ago. It helped, but was a lot of work.

Another thing I want to note is that some say/believe this wheel cleaner is less concentrated than others because of less of a smell or because it is less expensive.

I do not know how good of a reference this is, but comparing MSDS's of similar products and the claimed percent of chemical(the numbers are reasonably vague, 10-40% for Dub). This may not be so.

MSDS Meg's Dub


Sonax Wheel Cleaner Plus MSDS


Sonax Rim Cleaner MSDS(not sure if this is Full Effect but was the closest I could find)


I like that Sonax Plus has a tar remover(Limonene) in it also for all the chunks of tar that gets on wheel and especially in the barrels.

The Fatty Alcohol Sulfate may be a solvent too.

Want to search for more MSDS? Please do, it's a PITA! All the Sonax products were in German until you got to the actual Brit/Eng sheet.

 

[allenk4]

PiPUK....where are you?

 

[SameGuy]

Hell, he scolded me for wanting to decant dressing into dollar store bottles! This should fun.

 

[tuscarora dave]

PiPUK....where are you?

:righton:

Hell, he scolded me for wanting to decant dressing into dollar store bottles! This should fun.

:laughing:

 

[Mantilgh]

Uh oh, a chemist. Nice to know we have one that knows the industry on here.

Thanks for putting his name up, I did find some good information on PH and buffering that I had been looking for in a few of his post.

Did look more in to Fatty Alcohol Sulfate. Looked up by its CAS Number.

CAS: 126-92-1
Name Sodium-2-ethylhexyl-sulfate
Anionic surfactant, wetting agent, penetrant

Also my percentages are wrong up top. 5ml with 20ml=5/25=20%
4oz with 18oz=4/22=18%

 

[SameGuy]

Just for the record, I think your experiments and write-ups are fun.

 

[PiPUK]

Morning guys,

Glycerol isn't going to really do the trick here. You could probably get the product thicker, but you are going to be diluting it heavily, given the relative quantity you would need. If you want to make a gel, you could try gelatin.

As for the comparison, the ranges stated on the MSDS are as accurate as they need be. 25% is, IMO an upper limit in this kind of product. If there was more than that, the product very likely should have a TOXIC label on it (we, for one, are unwilling to sell a consumer grade product with such a hazard). So the stated ranges don't help much. There are other characteristics which should help. The active ingredient is very heavy, so the more there is present, the more dense the product would be. So Megs product claims it is 1g/ml - which means it is no more dense than water and thus must have very little active ingredient. I'll be honest, I think this is more likely that someone has failed to complete the safety data sheet accurately than the product is genuinely this weak. In either case, it is a negative point to Megs! The sonax product helps somewhat more, the wheel cleaner plus would fit with being nearer the 25% mark. This is a big improvement on the original version of the product which was certainly nearer 5%. The Rim cleaner... I cannot find an MSDS.

I would note that all of these use the sodium salt. This surprises me because my experience shows that this is the least desirable form to use. Yes, it is cheaper and more easily available, but it is technically inferior (IMO).

Other notes - Limonene, forget about that as useful. It is present in a very tiny proportion and will do nothing for your tar. The surfactant is just a wetting agent really, it will be nothing in terms of cost of the product.

 

[Mantilgh]

Thank you for the good information here PiPUK. I noticed that IronX was the only one using Ammonium Sulfanylacetate, Ammonia salts. I guess that(from posted above) this would account for the different smell and effectiveness.

Would adding gelatin give it a short shelf life, or would these "salts" prevent any sort of bacteria, or fungus from growing?

We have a couple of containers of Ball brand Low or No-Sugar Needed Pectin. Could this be used in a similar fashion?

Would these need to be heated?

I have read that gelatin can be done cold but does affect it in some way. May be the same with pectin. I do have an outdoor grill with a side pot burner if needed.

Have also found some others like Polyethylene glycol (MiraLAX)

And some food/drink thickeners but some of these use starches. Would starches be ok for this? I typically think of starches as paste like or sticky/gooey.

Sorry for all the questions, I did try to limit myself.

 

[allenk4]

You are either going to burn your house down or the Neighbors are going to think you are cooking Meth and call the Cops

 

[Mantilgh]

Yeah, I was wondering what my neighbors would think if they smelled it.

 

[PiPUK]

The product should be preserved already. In truth, you are going to use it long before it would go off!

The pectin would be an option although you might have trouble with it turning into lumps when you mix them.

 

[SON1C]

Interesting thread and some great replies! You never know what experiments like this might turn into -- best of luck!

Also try Xanthan Gum, for whatever it's worth. It will certainly add viscosity! And is readily available at your local stores more than likely, Walmart carries it

 

[PiPUK]

Also try Xanthan Gum, for whatever it's worth. It will certainly add viscosity! And is readily available at your local stores more than likely, Walmart carries it

That would certainly work. Seems to be laziness that the brand isn't doing this work themselves!

 

[SON1C]

Haha well shame on them! They'll have to hire mantilgh

 

[allenk4]

If you dilute the product by 50% by adding whatever and this addition increases the dwell time by 50%, that could be a break-even proposition

But, based on a limited knowledge of how chemicals work, I believe that the dilution would decrease the effectiveness of the product, even with the increased dwell time

This belief is based on the fact that in the diluted "gel" a percentage of the active ingredient never makes contact with the targeted contaminated surface

 

[PiPUK]

If you dilute the product by 50% by adding whatever and this addition increases the dwell time by 50%, that could be a break-even proposition

But, based on a limited knowledge of how chemicals work, I believe that the dilution would decrease the effectiveness of the product, even with the increased dwell time

This belief is based on the fact that in the diluted "gel" a percentage of the active ingredient never makes contact with the targeted contaminated surface

We make both clingy products and runny products. Our sprayable gel is the perfect product if you get past this - super strong and sticks to almost any surface without much in the way of dripping. Once of our major customers dropped it because the lack of dripping meant that the bleed was localised to the area that had contamination. You could literally see each spot of fallout bleeding. The customer ended up going with a runny product, like IX, because it would pick up some bleed and then run everywhere making the whole surface turn purple. The reality is that the latter needs to be needlessly stronger so that it can do the same job. However, the masses won't listen to reason and are willing to waste their money to get the same result, but more purple.

A slower bleed can sometimes indicate a poor product, and people cannot seem to differentiate these two scenarios. Amazingly, one of the popular products in the early days was massively weaker than the competition but they managed to convince people that the slow bleed was by design and didn't actually mean lesser performance. It took years for some people to pull their heads out of that marketing man's bottom!