Paste vs liquid

i prefer paste if possible. if you apply thin coats one tin will last you a lifetime and it doesn't go bad as long as you store it at the proper temperature...
 
From a wax point of view, pastes look better as there are less solvents and more carnauba resulting in pastes being harder, making carnauba's liquid requires more solvents and less carnauba,thats what I read somewhere thus making application easier but sacrificng durability and looks.
 
A few weeks ago I would have said liquid, but after using the UPW and seeing just how little is used and how far it spreads, right now I'd have to say paste. As a side note, I've used the UPW 3 times so far and it has yet to do any nasty things to my black trim, except make it shiny.
 
I lean towards paste being a little easier to apply by hand. I like the thick consistency of megs#21. That's pretty easy. I like the look but collinite 845 is too runny for me.
 
I used to be scared of pastes, but now they are my preference as well. Easier to apply thin and even than a liquid.

With that said, 845 is an excellent liquid, but has to be applied thin thin thin.
 
Zubair said:
From a wax point of view, pastes look better as there are less solvents and more carnauba resulting in pastes being harder, making carnauba's liquid requires more solvents and less carnauba,thats what I read somewhere thus making application easier but sacrificng durability and looks.
Click to expand...
^^^I find this hard to believe.^^^

As with any quality Waxes, a few of the main differences would just be:
•Their physical form
•Personal preference for liquid form.
(Ex.: easier for some to pour the Wax product out of the bottle.)

After all:
As you apply paste Wax to an applicator/pad, by any of several methods, it starts to liquefy---becoming even more liquefied as it is spread on the vehicles' panels.

Another passing thought:
Unlike paste Waxes:
Nothing (including applicators/pads) ever goes back into the Waxes' bottles/containers. This...IMHO...equates to: little or no chance of introducing contaminates into the Wax product itself.


Bob
 
Here's something to think about from another website:

There are two forms of car wax, paste and liquid. They differ basically in the amount of solvents. Rock hard Carnauba is diluted with solvents to Sonax Nano Pro Liquid Waxeither the paste form or further diluted to the liquid form. When you apply a paste wax, the friction of application helps melt the wax and evaporate the solvents. A liquid wax contains significantly more volatile solvents that evaporate out when the wax is applied. A liquid wax will never give the same depth of shine or longevity of a paste wax. The excess wax, left over lubricants, excess bonding agents, solvent residues and other goodies left over forms the "haze" that is buffed out to reveal the coat of wax. Paste waxes are difficult to apply by machine. If you wish to apply your coat of wax or sealant by machine, choose a liquid product. A good coat of wax will also add "depth of shine" and reflective gloss to the finish but cannot transform a neglected or abused paint from a pile of rubble into a Pebble Beach Concours winner. For a wax to be effective, it must be applied to a freshly washed and clean surface, as it will enhance the gloss as well as the defects of the surface. If you are not happy with the look and gloss of your paint, apply a pre-wax cleaner before you wax to insure maximum gloss.
 
Most liquid waxes are glorified sealants. If your defining a wax as something that has organic "wax" in it - liquids simply have much less because it is harder to get them dissolved.

So, I'll stick with sealants and paste waxes. I see liquid waxes as a compromise.
 
Paste wax hard or soft. I will not use a liquid wax anymore from 1st hand experience. The depth and wet look was not as good as the paste wax. This IMO.
 
I don't know the scientific mumbo jumbo differences. By feel using this applicator, Paste or megs 21 is easier. Collinite 845 is watery and really gets soaked up and gets on my fingers. It almost becomes like a slightly wet rag.

As far as the look, you guys are far better at judging than I am. I really don't notice much ofca difference. But my car is silver so everything looks good
 
I like paste, unless I'm applying by machine.

Usually I start by laying down a layer of sealant, and if the mood strikes, I'll go over that with the paste.
 
Zubair said:
From a wax point of view, pastes look better as there are less solvents and more carnauba resulting in pastes being harder, making carnauba's liquid requires more solvents and less carnauba,thats what I read somewhere thus making application easier but sacrificng durability and looks.
Click to expand...

Jason Rose from Meguiar's indicates that the only difference is that the "user experience" is modified, not the other characteristics of the product; like protection, shine, etc.

Of you are able to dig up the article you are referring to, I would be very interested in reading it
 
Read post #8, its from another website, cant post link as it might be a competitor website but pasted an extract, it clearly states liquids dont have the looks and durability of pastes...#8
 
Zubair said:
From a wax point of view, pastes look better as there are less solvents and more carnauba resulting in pastes being harder, making carnauba's liquid requires more solvents and less carnauba,thats what I read somewhere thus making application easier but sacrificng durability and looks.
Click to expand...

Zubair said:
Here's something to think about from another website:

There are two forms of car wax, paste and liquid. They differ basically in the amount of solvents. Rock hard Carnauba is diluted with solvents to Sonax Nano Pro Liquid Waxeither the paste form or further diluted to the liquid form. When you apply a paste wax, the friction of application helps melt the wax and evaporate the solvents. A liquid wax contains significantly more volatile solvents that evaporate out when the wax is applied. A liquid wax will never give the same depth of shine or longevity of a paste wax. The excess wax, left over lubricants, excess bonding agents, solvent residues and other goodies left over forms the "haze" that is buffed out to reveal the coat of wax. Paste waxes are difficult to apply by machine. If you wish to apply your coat of wax or sealant by machine, choose a liquid product. A good coat of wax will also add "depth of shine" and reflective gloss to the finish but cannot transform a neglected or abused paint from a pile of rubble into a Pebble Beach Concours winner. For a wax to be effective, it must be applied to a freshly washed and clean surface, as it will enhance the gloss as well as the defects of the surface. If you are not happy with the look and gloss of your paint, apply a pre-wax cleaner before you wax to insure maximum gloss.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but unless you classify water as a 'volatile solvent' then the above isn't right. Maybe in the old way of things it would be accurate but, these days, the majority of liquid products are emulsified in water (and hence the white 'milky' look). Such a product can actually contains much less in the way of volatile solvent than a hard/paste wax. In fact, there will be numerous spray waxes which are VOC/solvent free whereas paste waxes will almost certainly have significant (non water) solvent levels.

The compromise between the two is that a paste wax will, indeed, have more wax and active ingredient in it - probably 10 times as much (ball park). You need rather little (you must use little or it makes a mess) to get results. With a liquid product, you need more to get the coverage but you have much more flexibility to over-apply and not make a mess. Moreover, you can apply in multiple ways - you can use applicator if you want, spray and buff, apply with machine. The downside with emulsified liquid products is that the emulsification will tend to slightly compromise durability. It is not a massive difference and more times a spray/liquid product gives poor results is because it is a cheap ass product.

There was also the note that liquid products tend to be glorified sealants. This is also somewhat accurate for high tech paste waxes - no pro formulator would put together a paste wax without the sealant elements because they have such incredible flexibility and performance advantages. I would suggest that the only paste waxes which are free of silicone chemistries (or similar which are effectively 'sealant' chemistry) are those which are brewed on the cheap or those which are coming from home-brewers who simply have not discovered or gained access to the more advanced ingredients.
 
I agree that the liquid is a bit easier than the paste to apply by machine and the only problem with applying paste by machine is the tendency to waste product by over-applying it to the buffer pad.
 
Which portion is the "extract" (excerpt)?

I do not see any quotation marks?


Post #8 indicates that paste was is more difficult to apply by machine than liquid? Based on what? I think it easier to apply paste wax than liquid wax with a machine:

-Fewer applications of product to pad

-Less wasted product, left in applicator, spilled, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top