Science and New Detailing Products. . .

[Hantra]

All:

Is there published science out there on detailing products that I just can't find? I mean, I think we all understand how polishes and waxes work. Thanks to smart guys like Kevin Brown, the Meguiars guys, and Mike Phillips, we get a lot of experiential science on techniques, and some products. At the same time, there seem to be an awful lot of fantastical claims around (usually expensive) products that seem far-fetched.

Just today, I heard a podcast on a single product, which is said to do all of the following:

- encapsulate debris
- break debris into microscopic pieces
- "lift" said debris from a painted surface
- softens water
- provides some sort of ionic miracle electric charge effect which levitates dirt particles
- is antibacterial
- can clean mineral deposits from pumps, steam machines, extractors
- makes dirt jump off a sponge when dipped in a bucket
- lubricate and protect painted surfaces

And I know there are many folks who have used products with claims like this, and are satisfied. I have tried a few similar ones, and like them very much. But I only have anecdotal evidence on which to base my conclusions. One would assume, if scientists are involved in formulating these products, and providing the benefits to a marketing / sales team, there would be some lab tests to prove the claims.

Even if they aren't independently verified, I would love to see some science showing that a product does any of these things, rather than just knowing my car doesn't scratch, and I don't have to rinse it, and it looks good.

Maybe I am more sensitive to this, since I am a recovering audiophile who has spent tens of thousands buying the same sort of non-empirical claims. But again, if there are PhD's out here developing the stuff, where are boring white papers?

Thanks!

 

[swanicyouth]

Yeah, well... I think a lot of that podcast is B.S.

I'm pretty familiar with the product I think you are alluding to. It's fine for what it is - but the claims they are making are just ridiculous.

There are better products out there. Some are manufactured by PBMG.

No, you will not see any science behind these claims. It's basically the Wild West out there - you have to try different things and use what you like.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

Recovering Audiophile I bet your house is filled with reference grade amps and those $400 Cardas cables for your headphones not to be left out gold plated plugs for your speakers LOL

Well the simple science behind all the products is to protect your paint and plastic from UV rays and corrosive substances to maintain cosmetic appearance. So every company puts out products to address that.

As far as the intricate chemistry behind it as to what each one uses...they just provide sketchy information and some of it might be just snake oil. I believe most of the polymers each manufacturer uses is proprietary and trade secret so you don't know what it is in the product to do further research on what that specific polymer is capable of.

As an engineer, all I can tell you is Polymer/Nano Chemistry has advanced leaps and bounds since the turn of the century and each one of these companies probably have someone with PhD in chemistry spearheading the product development. It is like biotech or genetic research where boutique labs can cook up their own flavor of these compounds that can work wonders and once they have tested it, the formula for the exact polymer might be a closely regarded secret.

So without knowing what is in the product you are using, it is hard to prove or disprove the science and I am not sure if there is a regulating agency for auto detailing products.

In order for you to verify the science, you have to clearly know what is in the product and that information is a trade secret so there is no way to verify except to take their claim and use their product and find out for yourself with the results.

Most of these new 'nano polymer' products that have popped up in the past 10 years , they are all run by people with advanced knowledge and degrees in Chemistry and like I said, there is a lot they can do to alter the structure of these polymers/compounds to exhibit certain characteristics that might suit the specific application.

There is definitely published science on the base compounds they might be using but then most of these companies work to alter the structure of the base compound to impart the desired characteristics and once they've nailed down that specific compound, the formula might be locked up in a vault as trade secret.

So without that specific info, it is very difficult to prove their claims or verify the science. Well you can find out their claims as a customer by using the product and finding out the results and if they are not good, then customers go elsewhere. So all these companies have a vested interest in making their product work or the fickle customers might buy their next product from someone else. The business model is based on repeat customers (since most of the auto detail products are like consumer goods) so it is in their best interest to keep their customers coming back to them. Thats why you also see a lot of these company marketing people or distribution people in all the detailing forums taking the pulse of users as to how their product is received.

I am not sure if that answers your question but that is my take on it based on what I can logically deduce from available information

 

[Setec Astronomy]

Sounds like you're talking about ONR. Dr. G HAS written technical papers, it's just that we detailers aren't really the target audience for that.

http://optimumcarcare.com/articles/evolution

 

[ArnoldLayne]

Well I am not a detailer per se. Thanks for the article link.

Unfortunately the article is generic and does not have specific technical data on the exact chemical structure of the compounds which I am afraid and understand is a trade secret. It does not even have technical information as to what type of basic polymer structures they use in their products..

The paper only mentions the type of distillates and chemicals they use in a generic sense (like Petroleum Distillates, resins and binders etc)

In order to verify the scientific claim, you need way more data and information and probably someone with a advanced degree in polymer chemistry to verify if that specific chemical formula with that molecular structure can impart the characteristics the company claims to make in their products.

And just like Dr G, many other of these companies (like Nanolex or Dr Beasley's etc) have someone with a PhD specializing in polymer chemistry spearheading that company (most likely own) and they decided to capitalize on their knowledge in the field by developing specific products for niche markets instead of doing corporate slavery for a big corp like 3M or Dupont.

 

[Hantra]

But folks. I'm not looking for manufacturers to reveal proprietary information. Just show me a controlled test that shows the zillowionic effect working when your product is used as intended. Show me that dirt is encapsulated and broken down better than a control.

That's all I'm asking. Substantiate some of these seemingly outlandish claims your marketing people are making. I can't talk to a fellow smart car guy about trying rinseless without something empirical. I can't tell him it's magic, and awesome, so stop what you're doing, and join my cult. It's embarrassing.

 

[Mantilgh]

Not to say there isn't marketing hype out there, but to me, none of the points are inconceivable depending on how you read in to them.

Although when talking about ONR, I wonder why it stains wash media when it's encapsulating dirt and supposedly being released.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

But folks. I'm not looking for manufacturers to reveal proprietary information. Just show me a controlled test that shows the zillowionic effect working when your product is used as intended. Show me that dirt is encapsulated and broken down better than a control.

That's all I'm asking. Substantiate some of these seemingly outlandish claims your marketing people are making. I can't talk to a fellow smart car guy about trying rinseless without something empirical. I can't tell him it's magic, and awesome, so stop what you're doing, and join my cult. It's embarrassing.

Unfortunately the only way to verify the claim in this case would be to actually use the product yourself or read about previous user experiences of the product before you want to buy and try yourself. And also determine how it works for your specific situation based on where you live and the weather in your place or any other factors that can affect the life of the product.

That seems to be the name of the game and Youtube and Forums like this are your best friends to do your own DD before buying the product.

Oh and don't take some of those claims literally because that claim made by the company is based on a controlled environment in most cases. Your mileage may greatly vary based on various factors such as how you applied it, whether you followed all the application instructions to the tee, where you live and the weather and environment there etc.

For example, a product that claims UV durability of a year probably won't last half as much where I live, thanks to the extreme heat in AZ. On the other hand, a glass coating to repel water might last twice as much as the claim because it hardly ever rains here (you may have to talk to someone in Seattle or UK to find out how it performs in non stop rain)

 

[Setec Astronomy]

Although when talking about ONR, I wonder why it stains wash media when it's encapsulating dirt and supposedly being released.

Well, for that one, the claim is that ONR breaks the particles down so small that they penetrate into the fibers of the wash media.

It sounds like the OP is just looking for a technical explanation of how rinseless washes work, and I agree that would be very interesting. But sadly, like most consumer products, detailing products are largely driven by marketing, and less by technical details, so although these technical descriptions might be very interesting to some of us, they likely don't do the job of selling the product that the marketers are looking for.

But to the OP, I understand Dr. G is fairly easy to get on the phone, you might try calling and asking him directly.

 

[Mike PhillipsMike Phillips is verified member.]

All:

Is there published science out there on detailing products that I just can't find? I mean, I think we all understand how polishes and waxes work.

Even if they aren't independently verified,

Off the top of my head, here's the only science I know of that is independently verified and also "science". Even the guy in the picture is a real PhD Organic Scientist.

It's somewhere on page two of my article here,

Beginning Clearcoat Failure

I would love to see some science showing that a product does any of these things,

The nature of car care product companies is to hold their science or their technology close to their chest. When I worked for Meguiar's people were always asking,

What's in the bottle?


John Dillon, one of my Managers at Meguiar's helped to form the answer for that question, goes like this,

"Mike, when people ask you about the ingredients simply focus their attention to the performance of the product not what's inside the bottle"



That advice has served me well over the years and I'm pretty sure I included this in my first how-to book and of course, giving John Dillon credit by name. For what it's worth, when people would ask me about the formulas themselves or how the formulas worked, I would often say,

"We will start sharing our secrets when all those other car care product companies start sharing their secrets then we'll start sharing ours"


Of course that never happened and it will never happen.



Here's the BIG PICTURE

Products either work or they don't and now that we have this thing called the "Internet" word of mouth advertising takes care of both the products that work and the culls, all a person has to do is a little researching and reading. Find a place where you get both accurate and helpful information and go with it.

rather than just knowing my car doesn't scratch, and I don't have to rinse it, and it looks good.

Not sure what you mean about the bold part above?

Clearcoats scratch very easily. Here's my article on this topic,

Clearcoats are Scratch-Sensitive


It's hard for most people to wrap their brains around this idea when they also know clearcoats are hard but that's how it works.

Maybe I am more sensitive to this, since I am a recovering audiophile who has spent tens of thousands buying the same sort of non-empirical claims.

But again, if there are PhD's out here developing the stuff, where are boring white papers?

Thanks!

I don't know where the boring white papers are but I love the graphic at the top of this article that does have to do with the science of "bonding". The point of the picture is too many people in the blogosphere take something that is actually very simple and turn it into rocket science.

Miscible and Immiscible - Wax and Paint Sealant Bonding


I don't know if any of the above helps but a read your post last night from home and thought I would chime in today.

 

[yg1829]

I personally love optimum products. For me they do what they are supposed do. I still use other brands because there is a lot of great stuff out there but I mostly use optimum. Simple, easy to use, and excellent results.

I feel very comfortable knowing that Dr G actually helped to develop clear coat paints.

If he knows how to do that he knows how to protect and maintain them.

Anyway....sometimes you just have to believe in whatever you use if you like it. Using real world experience you will get your answers over time.

If there are studies and testing on the science of these products showing what they do is completely true people will still find a way to not believe it if they don't want to.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Cliffnopus]

+1 above. What he said.

 

[BM1024]

Using real world experience you will get your answers over time.

I agree and feel that the trying is part of the enjoyment. Plus, the science really doesn't mean anything unless you are a chemist/scientist yourself - and if you are, then you already have a pretty good idea how/why things work and what is hype.

It's called advertising. Kraft tells you that their new Mac & Cheese is richer, creamier, and tastes better than the competitor. All the science and ingredient list will mean nothing until you put it in YOUR mouth. Same goes for headphone/speakers - YOUR experience and opinion trumps all the science.

Does ONR/Whatever encapsulate - I don't know - but I know I like how it grabs the dust spots off my car and sheets them down the side.

 

[FUNX650]

Something new?

Scientists have been giving atoms their
marching orders for quite some time now.



Bob

 

[Hantra]

Excellent points all. Thanks for the links, Mike. I use WG Uber Rinseless, D114, and a similar product, and I know they work. I just don't know the "how", and it sounds like these companies want to keep it that way.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

It sounds like the OP is just looking for a technical explanation of how rinseless washes work, and I agree that would be very interesting. But sadly, like most consumer products, detailing products are largely driven by marketing, and less by technical details, so although these technical descriptions might be very interesting to some of us, they likely don't do the job of selling the product that the marketers are looking for.

Rinse less washes use emulsifiers that can lift up dirt and grime from surface that can be wiped away. That is the basic chemistry of it. But as such, the generic emulsifiers are used in various applications including food. So you can see...emulsifiers is a broad term and each emulsifier is application specific. Coke and Pepsi use emulsifiers in their product. Lot of foods have them too.

All you need to know as a customer is whether the product works as advertised and if it did, you'd keep coming back to buy the product. This market is so competitive that it is in their best business interest for these companies to make the product work as they advertise it. Most of them do to a good extent.

I suspect neither Dr G or any other chemists heading these companies is going to reveal what is in the bottle.

As for what a sealant or wax or any other broad umbrella product does...you could get that information from Wikipedia.

 

[FUNX650]

I use WG Uber Rinseless, D114, and a
similar product, and I know they work.

I just don't know the "how", and it
sounds like these companies want
to keep it that way.

On a lark, I'm going to say:

•As long as the RWs'/WWs' emulsification
is accomplished by using surfactants that
reduces the surface tension of water from
~72 to ~35 dynes/cm...Then:

"I'm happy as a Lark, belieee-eeve me"...


Bob

 

[Hantra]

All you need to know as a customer is whether the product works as advertised

This is precisely why I started this thread. That's exactly what I am looking for. If you're going to say your product lifts dirt away from a surface, while lubricating it, and breaking dirt particles into smaller ones, should you not be able to prove that in a controlled, scientific way?

Once again, I don't care what's in the bottle, and I have no interest in learning the formulations. I'd simply like to see a controlled test to back up a claim that the product gives dirt a neutral electric charge, and suspends it in the emulsifier or whatever.

Let's see that tested. Even if it's not independent labs. Show me it does that. Sure, I can use it and see if I like it. But I still have no way to know if the claims are pseudoscientific marketing BS, or if the product really does what they allege. And since some of these products have such a rabid fan base, it's hard to even have the discussion. I don't want to call a guy and have him elaborate on his marketing. I'd rather see some controlled testing. But that's just me.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

This is precisely why I started this thread. That's exactly what I am looking for. If you're going to say your product lifts dirt away from a surface, while lubricating it, and breaking dirt particles into smaller ones, should you not be able to prove that in a controlled, scientific way?

Well if we are talking about the product in discussion which are the rinse less washes... I think there is more than ample data and evidence not from a controlled scientific test alone but also from thousands of real time users. I personally use them and I can attest to it working as advertised.

All these products are tested in a controlled environment as well as real world environment before they go out to the customer. I am pretty sure they test it for the harsh environment suitability as well to find out durability or any adverse reactions to environmental factors. That said, their durability claims will be based on controlled tests so they have the marketing advantage.

So I am a little confused here. What exactly is the scientific data you are looking for in these products? I was under the impression you were looking for technical details on the polymers (which by now we established are trade secrets). If you are looking for evidence that they work... most of these products if not all have real world evidence as to how they work or not work as advertised.

In the end, the end user is the ultimate test of the product and using the fair assumption that not all people in forums like this are shilling for a company and its products (sometimes you have a few who identify themselves as marketing people or sometimes incognito), you have your scientific evidence from the real world.

As a consumer, all you need to worry about is whether the product will work and how it has worked for people just like you who already are using it.

Rest assured, all these companies have the requisite chemistry expertise and product testing to substantiate their claims to a great extent.

And big companies like Meguiars (which is owned by 3M) have dedicated R&D and product development & testing for all their products. And when they put out doozies, you will hear about that from an end user who had a bad experience.

 

[FUNX650]

This is precisely why I started this thread. That's exactly what I am looking for. If you're going to say your product lifts dirt away from a surface, while lubricating it, and breaking dirt particles into smaller ones, should you not be able to prove that in a controlled, scientific way?

Once again, I don't care what's in the bottle, and I have no interest in learning the formulations. I'd simply like to see a controlled test to back up a claim that the product gives dirt a neutral electric charge, and suspends it in the emulsifier or whatever.

Let's see that tested. Even if it's not independent labs. Show me it does that. Sure, I can use it and see if I like it. But I still have no way to know if the claims are pseudoscientific marketing BS, or if the product really does what they allege. And since some of these products have such a rabid fan base, it's hard to even have the discussion. I don't want to call a guy and have him elaborate on his marketing. I'd rather see some controlled testing. But that's just me.

Let me make sure I understand you...

You want RW/WW car-wash manufacturers
to show proof that their formulations has
"the right stuff" (micelles) that encapsulate
soils, thereby allowing them to be rinsed
or wiped away from the vehicles' surfaces,
without inducing harm to said surfaces?

Welp...
That is the actual scientific, innate behavior
of these types of products (and most every
other soap/shampoo used by mankind)...
that's been tested-to-death by numerous
[1 +...n = n(n+1)/2] Scientists over the
decades...the results of which are readily
available for peer review.

***************************************

•Here's a diagram depicting a car-wash
shampoo's micelle at work. That is:
-It shows both the hydrophobic/hydrophilic
"heads/tails"; that's surrounded by water;
with the soils seen in the center region.

Bob