I just got my July 06 Consumer Reports the other day and in the issue they rate car waxes. Unfortunately, they did not include Zaino, I guess because it is not available at major retailers.

Anyhow here are the top three in each category:

Liquids:
1. Black Magic Wet Shine Liquid Wax BM48016 (Gloss=E; Durability=E)
2. Turtle Wax Carnauba Car Wax T-6 (Gloss=E; Durability=E)
3. Eagle One Nanowax (Gloss=E; Durability=Fair)

Pastes:
1. Nu Finish NFP-80 (Gloss=VG; Durability=E)
2. Turtle Wax Platinum Series Ultra Gloss T-411R (Gloss=E; Durability=G)
3. P21S Concours-look Carnauba wax (Gloss=G; Durability=G)

Sprays:
1. Eagle One Wax-As-U-Dry (Gloss=G; Durability=P)
2. Turtle Wax 1 step wax n dry (Gloss=G; Durability=F)
3. Turtle Wax Platinum Series Ultra Gloss (Gloss=F; Durability=F)

where E=exellent; VG=very good; G=good; F=fair; P=poor.

They had all major brands including Meguiars, which suprisingly did not do very well. I use Meguirs NXT on my wife's car and I thought it was pretty good. The Meguiar's products ranked as follows: Liquid, No. 9; Paste, 4; Spray, No. 7.

They had other categories besides gloss and durability, but these are the ones most of us care about.

 

...and the *best* products will probably never be sold at mass market retailers, either.

 

I would be concerned if what I use WAS in the top three...

 

I am just quite surprised at how well Black Magic did and how poorly Meguiars did. Many people here swear by Meguairs, and very few mention or use Black Magic, it seems.

 

Why?

I think they did a decent job judging the products objectively.

 

Based on every detailing reality we have ever discussed on NAM, CRs results seem (as usual) misleading. Their universe of products they considered is too small.

 

Yes, there are many things to consider, but they do discuss factors such as whether the car is new or weathered. They also included "ease of application" and "compatibility with plastic," i.e., whether the wax causes the dreaded white residue. "Gloss" and "Durability," two of the most important factors to consider are, like the other factors, judged independently. So, one could choose a product based on what you deem most imprtant.

They did look at 28 products covering about a dozen brands (not enough?).

I suppose the results could be misleading if someone just made their choice based on the ranking without considering their specific needs. But if one were to look carefully at the ratings (and subratings) I think CR's work is quite useful, yes?

Now, not to be too enthusiastic, I should say that I was a bit disappointed that they did not mention clay-baring even after mentioning important pointers like washing regularly.

 

CR's for your typical Joe and Jane. i don't think any of my neighbors
know what a Claybar is...

thanks for the CR post. looks fine to me. might have to try ICE next
though.

 

I recently tried the black magic....very impressed. Believe me, I had my doubts but the car looks awesome. Will have to try it on my HEMI next.

 

ofioliti - As an audiophile, I have found CR inaccurate.

 

= a big red flag in my opinion!!!

 

The magazine is called Consumer Reports, not Detailing Enthusiast Reports!

I'm sure their testing methods were solid, and the results unbiased. Detailing enthusiasts are going to know what they like, and what works best for them. The average Consumer Reports reader (who I imagine is unlikely to wax their own car anyway) will be well served by the article.

 

I've found consumer reports is usually way off on most things they review. If you read that, why aren't you driving a Toyota? I might trust them for appliances, but that's about it. Did they publish exactly what their test methods were? Nothing beats a good ol' comparison test.

 

Until I got a MINI, I didn't know what a claybar was (and my friends consider me a 'car guy').

And I just tried ICE after using NXT last year. Good stuff.

 

That NSX article is a very interesting comparison test. I wonder if the results would have been different if the "professional" line of Meguiar's products were used instead of the "consumer" line. That would've been a little more fair to Meguiar's since all the other products were high end ones.

 

I'll try the stuff as well on my wife's car! I love Zaino myself, but I can't seem to use up all the 'ingredients' in the Zaino system all at the same time and I end up having to order more often than I care to.

 

I guess it would depend on what aspect one is looking at. Sound, I would suspect, like looking at, and feeling a newly detailed car, is a very subjective thing.

For their report CR says "To assess gloss, we did side-by-side visual comparisons. Gloss-measuring devices exist, but their measurements don't necessarily translate into what the human eye sees. For durability tests, we tracked how water beaded to show how quickly the wax wore away."

(They don't say how many people judged the gloss---that would be an interesting stat.)

I read CR because I do not know of any other source that is not potentially biased (those that rely on ads). Point me to a better source and I will gladly go to that

 

Still, where can we find more objective evaluations of detailing products?

 

I agree.

I think many here at NAM will be served well too, because several folks have expressed a desire for products that give a lot of shine, are durable, and are available at the local store.

 

See post above for test methods--they essentially were comparison tests.

I drive a MINI because it looks great, drives great (fun), and comes with a wonderful community---things that CR cannot evaluate, as we all can agree on. But, evaluating key properties of car waxes ... I think that's exactly what they do well.

 

In my opinion, one has to search (exert some energy) to get to the a true evaluation that works for an individual's goals and preferences, and limitations. If CR had said "the best waxes readily available at your auto parts store" maybe. But many of us have limited time and $$$ for detailing and so getting the most for our efforts is very important. Some of the best products of this type are skipped over, and worse, the reader still is clueless about these superb products that work in real-life with real budgets. Thing is...CR has postured itself in the marketplace as something of a final authority. It is a valuable tool, no doubt, but one had better be prepared to to their own homework rather than switch off one's own brain and mindlessly trust the experts. A sidebar on claying or acrylics would have improved their credibility. Just my opinion...

 

Oh, I agree completely. In fact, I have trusted the extra energy put in by others on this forum by going with Zaino.

I will go out and get some Black Magic and compare it with Zaino ... on my wife's car. I am intrigued by it's "Excellent" durability compared to the "Fair" durability of the NXT Generation Tech Wax.

 

As a coffee lover I had my first doubts about their methodology and selection bias years ago when they did a piece on gourmet coffees. While they clearly preferred Colombians -- and every coffee brand they sampled offered a premium Colombian -- they chose a random sampling of various types of coffee from all over the world. Any coffee fan can tell you there are distinct geographic and climatologic differences in coffee beans, so they should at least have controlled for that set of variables.

Since then I've examined their methodology and inclusion/exclusion criteria and found them to be pretty sloppy in many cases. It was a real eye opener for me.

Pete

 

Good point, regarding their sampling space. But for the types they did sample, did you agree with their ratings? (Coffee taste is even more subjective than car wax performance, so I would guess you did not! )

Anyway, to get back on topic, again, I was quite surprised at the large spread in ratings especially in terms of "gloss." I would have expected that the glossiness of most top products would be similar, and that we would see more variation in durability.