Car detailed with Zaino
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: This drivers strike ?
Next: Should I or shouldn't I?
From: Brimstone on 22 Jun 2008 12:05 David Taylor wrote: > On 2008-06-22, Raymond Keattch <ray.keattch(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >> On 22/06/2008 11:36:31, David Taylor wrote: >>> On 2008-06-22, Raymond Keattch <ray.keattch(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I am not the manufacturer trying to blind you with science and >>>> neither do I gain financialy from you agreeing about the product. >>>> However, I am an individual who has used the products discussed on >>>> my own car over the past year. >>> >>> But you have proven yourself repeatedly in this thread to lack any >>> sense of objectivity. It's all wooley subjective richness and >>> deepness and clarity... >>> >>> Which have all been proven, repeatedly, to be complete bollocks >>> when the same people are asked to compare products under scientific >>> double-blind conditions (i.e. where their pre-conceptions _can't_ >>> affect the result). >> >> Can you explain your criteria for buying a product to improve the >> finish of an item? Do you put yourself through this double blind >> rubbish everytime you want to buy such a product? >> >> Maybe you try a few and pick the one you like the best? >> >> What are these pre-conceptions you describe? I buy product A and >> apply it to the car. I buy and apply product B to the car. I make a >> judgment on what I like best, by what I see on the car and what I as >> a person want from a finish. > > I tend not to buy things based on "finish" and "shine" and "richness". > I certainly would never spend £150, or even £30 on a piece of wire. > I go for something that is good value & works, how it "feels" comes a > distant second. Then how do you decide if it's "good value" or not? Whether or not a item is "good value" is a totally subjective matter.
From: David Taylor on 22 Jun 2008 13:53 On 2008-06-22, Raymond Keattch <ray.keattch(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > On 22/06/2008 11:42:17, David Taylor wrote: >> On 2008-06-22, Raymond Keattch <ray.keattch(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>> On 21/06/2008 22:41:05, The Real Doctor wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>> As I recall, he said he had to travel four hours each way to do the >>>> job for you. Did he not make any charge for travelling time? >>> >>> I still didn't pay for my car to be washed. >> >> He didn't even wash it!? > > Yes he did, because an unwashed car shouldn't be machine polished. Well then, you did pay for your car to be washed. -- David Taylor
From: Adrian on 22 Jun 2008 16:35 "DanB" <iridiumdan(a)googlemail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > So, how come it's ok to have tyres designed to be low rolling resistance > (so, less grip as a trade of for economy) as long as they have a brand > name on, but it's not ok to have cheap tyres? Because they'll still be far, far better than the TeflonFreds.
From: Adrian on 22 Jun 2008 16:38 "Raymond Keattch" <ray.keattch(a)nowhere.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> You want me to say there's a definite difference? Find me one panel, >> starting from an even start point, and show me it - in the flesh - >> after sections have been treated with the different products. > Want to put your car forward for the test - one door with Carnauba and > the other with Sealant? No problem. You can have a do it when I'm over with you to blind-test the interconnects and you prove how good you & the Rover are. You know me... If I'm proved wrong I'll cheerfully and readily admit it, unlike some.
From: Adrian on 22 Jun 2008 16:39
steve(a)italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> Want to put your car forward for the test - one door with Carnauba and >> the other with Sealant? > To be fair, I don't think anything would improve Adrian's shite old > Saab, short of a full respray. Pffft. > Or a tin of Dulux ;-) I've spent some time today repainting panels for the Acad. £5/litre Screwfix red oxide. |