If anyone is interested:
Pics:
1. Whole bunch (left to right: Bronner's pump LS and LS, water, sugar, more sugar, 4x glycerin).
2. Glycerin batches. Probably the clearest, water comes close, but used slightly different olive oil.
3. Sugar batches. Cloudy mofos, more sugar means more cloud.
4. Water batch+Dr. Bronner's (normal LS and pump LS). The jar looks cloudier than it is in real life. Apart from being darker, it doesn't appear to be less clear than B's. The clarity is more observable on the first picture with all the soap.
5. Pastes. "More sugar" paste (mid) is a **** brick.
Quick info: None of my batches feel as "luxurious" as Dr. B. soaps do. Upon applying and rubbing hands together, mine feel thin and produce craptastic lather in comparisson. Overall, the water based LS comes closest.
More info in the PDF file (located at the very bottom under the pics). It is incomplete with missing data.
Conclusions:
1. The massive price jump of GLS is not justified by any meaningful gains over a water-based LS. There are indeed even some downsides, lather is lessened. The need for cooking may be skipped by dumping in some paste to hasten "time to paste" and saponification.
2. Sugar as a substitute for glycerin is a big no-no.
3.The formulation itself is probably the reason why it fails in comparisson with Dr. B. (on factors such as lather and feel). Their CO percentage is higher and more oils are used, some of which they claim have a great effect on the soap (jojoba, hemp).
View attachment soap charts.pdf
Pics:
1. Whole bunch (left to right: Bronner's pump LS and LS, water, sugar, more sugar, 4x glycerin).
2. Glycerin batches. Probably the clearest, water comes close, but used slightly different olive oil.
3. Sugar batches. Cloudy mofos, more sugar means more cloud.
4. Water batch+Dr. Bronner's (normal LS and pump LS). The jar looks cloudier than it is in real life. Apart from being darker, it doesn't appear to be less clear than B's. The clarity is more observable on the first picture with all the soap.
5. Pastes. "More sugar" paste (mid) is a **** brick.
Quick info: None of my batches feel as "luxurious" as Dr. B. soaps do. Upon applying and rubbing hands together, mine feel thin and produce craptastic lather in comparisson. Overall, the water based LS comes closest.
More info in the PDF file (located at the very bottom under the pics). It is incomplete with missing data.
Conclusions:
1. The massive price jump of GLS is not justified by any meaningful gains over a water-based LS. There are indeed even some downsides, lather is lessened. The need for cooking may be skipped by dumping in some paste to hasten "time to paste" and saponification.
2. Sugar as a substitute for glycerin is a big no-no.
3.The formulation itself is probably the reason why it fails in comparisson with Dr. B. (on factors such as lather and feel). Their CO percentage is higher and more oils are used, some of which they claim have a great effect on the soap (jojoba, hemp).
View attachment soap charts.pdf
Last edited: