PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Result with Cones and an SMT



HintOfMint
September 18th, 2010, 11:38 PM
A little while ago, I mentioned using a coney shampoo on my length, followed by a highly modified SMT (honey, glycerin, coconut oil, and Garnier Fructis Triple Nutrition/Suave Lavender conditioners--neither of the conditioners have cones). I said that my hair was so ridiculously shiny, strong, silky and well... perfect. I chalked it up to the silicone. For a while, without clarifying, I would do a CWC with the coney shampoo and suave conditioner (a no-cone conditioner) and my hair stayed perfect, leading me to believe even more that it was the coney shampoo's effects since it wasn't really fading with each wash.
Since then, I clarified and started over.
However, I wanted to really see whether or not the coney shampoo really had that effect on my hair. I figured that the SMT would be wasted because the silicone from the shampoo had already coated my hair. So I used the coney shampoo on my length and then used my regular suave conditioner, not the modified SMT. However, I was pretty surprised to see that the effects were not the same as before. My hair is not as silky and smooth as it was when I used the coney shampoo with the modified SMT.
How is this possible? I thought that cones coated the hair so that basically any conditioning treatment couldn't really penetrate. But there is a huge difference between the coney shampoo followed by my modified SMT and the coney shampoo followed by regular old suave.
Can anyone explain why?

Kathie
September 19th, 2010, 03:57 AM
Coney shampoos have always confused me. What’s the point of cones in a shampoo, most of them would be washed away, right? I’m sure some cones would stay behind, but the coating may not be as thick as when you use a conditioner.

Heidi_234
September 19th, 2010, 04:23 AM
Cones don't seal the hair off completely. I don't think any substance can be applied in a way we apply hair product, at those same amounts, and completely coat the hair. If you come think about it, it takes quite a lot of water to get your all hair damp or wet, why would it be different with silicones?

Oils still work over hair that has coney product applied to it. I think the main concern about cones around here is that when you CO, there's nothing in your routine that washes the cones out of the hair, and that allows them to build up and eventually make hair feel dry and damaged. So I don't think your SMT gets wasted away if you use shampoo with cones in it. Your hair probably likes cones and responds well to them, and you do use a shampoo in your routine, I don't see why you should avoid them. :)

swivelhop
September 19th, 2010, 09:01 AM
I've only ever seen water soluble cones in shampoo. The make it much easier to distribute the shampoo to wet all the hair. The also provide slip so that while washing tangles aren't made. Its probably more important to 'aggressive washers'.

HintOfMint
September 19th, 2010, 02:40 PM
I've only ever seen water soluble cones in shampoo. The make it much easier to distribute the shampoo to wet all the hair. The also provide slip so that while washing tangles aren't made. Its probably more important to 'aggressive washers'.

The funny thing is, my shampoo has dimethicone in it which is not water soluble.

Anyhow, looks like I'm reintroducing cones to my routine. I probably won't go the coney conditioner route, and certainly not the serum route, but this routine gave me the nicest hair I have ever had. Thank god it is still cheap. Suave professionals is only two dollars.

ktani
September 19th, 2010, 04:16 PM
The funny thing is, my shampoo has dimethicone in it which is not water soluble.

Anyhow, looks like I'm reintroducing cones to my routine. I probably won't go the coney conditioner route, and certainly not the serum route, but this routine gave me the nicest hair I have ever had. Thank god it is still cheap. Suave professionals is only two dollars.

My shampoo contains dimethiconol which according to posts here is not water soluble either and is made by the same company that makes Suave, Unilever.

The truth is that there are different kinds of dimethicone and dimethiconol. Not all of them cause build-up. My shampoo does not build-up. It has successfully over time, removed build-up from past experiments with conventional conditioners and natural products when I have stopped using them (I do not clarify), without causing problems of its own.

I like Unilever products. Not all have worked for me but that has been about my sensitivity to certain ingredients, not product efficiency.

If your cheap Suave shampoo with dimethicone works for you, it works. Other things in conventional products can build-up far worse than wrongly vilified cones, like waxes, butters, certain oils and polymers.

virgo75
September 19th, 2010, 05:40 PM
For the coney shampoo - like some others that have posted, I don't believe cones coat your hair the way some people think. I've never experienced buildup with coney shampoos and conditioners. But Nature's Gate Hemp Conditioner & Garnier Triple Nutrition gave me the WORST buildup I've ever had. My hair was stuck together and practically tied in knots. :shake: Both are completely cone free. :shrug:


And there's no way to compare SMTs to regular conditioner. It's just not fair to that poor little conditioner to have to defend itself against the awesomeness of a SMT. :lol:

ktani
September 19th, 2010, 05:53 PM
For the coney shampoo - like some others that have posted, I don't believe cones coat your hair the way some people think. I've never experienced buildup with coney shampoos and conditioners. But Nature's Gate Hemp Conditioner & Garnier Triple Nutrition gave me the WORST buildup I've ever had. My hair was stuck together and practically tied in knots. :shake: Both are completely cone free. :shrug:


And there's no way to compare SMTs to regular conditioner. It's just not fair to that poor little conditioner to have to defend itself against the awesomeness of a SMT. :lol:

Depending on the amount of hemp oil and waxes in that conditioner I can see that happening. Hemp oil is a drying oil that leaves a tough film on the hair when exposed to oxygen.

The only caveat with an SMT is possible honey residue (aside from conditioner build-up). Honey residue, from reports is best removed with shampoo.

virgo75
September 19th, 2010, 08:33 PM
Depending on the amount of hemp oil and waxes in that conditioner I can see that happening. Hemp oil is a drying oil that leaves a tough film on the hair when exposed to oxygen.

The only caveat with an SMT is possible honey residue (aside from conditioner build-up). Honey residue, from reports is best removed with shampoo.

Thanks for that tiddle bit of info.
I had to wash my hair 4 times in one shower trying to get the Nature's Gate Hemp Conditioner out of my hair. It was still knotty for a week - with shampooing almost every day. :shake: Hemp oil is the 3rd ingredient... They were very generous with it.

I didn't know honey could build up.
Good to know since I get buildup so easily. :thumbsup:

ktani
September 19th, 2010, 08:41 PM
Thanks for that tiddle bit of info.
I had to wash my hair 4 times in one shower trying to get the Nature's Gate Hemp Conditioner out of my hair. It was still knotty for a week - with shampooing almost every day. :shake: Hemp oil is the 3rd ingredient... They were very generous with it.

I didn't know honey could build up.
Good to know since I get buildup so easily. :thumbsup:

You are most welcome!

Honey does not necessarily build-up. Some honeys do not leave a discernable residue. Others do. There is no predicting. I have recorded one from the UK that does not on the Successful Honeys List.

Otherwise it is pretty random. Raw and pasteurized honeys can leave it. It is what people here have reported has left their hair feeling dry and their ends "fried". It is not permanent. It cannot be removed by water only though or vinegar completely. Shampoo and lots of water are reported to work the best, based on reports.