Therefore, when I bought the Oil of Olay one, hubby wasn’t quite sure why I needed it. I tried to explain it was highly recommended by Ciao, but he just raised his eyes skywards and sighed deeply. So I thought I’d plead my case here and try to explain why I bought it, to those who will understand.
I have only become a convert to showers in the last couple of months, having previously loved long hot baths. It is a relatively new experience
to try out varieties of shower gels.
When I checked out Ciao’s ratings for shower gels and body scrubs, right at the top was Oil of Olay’s moisturising body wash with 96% of opinions recommending it. How could I let this pass me by? I needed to try out the best shower gel, just to see for myself.
I found some in my local chemists and bought a 300ml bottle for £2.65. This is quite expensive compared to Asda’s wonderful Get Fruity shower gel (for less than £1) but comparable to Original Source which sells 250ml of shower gel for £2.49 or body washes at £2.99 for 300ml.
Oil of Olay has been around a long time. I remember them being products my Mum would use in the 1970s, although it was Oil of Ulay at the time. The products still look as though they’re aimed at the 30-50 year old age group. They certainly don’t look young, modern and vibrant like Original Source does.
The moisturising body wash comes in a plain white squeezy plastic bottle with a flip-up lid. There’s no clever mechanism to let the contents out in a measured way and there’s no hook to hang it up with either. Original Source and Asda’s Get Fruity both beat the Oil of Olay design in attractiveness and practical uses.
One of the reasons I bought the Oil of Olay product was due to its claim to be moisturising, as my skin is inclined to be dry. I liked the idea that this was enriched with moisturisers and that it was a brand name I knew and trusted. The bottle also claims this will last for over sixty baths or showers, if used in the way directed.
It smells lightly fragranced, slightly girlie and creamy, but definitely soapy. I prefer the strong fruity smells of Original Source really. If I wanted to smell of soap, I’d use soap in the shower instead of shower gel. But it’s not unpleasant and is a matter of individual tastes. If you just want to smell clean, this one could well be for you.
It suggests you wash with an Olay puff, but any body puff will do or a flannel or whatever. You only need a small amount, but it is hard to judge this accurately as it all comes out rather fast. It is white and quite thick in consistency.
It lathers really well and you will soon be covered in white, creamy bubbles. It does leave you feeling very clean and yes, my skin feels soft and silky. The body wash lasts well, but it is hard to see when it is running out, as the bottle isn’t see-through.
Overall, it is a fairly good product. It cleans and moisturises and with an inoffensive scent. But in these days when the shower gel market is full of excellent brands with different products, I am surprised Oil of Olay is rated so highly. In my opinion, both Original Source and Asda’s Get Fruity are far superior.
Let me explain…
SMELL ~ Oil of Olay has a bland, soapy kind of smell, while Original Source and Asda’s Get Fruity have beautiful aromas in various fragrances – orange, lemon, mint, raspberry, peach and so on.
DESIGN ~ Original Source and Asda’s Get Fruity have modern, bright and interesting looking designs. They shout “Hey! Try me!” while Oil of Olay hides at the back hoping someone's Granny might remember when the brand was called Ulay and pick them up.
PRACTICAL PACKAGING ~ Original Source and Asda’s Get Fruity both have bottles with a hook, so you can hang them on the shower for convenience. They have a special mechanism in the cap so that you get a measured amount of shower gel and they don’t leak. You can see how much is left, because the bottles are see-through. Oil of Olay has no hook, no anti-leak device and you can’t see in it to find out when you need to buy more.
Overall, Oil of Olay is good, but in my opinion, just not good enough.
Oct 13th, 2002
very helpful by (97%):
helpful by (3%):
