The value of unsaponified matter in LS

[Sapo]

Any idea how one would find out if the unsaponified matter of specific oils/waxes (e.g. jojoba or hemp oil) is of actual value (moisturization, conditioning, vitamins, texture, etc.) or provides no benefits?

The unsaponifiable matter of this jojoba is listed at 46.4% (http://www.gracefruit.com/butters-oils-and-waxes/liquid-oils/jojoba-oil.html)

Basically:

Jojoba "oil" reportedly has skin-loving properties. Would saponified jojoba keep said properties? Would they come from the saponified portion, or from the unsaponifiable matter? Commercial soapers (Bronners?) probably employ a filtering phase and remove unsaponifiables alltogether (in this case that would mean 50% of the jojoba gets tossed) - would a filtered soap have any of the before mentioned properties?

Contributions to lather/cleansing etc are obviously a different story as they most certainly come from the saponified portion.

...Much the same, commercial beer filtering phases remove many substances from the beer, sacrificing them in exchange for clarity. Craft beer sellers do not filter the beer, claiming better taste and quality in exchange for cloudyness.

Edit: More questions:
Im wondering if there is a difference between superfatting before and after saponification in HP/LS:

1.Presumably, if SF-ing after saponification, the SF matter stays, chemically speaking, an oil (some mono, some di, but mostly triglicerydes+glycerol).

2. Do the mono/di/triglyceride+glycerol bonds get trashed (yes, my terminology is awesome), if SF is done at the very start of the processes, despite not being enough alkali to ultimately saponify them, leaving us with a different kind of superfat (free fatty acids+glycerin)?

If so, which would be more desirable?

As a practical example of the possible difference im talking about: if you 3% SF a LS from start, clarity and an all around normal soap is expected. But if you made a 0% LS and dumped 3% oil on top of it, you'd probably get floating oil on top, and a 0% SF LS below. Talking out of my arse, but it seems that the SF from point 2. is more readily emulsified and has different qualities than the original oil.

 

[Susie]

As a practical example of the possible difference im talking about: if you 3% SF a LS from start, clarity and an all around normal soap is expected. But if you made a 0% LS and dumped 3% oil on top of it, you'd probably get floating oil on top, and a 0% SF LS below. Talking out of my arse, but it seems that the SF from point 2. is more readily emulsified and has different qualities than the original oil.

That is what you would have. You need to saponify those oils in liquid soapmaking. You can get away with SF after gel only in bar soaps. Liquid soaps are not so friendly that way.

As for jojoba, you are going to get cloudy soap that has sediment falling out of suspension. I see no benefit to the extra cost of jojoba/other high unsaponifiables oils.

The only exception to this is my "Soap2Go" that I leave in paste form. I use a high lard recipe for that as it is not being diluted. It makes lovely hand soap.

I think if you wanted to use high unsaponifiable oil soap, I would use IL's GLS method and leave it as a gel/paste. It would do fine in those squeezable containers. Then it would not matter how much unsaponifiables you had in there, no one would be judging your clarity.

 

[IrishLass]

I'm not able to provide any technical answers to your question (hopefully DeeAnna or TOMH or Ngian will chime in on that aspect), but for what it's worth, the creamy cocoa shea liquid soap formula that I make contains a 3% lye discount up front, and then is superfatted with an extra 4% after the fact (at dilution). I use stearic acid and meadowfoam oil to superfat after the fact. To keep them from separating/forming an oily layer on top of my diluted soap, I add PS80 along with them. Of the three different liquid soap formulas I make, it's everyone's #1 favorite. They like the others, too, but that particular one is the cream of the crop (pun intended, lol).


IrishLass