Hepastat works well on it's own....I've done the experiment. Along with the quats, it does contain a non-ionic detergent and ethanol, albeit at lower concentrations. As a general rule, I don't like to introduce too many charged molecules into systems. Hence, I use mostly non-ionic detergent for cleaning with a smaller amount (10- to 100-fold less) of positively charged quats to control static and neutralize what is on the record surface. Does it matter? Not really, according to the Hepastat alone tests where there were no ill effects. I do know that there can be synergy when using surfactants of differing properties. You get mixed micelles that can solubilize things better that homo-micelles might. With all the surfactants in the Hepastat/Triton mix with the variety of head and tail structures, all the bases are pretty much covered.
And yes, the quat mix can be used as an antistat by itself. That is exactly what the commercial antistat treatments and sprays consist of. Many patents based on this, beginning in the 1930's with Dupont, continuing in the 60's with Bayer and Ciba, and in the 70's with BASF and DOW, through the 80's with Xerox and PPG. I could post a bunch of these if folks are interested. Controlling static has been a problem in industry since the beginning and great corporate scientists have solved the problem for us. We simply have to adapt it to our use, as it has also plagued many record collectors for no reason other than our own ignorance.
Hence, a 1:5000 to 1:10,000 dilution of Hepastat in 5% IPA put into a spray bottle makes a great antistat treatment. It also lubricates the record surface and prevents microbial growth. It isn't that great for cleaning at this concentration as it will be below the critical micelle concentration.
