CG's Wet Mirror Finish & JetSeal 109

JasonD

JasonD

New member
My fiance is trying to sell her car, and wants me to put it on Ebay for her so since I finally had a day off to actually detail it, I thought I would kill two birds with one stone and try out Wet Mirror Finish at the same time.



I had some minor defects to take care of first, so I spot corrected those areas with some Optimum Polish, but for the most part, the majority of the vehicle was just washed and clayed prior to the WMF.



I was very surprised to see how thin WMF is, and was definitely expecting something thicker. It has a consistency similar to CK's VM. I then started working the polish using my PC on speeds 5 and 6 with a green Sonus DAS polishing pad. I immediately noticed the filling properties of this product. Small defects were disappearing almost instantly, and the paint got a good bit darker after each section. Something I also noticed was how much it dusted. The amount of dust this product generates is quite substantial. Not as much as say 3M PI II RC but definitely enough to really bug me.



After polishing the entire car, I stood back to inspect my work, and the finish was near flawless, but was missing something. Even though it looked very wet and mirror-like just like the name of the product suggests, it lacked something I couldn't quite put my finger on, depth? pop? not sure.



Well, after thinking about it for a few minutes, and looking at my truck in the driveway just gleaming like a show car (sealed with JetSeal only), I decided to make a pass with JetSeal 109 just to see if it could give me that little bit that was missing. So, I pulled out my PC again, and slapped a black finishing pad on it and applied JS, let it sit for the usual 30 minutes or so, and then wiped it off and took a few steps back and was completely amazed at the finish this combo just produced.



JS definitely brought out that extra little bit that WMF was missing. So, to sum everything up, I think WMF is a nice product. Its general characteristics are very similar to VM, and I mean this in texture, polishing ability, finish, etc. Would I buy it again? Probably so, but not until I ran out of all my other glazes like VM, RMG, etc.



That being said, WMF and JS together is definitely an impressive combo. Here's some pics of the whole detail. Enjoy.





04Explorer4.jpg




04Explorer2.jpg




04Explorer1.jpg




04ExplorerRear.jpg




04ExplorerEngine1.jpg
 
I literally did a move my head out motion and eyes pop out. Damn that looks nice. If you were near MN Id buy it!





Anyone got a sample of this they want to share?!?!?
 
That truck looks amazing! I think Im gonna have to try some of that WMF and Jetseal 109.



Great work and thanks for the writeup!



Jim
 
That really looks terrific! Sounds like a great combo; the more I learn here of CG products, the more I am leaning to placing an order with them soon.



Thanks for sharing.
 
After talking with Paul @ CG, I've been using WMF by hand as a topper over AJT, every four weeks or so, for the last 3 months. I guess you could say that by now, it's "sandwiched" between AJT layers. He was saying it could be used both under and over a sealant. I can attest to the filling properties of WMF. It "hides" imperfections quite well on my black paint. You know, the ones that mysteriously appear on black paint that seem to "challenge" the "inner Autopian" in all of us. WMF melts right into the paint during application. I dampen a terry or mf app with distilled water for each panel. This really seems to help with product buildup on my app and allows me to "stretch" the product during application. ( and no, not stretch as in pulling taffy......lol ) I cover the entire vehicle with WMF and let it sit for 15-20 mins ( under my carport ) before removing. I prefer using a short napped mf for product removal. I then come back for a final buff with my trusty Monster Fluffy. Based on my experiences with WMF, it works well with acrylic based sealants such as FS, MS, and AJT. Acrylics seem to be the sealant "flavor of the year" for me. As for durability of WMF? Like I said, it's "sandwiched" between AJT layers. We've had a boat load of rain here in West Texas and all I can say is the combo is holding up quite well, as it should with monthly applications. I have yet to use WMF with my carnauba collection. For that application, I'm inclined to use WMF as a glaze, under my nuba of choice. All in all, another solid product from CG.
 
BlkTac05,



I was under the impression that WMF is a polish, and not just a glaze. When you spoke with Paul, did he mention anything about that?



I'm wondering if I used it wrong by working it into each panel, but it says right there on the bottle to "work a 2ft x 2ft area at a time." Hmm, a little confusing......or is it just this versatile that it can be used as either a polish *or* a glaze?
 
JDookie,



I called Paul because I had questions as to where WMF fits into my detailing regiment. Polish, Glaze, Sealant??? Is it "the finest one-step micro polish" or a "one-step prearatory product guaranteed to enhance the shine of any surface" or "......bonds molecularly to your paint delivering a finish that reflects like glass while offering superior surface protection." The product label also contains things like " ultra slick non-stick high-shine all-weather gloss magnifier", "repellency of dirt and reduces static charge", "formulated with UVA and UVB light absorbers". Confusing to my fragile little detailing mind. I mean, WMF does everything but perform a "happy ending massage". (lol) Paul knows the frequency of which I detail my car and told me WMF can be used as an LSP because of it's protective qualities. He said it shines best when used as an LSP. He also said it could be used under a sealant or carnauba. And to be honest with ya.......I still don't know where WMF fits in my regiment. I haven't tinkered with it enough. I know this..........The product produces a teriffic finish on my black paint. Once again, layered with AJT by hand. I use many of the products discussed 'round these parts, from various vendors, and CG products have always delivered results for me. Their descriptions, on the other hand, can be confusing. Now about that "happy ending"..............
 
Now that I think of it.........The first time I used WMF I topped it with AW for that "just in case" feeling. That's a nice looking combo as well.
 
I had some time to play with the CG WMF, so I thought I'd add my impressions to the discussion… as there still seem to be some confusion around the boards as to exactly what the product is.



Round 1:

I first tried WMF as a topper, applied by hand, over DG 105 & AW (it was the sealant I had on my car at the time). The car was polished 1 month prior so the paint was in pretty good condition except for some very minor wash swirls (damn super soft Acura clear). I felt it did add a little depth & gloss and seemed to darken the paint some, but I didn’t really care for the overall look. I think I liked the overall appearance better with just the 105 and AW. I have to agree with Jdookie…even though the product seemed to do all as described, it was just missing something. The paint looked dark, glossy & wet…but still just blah. It also seemed to smear a bit in some spots and was somewhat hard for me to apply evenly by hand. After removal there was def spots I could see I had too much product. What’s good is those spots seemed to have dried up and all but disappeared on their own the next day.



Round 2 (week later):

Stripped everything off my car, started with clean paint. I did not re-polish as I wanted to use the WMF by PC and see if I noticed any filling. After hearing J’s dusting issues with WMF I decided to stick with the PC, a black pad and try to keep the speed down to around 3.5 - 4. The WMF did everything it did by hand times 5. I was MUCH more impressed with this product with the PC. It was MUCH glossier, darker and wetter than when I applied by hand. It also seemed to just melt into the paint, quite quickly, without needing much of a final wipe at all. Also, I didn’t have much dusting at all, I don’t know if that’s because I live in SC and the humidity was high, but it just dusted a little bit for me. I also noticed some filling this time around. I didn’t have any major swirls, but the light day-to-day marks on my car were def lightened if not completely gone.



IMO…MUCH BETTER PRODUCT BY MACHINE.



But still, missing something. It’s weird…here I’m looking at a very glossy, rich, wet looking car and it was so obviously lacking something that my wife even said something. She NEVER notices details like this.



Since J went the synthetic route with good success I thought I’d try a carnauba. I put a coat of Pete’s on top. That did it!!! That’s exactly what it needed. I just don’t think WMF can be called a stand-alone product, because it’s very obviously missing something. It needs to be topped.



Enough talk…a couple pics.



100_3301.jpg






100_3303.jpg
 
Your words confirm what I heard elsewhere too. Now I know what I did wrong. It needs to be applied by machine. I applied it by hand. :(
 
Thanks guys...much appreciate the kind words!!! :grinno:



The WMF is def a step worth taking IMO. Many times I find myself adding multiple coats of different products, only to come back to the phylosiphy of less is more.



But I think I found a place for WMF in my process. It's certainly quicker than polishing the entire car. It took me about a 1/3 of the time to apply the WMF with PC, as it would take to properly polish the car.



One thing I forgot to mention that I really like about WMF. My car just turned 75k miles (yes I drive a lot). and my hood is riddled with little stone chips. I tried my best to keep up with touch-up paint, but it became a losing battle. The WMF really did a good job of covering up MANY of the little nicks I have on my hood.



The only remaining question for me is durability??? Time will tell.. it's been almost 3 weeks now and the WMF/Pete's combo is holding up good. But I expect to start seeing some changes in the next week or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top