Collinite 845-A "winter" wax?
- Thread starter Striker
- Start date
Deep Gloss Auto Salon
New member
ThomasC said:
Many Mfg's call a product what it isn't...
For instance: Duragloss and Zaino call their products polishes when they are actually sealants
Meg's Tech Wax is not a wax but a sealant
The list goes on and on....
845 is a polymer/wax combo....
ThomasC, I wasn't talking about gloss, I was speaking about depth. Depth can't be captured in photos. It's a human perception using one's eyeballs. If you look at all those excellent photos posted above you'll see masses of gloss but no depth, simply because it's a 3-D phenomenon that photos can't capture. And there is a significant difference to the depth evidenced between waxes and sealants. There's even a scientific explanation which I won't bore you with.
As I said before, both waxes and sealants can contain the same solvents and oils. But the true wax (or a hybrid wax/polymer) will always look deeper due to the way the wax molecules affect the light.
As I said before, both waxes and sealants can contain the same solvents and oils. But the true wax (or a hybrid wax/polymer) will always look deeper due to the way the wax molecules affect the light.
Deep Gloss Auto Salon
New member
Alfisti said:
WOW, that is the first time I have read that in a post... And all this time I thought I was crazy...- I totally agree..
Depth is 3 dimensional and pictures are not so pictures cannot accurately convey depth....
** thanks btw**
Deep Gloss Auto Salon said:
I read somewhere that Collinite added a smidge of carnauba to their sealants so that they can say "it contains carnauba" for marketing reasons. For that reason I always treat 845 as a sealant.
The only Collinite that *I* view as a true hybrid wax is Marque D'Elegance (No. 915) a serious effort was made to make carnauba a major part of the formula. But that's just me.
Accumulator
Well-known member
bogi094 said:
I generally top 845 with 476S, and sometimes do another coat of 845 on top of that.
Actually, I almost *always* use the 845-then-476S combo when I'm using Collinite.
Not sure if I buy into the depth/gloss thing in my mind you cannot have one without the other.
I think in the end everyone has to admit that the results with reflection are all perception and the only objective performance factor of a wax v sealant is longevity and the sealants take that criteria hands down, even the people who make the stuff say so..
Tomorrow at lunch I will e-mail Collinite and ask if they consider 845 as anything other than an automotive -wax-.
I think in the end everyone has to admit that the results with reflection are all perception and the only objective performance factor of a wax v sealant is longevity and the sealants take that criteria hands down, even the people who make the stuff say so..
Tomorrow at lunch I will e-mail Collinite and ask if they consider 845 as anything other than an automotive -wax-.
ThomasC said:
Gloss can be measured by an instrument called a Gloss Meter. It measures reflectivity which amounts to gloss. You *can* have gloss without depth.
Depth, is another matter all together. As I said before, It's a 3-D perception that no instrument or camera can measure.
Think of it this way:
Imagine a pool of water...at an angle you can see the reflections of a tree on the surface. That's 'gloss/reflectivity'. If you look at the water from directly above, the clarity of the water can make the image of the tree seem like it's growing inside of the pool, not just a reflection of something outside of the water. That's 'depth'. Sealants have trouble creating that effect, whereas, it defines a fine carnauba.
Longevity is only one criteria that we look for. Appearance tends to be more important, at-least to the obsessives on this forum. :grinno:
Why? :think:
Alfisti, tnks for the info I do appreciate the thoughts.
The 'problems' I have are this: with determining the phenomena, and it is just that, of reflectivity or gloss is that getting the same angle of view, or for that matter even maintaing the same angle of view, is impossible unless a ridgid mount is used to either look at or -measure-.
But I do like the analogy of the pool of water-many times we have walked into what we thought was a 'foot cooler' only to discover that it was a neck cooler, so to speak.
As to why I want to contact Collinite, I believe that if the product was anything other than a simple -wax- it would be marketed as such, by this I mean that if it contained any synthetic sealant the bottle would state that it was a semi-synthetic product.
I feel this way, if you like to wax alot then use a wax, if you want the protection that you get WITH frequent waxing but don't like to rub as often, use a sealant-just my opinion.
Bottom line, alot of people like the 845 product and if it works for them/you that is all that matters.
The 'problems' I have are this: with determining the phenomena, and it is just that, of reflectivity or gloss is that getting the same angle of view, or for that matter even maintaing the same angle of view, is impossible unless a ridgid mount is used to either look at or -measure-.
But I do like the analogy of the pool of water-many times we have walked into what we thought was a 'foot cooler' only to discover that it was a neck cooler, so to speak.
As to why I want to contact Collinite, I believe that if the product was anything other than a simple -wax- it would be marketed as such, by this I mean that if it contained any synthetic sealant the bottle would state that it was a semi-synthetic product.
I feel this way, if you like to wax alot then use a wax, if you want the protection that you get WITH frequent waxing but don't like to rub as often, use a sealant-just my opinion.
Bottom line, alot of people like the 845 product and if it works for them/you that is all that matters.
Deep Gloss Auto Salon
New member
ThomasC said:
As offered earlier in the thread, MANY mfg's call their respective products something it is not....
Mikeyc
TheDetailingHandBook.com
BobbyG said:
The cap is AWFUL. Thanks for saying that. Mine doesn't even stay on. The bottle tipped over on the shelf once and I lost half of it.
ThomasC said:
Depth & gloss are different components of finish quality and I've seen some cars that were very glossy but lacked depth. Typically though, cars that have depth of shine are also glossy. Also, BIG thank you to the person who posted that depth is a 3D effect and cannot be displayed in a photo. I wish more people realized this.
Also, everyone places different levels of importance on things like longevity and "shine." For me at least 80% of my concern is "shine" and 20% is longevity (at least during the warmer months in the winter that reverses). For example, I traded away my Souveran because I felt like I had to reapply every week to maintain the "shine." When I use a wax like Zymol or Swissvax I find I can go 4-6 weeks without applying. For me, that's more than enough longevity.
Accumulator
Well-known member
ThomasC said:
I find that some paints (e.g., the oe single stage metallic gray lacquer on my Jag) *can* have great differences in those two characteristics. If I don't use the right LSP(s) on it, I get a "bright, reflective", very metallic look that is very glossy but looks "shallow". If I use the stuff that *I* prefer the look of, I get a much deeper but noticeably less glossy appearance. It almost looks like I could (should? some might think so..) repolish in order to "bring up the gloss", but that deeper, less reflective look is what I think looks right on that car. The differences can be striking, almost like the paint appears to be thinner/thicker...just another weird characteristic of that particular, and very strange paint.
I have to pay attention to the same thing on my pal's '60 Jag showcar that was repainted with b/c paint. If I get it too glossy it looks like the b/c that is is; I have to tone that characteristic down and make it look deeper so it's more like single stage, otherwise it looks wrong for concours purposes.
Subtle stuff, yeah. No doubt about that..
I dunno, some waxes I've used (and I'm not including Collinite) have lasted a lot longer than some sealants. IME the big durability potential of most sealants is related to the ability to layer them. Some sealants (e.g., UPP and BF in their initial versions) weren't nearly as long-lasting as some pre-sealant/pre-hybrid waxes like #16 and Blitz, they were more like Souveran. The newer versions of those sealants are much more durable, but I still don't find them any longer-lasting than many waxes.
Good example of what I mean is our two Audis; my wife's A8 (#16 or 3M Showcar Paste Wax) gets used *hard* whereas my S8 (UPP, usually just one layer) is seldom driven. I don't have to wax her daily driver much more than I seal my garage-queen! And the wax holds up *MUCH* better against bugs/etc. One of the reasons I choose those LSPs for her car is the durability; I don't want to be redoing it all the time, and the waxes hold up just fine while giving a look that she and I both like.
It'll be interesting to hear what they say! Note that the products in question came out quite a while ago when "wax" was what people called anything that wasn't a "polish", and that they might not want to change the descriptions of those products to more accurately describe their makeup.
They might not want to divulge just what's in those products either. I read on another forum that 845 contains "resins" and those are what contribute the most to its durability. I always got the feeling that Collinite likes the "aw-shucks" approach, rather than "look what our lab boys invented!".
Eh...the above post sounds a bit more :argue than I inteded, pleast don't take it the wrong way.
TLMitchell
is dazed & confused
Mikeyc said:
Heh, I've still got blotches of 845 on the inside of my garage door from a vigorous shaking episode. :doh Yeah, the cap was on as tight as it'd go.
I started yanking flip tops off other products until I found one that threaded on tight. Then I wrapped the bottle threads with teflon tape and it's been there ever since. It's really nice for when you first get started and the pad hasn't uniformly loaded up with product. I usually start with the hood and dribble small dots here and there. By the time the hood is done the pad is primed and I rarely have to add more than a small dab of additional product. Ease of use and it appears I'm using less 845 as the level off the bottle doesn't seem to be going down. At this rate Collinite isn't going to get a repeat customer for a long, long time. :laugh:
TL
loveyourcar
New member
ThomasC, from the 845 label: When used on high voltage power lines it prevents dangerous flashovers which can cause power failures, fires and explosions. It is also used in the fiberglass industries as a mold release agent for normal spray-up to hand lay-up molds.
So I think they consider to be not just an automotive wax.
Oh and I personally love the stuff!!
So I think they consider to be not just an automotive wax.
Oh and I personally love the stuff!!
loveyourcar
New member
TLMitchell, the spout from a bottle of gear lube(like for a diff or manual trans) fits perfect!
Fast response here is what Collinite says 845 IS and ISN'T:
' The 845 Liquid Insulator wax basically contains solvent, silicone, #1 grade yellow carnuba wax, and two man made wax blends. It is a pure wax blend - does not contain or is a sealant-.'
The part in hyphens is as typed by Collinite, the answer is clear; 845 does contain both natural and synthetic WAXES but it does not contain a sealant and is not a sealant.
Which is what I thought, any product that was a semi sealant, for lack of a better description, would have been advertised as such.
Collinite calls 845 a wax because that is what it is.
I have never tried 845 because years ago I discovered the joys of the Klasse twins and vowed never to go back to wax. Many here report good results with Collinite and I will take away from these posts that 845 is a fine product for those who prefer waxing their rides.
As for me, rather than pondering 'depth' I prefer to grab a few beers on Friday evening, sit in front of the GS, and try to determine if the direction of rotation of the spinning propellor is cw or ccw.
Doing the 'Gap' in a few short months for the 5th time, can't wait.
Great thread.
By the way, I did not post the email as I forgot to ask if I could use the response in that manner, and similarly, I did not post the author because of the same.
' The 845 Liquid Insulator wax basically contains solvent, silicone, #1 grade yellow carnuba wax, and two man made wax blends. It is a pure wax blend - does not contain or is a sealant-.'
The part in hyphens is as typed by Collinite, the answer is clear; 845 does contain both natural and synthetic WAXES but it does not contain a sealant and is not a sealant.
Which is what I thought, any product that was a semi sealant, for lack of a better description, would have been advertised as such.
Collinite calls 845 a wax because that is what it is.
I have never tried 845 because years ago I discovered the joys of the Klasse twins and vowed never to go back to wax. Many here report good results with Collinite and I will take away from these posts that 845 is a fine product for those who prefer waxing their rides.
As for me, rather than pondering 'depth' I prefer to grab a few beers on Friday evening, sit in front of the GS, and try to determine if the direction of rotation of the spinning propellor is cw or ccw.
Doing the 'Gap' in a few short months for the 5th time, can't wait.
Great thread.
By the way, I did not post the email as I forgot to ask if I could use the response in that manner, and similarly, I did not post the author because of the same.
Accumulator
Well-known member
ThomasC- Hey,that was a nice, fast reply! Thanks for posting it.
I wonder how "man made waxe blends" differ from "sealants". It kinda reminds me of how FinishKare calls FK1000P a "man made wax" when everybody I know thinks of it as a sealant :think:
Heh heh... OK OK, enough of the semantics game
I wonder how "man made waxe blends" differ from "sealants". It kinda reminds me of how FinishKare calls FK1000P a "man made wax" when everybody I know thinks of it as a sealant :think:
Heh heh... OK OK, enough of the semantics game
Accumulator, I wondered about the language also but it is clear that they do not call the product a sealant.
I did find it interesting that silicone is a part of the formulation.
loveyourcar, I will go back to the website to try and find some more info on the electrical insulating properties, tnks.
I did find it interesting that silicone is a part of the formulation.
loveyourcar, I will go back to the website to try and find some more info on the electrical insulating properties, tnks.