Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

[Loach]

Loach- Ah, interesting indeed!

Gee, wonder what`s up with the apparently residual effects of the M07 (new formula? they`ve changed it?). Any chance it somehow micormarred the surface? The way it stayed the same after the Prep All...

And of course, yeah...that PB BH + N-914! Gee, I don`t want to proclaim it The Grail, but that`s really something.

Yes they changed it up slightly, check out Mike Phillips` thread here covering the update: https://www.autogeekonline.net/forum/how-to-articles-by-mike-phillips/100726-meguiars-7-show-car-glaze-goodbye-old-friend-hello-new-friend.html


It`s been a while since I last pulled out this bottle of #7, last time it was still a bit heavier than the other glazes to wipe off, but really buffed off quite nicely on this same test panel compared to this time. I`ll pull the DA out later and play around with it more. Pretty cool stuff to see with Black Hole for sure, I suppose one of the issues is who is going to apply a glaze like this and then go immediately to washing it? Not something that I would do but the very slight increase in measurable gloss after washing it in this specific test is very interesting.


As an update to the Griot`s, the Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax is doing something that I haven`t really seen before, it`s locking in some of its lower gloss ratings after the cure. It does have a curing effect showing improved gloss measurements after 12-24 hours, but even after the wash with N-914 it`s not jumping the bottom range of the numbers up as much as other products. The gloss potential is still as high as other products, but if it`s wiped in unevenly and drives the measurable gloss down as a result, then after the cure this can be locked in a bit. Other products easily shed their unbonded residuals after the wash and the numbers are driven up to closely match the polishing step.

Even after a wipe on top of the Griot`s with Eraser this doesn`t have any gloss effect after the wash with N-914, and only after the wipe with Prep-All do the numbers jump back up immediately to the post-polishing numbers with Menzerna 3800. I`m running another test tonight which is why I`m not posting results yet, working on different methods of application.

If guys are running into streaking with Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax, I can see why this is happening. It actually looks like it`s buffing cleanly into the paint with nearly no visible trace of residuals after the final wipeoff, but this doesn`t mean it`s bonding evenly. No other spray product I`ve worked with has behaved like this I would say. Still looks great and glossy, and I guess the preliminary takeaway from what I`m seeing right now is Griot`s bonds/cures very significantly.

 

[Accumulator]

Loach- TBH, the only times I`ll ever open a bottle of M07 are when I want the Wayback Machine effect of the scent...

Gee, thanks for the info (AKA warning) about the GG 3-in-1, that sounds lightyears away from Accumulator-proof even if it did work out better.

Q: is the Grail Effect of the PBBH + N-914 discernible or something only the Glossmeter can detect?

 

[Loach]

Loach- TBH, the only times I`ll ever open a bottle of M07 are when I want the Wayback Machine effect of the scent...

Gee, thanks for the info (AKA warning) about the GG 3-in-1, that sounds lightyears away from Accumulator-proof even if it did work out better.

Q: is the Grail Effect of the PBBH + N-914 discernible or something only the Glossmeter can detect?

The Griot`s is definitely quick bonding, I had the Prima Hydro Max and Hydro out just now running some tests and they behave the same as most other products, goes on the paint, drops the readings to around 0.5 to 1GU less, and then the immediate wash brings those numbers right back up to the polishing numbers. Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax, even if I immediately wash it after I apply it to the paint with N-914, it will still not equalize the readings across the board. There are still significant low readings in some areas.

This is very cool stuff, and that fast and significant bonding is probably why it`s performed the best out of all of the other consumer ceramic sprays I`ve tested at 4 months of durability. But it`s crazy because it doesn`t look like it`s leaving any heavy residuals behind on the paint, it wipes down without any significant unbonded residuals that shift in the light through the final wipe.

With Black Hole + N-914 I`ve only done a few sunlight observations and I still can`t see a noticeable difference on this paint, it just looks "good" from a visual perspective. But even with products like Griot`s Ceramic on a heavy application when I pull it out in the sun, even though there can be a wider variation of gloss readings before washing the paint, say from 91GU to 95.8GU in that same 2x2 ft section that I first ran measurements inside the garage, I`m not seeing a noticeable gloss variation out in the sun. It blends together very well and it doesn`t look uneven or shows streaking. If someone ran me through a blind test without telling me there was a 4-5GU gloss differential across sections of the panel, I wouldn`t be able to tell at this point.

 

[Accumulator]

Loach- Ah, OK...thanks for once again addressing all my Qs.

I`m actually glad to hear that the measured diffs are still indiscernible to the naked eye. I`m a lot more OK with this stuff as a purely intellectual exercise; something I`d actually *see* might prompt me to second-guess things that don`t need fixing

 

[Loach]

Very interesting results working with the Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax. When I apply this to the paint, I`m seeing that standard post-application gloss measurement reduction (which of course is normal). The curious part is through the final wiping with a dry towel after applying this to the paint, I`m not seeing any visual oils or residuals left behind, nothing shifts in the light when moving the microfiber across the paint. So it looks like a very nice clean wipeoff, but the meter is still picking up on a more significant range of gloss disparities.

Now where Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax differs from most, is this is a fast bonding product. That lower range of readings will be locked in pretty much immediately after application. What I`m guessing is as I`m applying this to the paint, some sections are just going to bond unevenly. But instead of being able to level out like most products, Griot`s really seals this in. So after washing with N-914 even immediately after applying this to the paint, I`m still not seeing that regular jump up in measurements across the board to normal levels. In fact, the readings only ever fully normalize after wiping the product down with Prep-All.

The first readings below with Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax are going to cover a cured application. Then I move on to a few short term tests to see if an immediate post-application wash with N-914 is able to bring the numbers up before the Griot`s has any significant amount of time to cure. Then I finish with a final cured application.


Meter: Rhopoint Novo-Gloss Trio / Calibrated to 93.1GU / 60° Measurement Angle


Pre-Test Measurement
GU: 95.3 - 96.1
Temperature (°F): 80.9


Menzerna 3800
Post Panel Wipe GU: 95.4 - 96.1
Temperature (°F): 81.5
Panel Wipe: CarPro Eraser
Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
Pad: Buff and Shine Blue
Polisher Speed: 3
Overlapping Passes: 4
Note: These settings above will remain constant for 3800 for the remainder of the test.


Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax
Post-Application GU: 93.3 - 95.2
12 Hour Cure: 93.8 - 95.8
24 Hour Cure: 94.0 - 95.8
N-914 Wash: 94.0 - 95.8
Note: Temperature was consistent between 79-81°F. No change after the N-914 wash! Allowing the product to cure has a beneficial improvement to the measurable gloss.

The next batch of tests are post-application measurements without curing allowed. I`m checking to see how a heavy application does, and to see if a N-914 wash is able to improve the readings before it cures.


Menzerna 3800
Post Panel Wipe GU: 95.3 - 96.0
Temperature (°F): 80.6


Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax (Heavy Application)
Post-Application GU: 92.4 - 93.3
N-914 Rinseless Wash: 93.2 - 94.4
Temperature (°F): 80.2 / 80.4
Note: Slight improvement after the N-914 wash, but below typical readings compared to other LSP`s.


Menzerna 3800
Post Panel Wipe GU: 95.4 - 96.1
Temperature (°F): 80.6


Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax
Post-Application GU: 93.0 - 95.2
N-914 Rinseless Wash: 93.6 - 95.7
Prep-All Panel Wipe GU: 95.3 - 96.0
Temperature (°F): 80.4 / 80.2 / 80.6
Note: Better readings by spraying less on the paint, jump in readings after washing with N-914, but look at the lower range of those readings not being able to be boosted back up. The readings are immediately normalized after one application of Prep-All as a follow up panel wipe after washing with N-914.


Fast forward a week later, I set up another curing test, but this time I`m going to try CarPro Eraser and Prep-All after the wash with N-914.


Menzerna 3800
Post Panel Wipe GU: 95.5 - 96.2
Temperature (°F): 85.4


Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax
Post-Application GU: 93.5 - 94.8
12 Hour Cure: 94.0 - 95.3
24 Hour Cure: 94.0 - 95.5
N-914 Wash: 94.7 - 95.9
CarPro Eraser Panel Wipe: 94.7 - 95.9
Prep-All Panel Wipe: 95.4 - 96.1
Note: Temperature was consistent between 83-85°F.So you can see here, this time N-914 was able to jump the numbers up. However, CarPro Eraser wasn`t able to further improve these, but one application of Prep-All was able to nearly fully correct any gloss disparities after this cured application.


The conclusion here this Griot`s is quite the strong bonding protectant and appears to be somewhat unique with what it does during the gloss tests. And I`ve seen this show through in the durability test as well, it`s outperforming Hybrid Ceramic Wax, Seal N Shine, Hybrid Solutions Ceramic Spray Coating, and CMX Ceramic Spray Coating in durability. Those of you who are having issues with streaking I can see exactly how this could happen.

As far as an attempt to somehow apply this to bond more evenly, I haven`t be able to track down a consistent method. It doesn`t seem to matter if I spray directly into the towel and spread as opposed to spraying directly on the paint, or applying it with a block style applicator. But in all of my tests I really haven`t noticed any streaking, it gives the impression of a very clean wipeoff visually for me even with the heavier application. Looks great out in the sun as well.

Curing certainly has a measurable increase in its gloss. And the last cured test was showing 95.9 GU peak gloss reading after the N-914 wash which is not far off from the 96.2GU reading after 3800. So I know its gloss potential is very high, I assume it just doesn`t level out quite as evenly as other products. Another takeaway from this test is a highlight of my preference towards Prep-All as a very high performing paint prep. Strong, yet very paint safe in my tests.

Next round of tests should cover Poorboy`s Black Hole Glaze.

 

[Accumulator]

Loach- Ah, interesting results indeed! That need for an even application sounds like a deal-breaker to Yours Truly..although maybe I`m looking for an excuse to say that as I get the feeling that to the naked eye it`s a perfectly OK product.

 

[Lonnie]

Loach:
Very late to this thread, but could you describe a good methodology for applying GG 3-in-1 Ceramic Wax to avoid streaking with this product?
I would like to know what specific microfiber(s) you use (IE, manufacturer and their trade name or grams/meter² weight).

If this product does streak, how do you get rid of it? OR, do you let is cure for 24
hours and does it "disappear" and self-level; OR does it require a re-wipe with a microfiber??

Also, what specific microfiber are you wiping off the Prep-Sol with?

Which compound and polish manufacturer do YOU prefer to use for your detailing exploits? This a really "loaded" question because there are so many variables with correction and polishing like:
1) Paint type (clear coat, lacquer, single stage)
2) Paint hardness
3) Paint thickness
4) Paint color
5) Material/substrate under the paint (plastic, steel ,aluminum, fiberglass, carbon fiber)
6) Pad type (foam, microfiber, wool, hybrid wool)
7) Pad diameter
8) Pad thickness
9) Pad foam cell density (defined by color)
10) Pad manufacturer
11) Polishing machine being used (Rotary, Long-Throw Dual Action, Gear Drive DA)
12) Polishing machine manufacturer
13) Ambient temperature and humidity conditions working in
Well.... you get the idea!!!

 

[Loach]

Loach- Ah, interesting results indeed! That need for an even application sounds like a deal-breaker to Yours Truly..although maybe I`m looking for an excuse to say that as I get the feeling that to the naked eye it`s a perfectly OK product.

Right, I wouldn`t put too much weight into the gloss results as a judgement on the product. In fact, these results with Griot`s gives me a beneficial perception into its performance, because it feels like it really identifies itself as a spray protectant that is bonding and curing at a significant level that can be measured to some extent. Now the question is what happens to the gloss once we apply something like Best of Show Detailer on top of it for maintenance, or Best of Show Spray Wax? Definitely will test this in the future.

Loach:
Very late to this thread, but could you describe a good methodology for applying GG Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax to avoid streaking with this product?
I would like to know what specific microfiber(s) you use (IE, manufacturer and their trade name or grams/meter² weight).

If this product does streak, how do you get rid of it? OR, do you let is cure for 24
hours and does it "disappear" and self-level; OR does it require a re-wipe with a microfiber??

Also, what specific microfiber are you wiping off the Prep-Sol with?

Which compound and polish manufacturer do YOU prefer to use for your detailing exploits? This a really "loaded" question because there are so many variables with correction and polishing like:
1) Paint type (clear coat, lacquer, single stage)
2) Paint hardness
3) Paint thickness
4) Paint color
5) Material/substrate under the paint (plastic, steel ,aluminum, fiberglass, carbon fiber)
6) Pad type (foam, microfiber, wool, hybrid wool)
7) Pad diameter
8) Pad thickness
9) Pad foam cell density (defined by color)
10) Pad manufacturer
11) Polishing machine being used (Rotary, Long-Throw Dual Action, Gear Drive DA)
12) Polishing machine manufacturer
13) Ambient temperature and humidity conditions working in
Well.... you get the idea!!!

Cheers Lonnie! You bring up some great questions and I haven`t been able to get streaking to pop up with Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax testing it inside of the garage. Every time I`ve worked with it so far I`ve been able to get a nice wipeoff, but I`ve definitely heard reports of streaking from some other users of it. I`ll pull it out in the sun and insane heat we`re getting right now and report back to see if I can get streaking to pop up that is really problematic.

The towels I`m using when working with any LSP`s or glazes for the gloss tests are the Gold Plush Jr`s: https://www.autogeek.net/gold-plush-jr-towel.html
The towels I`m using when working with any abrasives and panel wipes for the gloss tests are the blue Cobra Elite Microfibers, which I think Autogeek discontinued this color, and is running only gunmetal now: https://www.autogeek.net/gun-metal-towel.html

The fibers of the blue Elites feel very similar to the Gold Plush Jr`s, just a different banding around the edge. And I like how these towels have a different pile on the opposite side of them, so I can check for differences in wipeability on the spot with the different pile lengths.

As for my current favorite abrasives, Sonax Perfect Finish has been the best finishing polish I`ve worked with. The numbers are always top tier, even though it`s very close or others can match it once the paint is jeweled up like this, it consistently wipes off the best on this paint. But to be honest, the wipeability of the polish is largely negated by your panel wipe or prep spray, most of these will wipe off very well with a simple IPA wipe. With all of these tests, for the abrasives to all be less than 1GU apart from one another, I think this is a testament that the quality of them all is very good and largely comparable, while still not being identical in how they work and how they wipe off. M210, Perfect Finish, Griot`s BOSS, Menzerna 3800, 3M Perfect-It EX, all certainly different to work with but are also capable of reaching that high gloss limit.

With compounds I haven`t done nearly enough comparison testing with the meters to figure out the best performers, it`s just going to take a crap ton of clear coat and test panels to run this type of testing, and the panels need to be consistently resanded before tests to find the one with the highest jump in numbers, while actually cutting through the majority of the scratches. Because in reality, you could definitely have a compound providing much better gloss without cutting through and tackling deep enough into the scratches to remove them. So compound testing is less based on pure gloss readings, you would have to balance out both the cutting and the finishing capabilities.

Before doing compound testing, I would prefer to have access to one of the much more expensive Rhopoint IQ models, that measures distinctness of image, haze, gloss, it gives a better idea of the clarity of the paint compared to just pure gloss which would be better to rate compounds. I still really like reaching for Jescar Correcting Compound first anytime I`ve made the decision to require additional cut. The balance between cutting and finishing is really good with Jescar, and it wipes off really well.

I`ll probably jump into documenting the gloss of the paint coatings that I have before I start running heavy compound testing.

 

[Lonnie]

Loach:
While this thread is about Last-Step Products and Waxes in particular and their objective gloss "value" as measured by a calibrated gloss meter, my question about compounds is not so much the "gloss" they produce, but rather which one(s) are easiest to work with and produce the most effective correction major paint flaws. Unfortunately, many compounds are designed to refine freshly painted vehicles that have been wet-sanded and remove the appropriate coarseness or grit of the "abrasive paper" sanding marks used to refine the paint. Most detailers will never face that paint finish scenario, unless they are fixing (very) bad auto body jobs on repaired vehicles, which apparently, some detailers are making a decent living at doing.
ANYWAY, long story short, correcting major paint surface damage, like environmental etching, or scratches is difficult enough. I would think that there are some compounds that "work" better than most at this and are easier to work without causing more "problems" than they are trying to fix. Sonax makes CutMax compound that could offer similar results to the above-mentioned correction objectives as their Perfect Finish you highly like, BUT I make this assumed evaluation because I have never used it.

 

[Accumulator]

Don`t mean to take this off-topic, but:

Lonnie- Just FWIW, M101 cuts so well that I no longer think of serious correction as being any kind of chore. Nasty, deep stuff is simply no problem with it, completely different from the days when nasty scratches behind door handles could take (literally) hours to do.

 

[Bill D]

Yes! I can use M101 by *hand* and see noticeable improvement. It’s a keeper in my arsenal

 

[JustJesus]

So much reading. I had time to kill so I just spent like 1.5 hrs reading through the thread. Good stuff.

Lonnie, Cutmax is a pretty good compound. More than adequate for most jobs. Easy to work with. Finishes well. But like Loach has mentioned with the polishes, they can all pretty much get the results you want. That being said, I have not paid the price to buy some. (I used it on set for Competition Ready show, so limited to my experience with it).

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[acuRAS82]

Thanks again, Loach. Very Interesting stuff with the 3-in-1 bonding findings. No one would ever imagine results like these until a test like this is performed. Great stuff!

 

[Coatings=crack]

Yeah i bought the 3-1 at Griots just cuz i got a good price and thought i would try it and give it away.

Well i was impressed with how substantial it seem to be and the gloss and reflectiveness on my hood. In griots video the say it’s a 6 months and that they truly vetted it and its not your typical 6month sealant that lasts 3.

Lastly i did have some problems with streaking due to improper lighting and even left a high spot that would not remove a day later with any wash, rinseless or even applying more product

Here are the gloss reflective shots of the hood. Hood is not coated with CQuK3 like rest to test products

Thos reflection of my black hood on a January over cast day.


It did degrade in about 2 months but it was getting Fenylab pure rinseless or Bilt Hamber Auto Foam weekly.

I believe both are Alkaline and degrade sealants but was testing both this and Seal and shine.

Great topper too. It is on my short list of repeat buys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[craigdt]

I haven`t posted in a long time, but this is excellent reading.
Wonderful research which helps quantify measurable results.

 

[Accumulator]

Yeah i bought the 3-1 at Griots...[but be forewarned that]...

Lastly i did have some problems with streaking due to improper lighting and even left a high spot that would not remove a day later with any wash, rinseless or even applying more product..

Thanks for the warning!

 

[Loach]

I appreciate the feedback guys!

Loach:
While this thread is about Last-Step Products and Waxes in particular and their objective gloss "value" as measured by a calibrated gloss meter, my question about compounds is not so much the "gloss" they produce, but rather which one(s) are easiest to work with and produce the most effective correction major paint flaws. Unfortunately, many compounds are designed to refine freshly painted vehicles that have been wet-sanded and remove the appropriate coarseness or grit of the "abrasive paper" sanding marks used to refine the paint. Most detailers will never face that paint finish scenario, unless they are fixing (very) bad auto body jobs on repaired vehicles, which apparently, some detailers are making a decent living at doing.
ANYWAY, long story short, correcting major paint surface damage, like environmental etching, or scratches is difficult enough. I would think that there are some compounds that "work" better than most at this and are easier to work without causing more "problems" than they are trying to fix. Sonax makes CutMax compound that could offer similar results to the above-mentioned correction objectives as their Perfect Finish you highly like, BUT I make this assumed evaluation because I have never used it.

CutMax and M101 I definitely want to try out in the future, I always avoided picking those up because they were more expensive. Sandro at Car Craft Auto Detailing made a great case for Griot`s Fast Correcting Cream on the DA polisher in terms of clarify and finish and wipeability compared to CutMax and 3D ACA 500 in his test video here which shows some awesome visuals with different paints and pads and polishers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnkccJ4olCU

Yeah i bought the 3-1 at Griots just cuz i got a good price and thought i would try it and give it away.

Well i was impressed with how substantial it seem to be and the gloss and reflectiveness on my hood. In griots video the say it’s a 6 months and that they truly vetted it and its not your typical 6month sealant that lasts 3.

Lastly i did have some problems with streaking due to improper lighting and even left a high spot that would not remove a day later with any wash, rinseless or even applying more product


Here are the gloss reflective shots of the hood. Hood is not coated with CQuK3 like rest to test products


Thos reflection of my black hood on a January over cast day.


It did degrade in about 2 months but it was getting Fenylab pure rinseless or Bilt Hamber Auto Foam weekly.

I believe both are Alkaline and degrade sealants but was testing both this and Seal and shine.

Great topper too. It is on my short list of repeat buys.

Thanks Coatings, really appreciate that visual of the high spot for the Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax! Would be interesting to see if that would be fully cleaned up with a quick touch up of Prep-All. Pretty crazy how it leaves a legitimate high spot on the paint, but your results after washing are mirroring the results of the gloss test, where the gloss isn`t normalizing after the wash as much, and instead required that Prep-All wipe to get those numbers to jump back up to the abrasive numbers.

 

[Coatings=crack]

I appreciate the feedback guys

Thanks Coatings, really appreciate that visual of the high spot for the Griot`s Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax! Would be interesting to see if that would be fully cleaned up with a quick touch up of Prep-All. Pretty crazy how it leaves a legitimate high spot on the paint, but your results after washing are mirroring the results of the gloss test, where the gloss isn`t normalizing after the wash as much, and instead required that Prep-All wipe to get those numbers to jump back up to the abrasive numbers.

So you are wiping with preps all after aplication and it is glossier? Do you think that affects durability?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Loach]

So you are wiping with preps all after aplication and it is glossier? Do you think that affects durability?

Prep-All will definitely cut into Ceramic 3-in-1 Wax and knock it down either partially or fully, so you would want to reapply Griot`s afterwards. Prep-All was the one spray prep in my test that was able to normalize those gloss readings back up after Griot`s had cured, so this is why I think it would be good for anyone tackling any heavier high spots as a potential quick prep to knock down those areas to remove the streaks, and then reapply afterwards.

Waxes and sealants that I test on paint that is this polished, they drop the gloss readings. The readings are usually bumped right back up to normal after the first wash, but Griot`s resists the ability to be leveled out after this wash. Only a Prep-All wipe was able to bring the gloss numbers back up across the board which is a destructive method.

 

[TheMac]

Tremendous thread and a most interesting read.
Brian from Apex detail managed to achieve gloss readings of between 99 to 102 using TAC`s Òne Step Master. It would be an interesting exercise to see what level of gloss it is possible to achieve with this product over a base coat of Essence primer.