wannafbody
wannafbody
Based on some comments in other threads I wonder what is the consensus for measuring environmental protection that any product offers(this thread is not product specific)?
As for me, I've always relied first on a visual inspection. This includes what sticks to the LSP after washing, how easily it washes clean and if there is any visible etching from bird bombs and other fallout. Secondly, I test for bonded contaminants over an extended period of time-3-6 months is a good time frame. To do this I will claybar a portion of the vehicle after washing. If the claybar remains clean that means (to me) that the product is offering good environmental protection. Using a claybar test to compare the amount of bonded contaminants is IMO an unbiased way to compare various products against each other-providing that the product in question can actually last longer than 3 months.
As for me, I've always relied first on a visual inspection. This includes what sticks to the LSP after washing, how easily it washes clean and if there is any visible etching from bird bombs and other fallout. Secondly, I test for bonded contaminants over an extended period of time-3-6 months is a good time frame. To do this I will claybar a portion of the vehicle after washing. If the claybar remains clean that means (to me) that the product is offering good environmental protection. Using a claybar test to compare the amount of bonded contaminants is IMO an unbiased way to compare various products against each other-providing that the product in question can actually last longer than 3 months.