NXT vs. Z2 vs. Klasse SG Cleaning Test (56K warning)

bretfraz said:


I'm still waiting for your "technical" analysis. And I wouldn't dream of putting you on my Ignore list.
Click to expand...



:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol



And to Brad,



Thank you for performing this test. I sincerely appreciate it. Now I know that NXT will most likely strip off my SG.



As others have mentioned, if you are able to apply SG and Z2 over the magic marker lines, let them cure, and then apply NXT over top, I think we'd have a even better idea if NXT will strip them.



Unfortunately if I mess around with any of the appliances I'll get my a$$ handed to me. :lol



Bill :up
 
OMG.

I am a newbie, so maybe I don't know quite how things around here operate, but WHAT IS THE FUSS ABOUT.



Simple test: NXT showed its cleaning properties: End of story.



I too have found NXT to contain cleaners that removed light tar. IMO it is not layerable. But multiple coats probably looks better because you are still putting more crap on the paint, oils, etc. etc.



Although, you are not going to build an inch of sealant on your car with Z or SG, but you can, IMO, build a few MICROSCOPIC layers because it bonds to itself with no cleaning agents. However, that is just my speculation.
 
Corey, I'm going to use something you brought up earlier as a starting point for something - the comments aren't directed toward you, but rather just a general observation about layering and Brad's test.



Corey Bit Spank said:
Personally, I don't mind the cleaning ability. I don't apply more than 2 layers of anything, only because I think each layer after that doesn't do much in terms of protection of appearences (maybe with Zaino or SG it would be a different story).
Click to expand...



There's nothing wrong with a product that offers cleaning ability - heck, we all use abrasives to correct defects and other problems, right? I'd sure hate to think of what detailing would be like were it not for abrasives.



But, the whole layering thing... this could get long...where should I start? (Forgive me if my thoughts become scattered here)



1) Realistically speaking, how can a last step product be layered if it has abrasives in it? Wouldn't the abrasives remove the previous layer? Or, are these abrasives "smart enough" to only wipe out the enemy while carefully side-stepping its allies? I know that manufacturers would like us to believe that's possible, but common sense sorta tells us it's not really possible. Some of the previous layer will be sacrificed in the "cleaning" process that the abrasives (be they chemical or mechanical) introduce.



Again, I know the marketing departments would love to lead us to believe that there are these uber intelligent abrasives, but...





2) Save the abrasives for the prep process please. Call me crazy, but I like to use abrasives in the prep process, and then I like to forget about 'em. If I already cleaned the surface and got it perfect, why do I need to polish it again when I'm trying to protect the surface?



People talk about how slick products feel after they've been applied, and I wonder how much of that slickness is a result of the additional polishing (thanks to the cleaners in the last step products)? Think about it - if you took two painted sections of a hood and wetsanded one portion with say 2000 grit paper, which would feel more slick? My money's on the sanded portion.





3) Why are abrasives added to last step products? Is it because the protectants need something to grab on to? Or is it because not everyone who uses the product is going to use it as a true last step product (i.e. it'll be used more like a 1-step)? Part of me thinks it's a combination of the two...



I guess I asked more questions than I answered, but that's what happens when I "think out loud." :)





Finally, regarding the whole "apply NXT over SG and Z2 to see if it removes the marker" thing - I don't think a nano-thin film of anything could protect a line of marker from something with decent cleaning abilities. I also fail to see how letting SG or Z2 cure for 24 hours, 72 hours, 7 days, etc. could lead them to remove the marker either. If that were the case, then shouldn't we all leave our SMRs and DACPs on the car for a week or so? Surely then they'd be at their prime, right? :D
 
I also fail to see how letting SG or Z2 cure for 24 hours, 72 hours, 7 days, etc. could lead them to remove the marker either. If that were the case, then shouldn't we all leave our SMRs and DACPs on the car for a week or so? Surely then they'd be at their prime, right? :D [/B]
Click to expand...




The reason I suggested this time frame was because they already picked the sh*t out of every thing he did in the trial so far I wanted have it looked at without someone saying "Well no wonder it didn't work .. it wasn't allowed to properly cure"



Now .... do SMRs and DACPs crosslink??? Not that I am aware of or did I miss something?
 
No, I understood the point...was just trying to make even more "light" of it. SMR/DACP/etc don't cross-link. It was sort of a tounge-in-cheek theory. ;)
 
This was excellent! I was thinking of Getting NXT because of all the talk, but I love my Klasse SG and I don’t think I need to switch.
 
I have a question that I know doesn't have a definitive answer, but maybe someone could take a stab at it.



Do the cleaners effect durability? I mean theoretically, if something is cleaning what is underneath it, why isn't it cleaning itself, thus removing some, :. decreased durability? The two products that are noted for their durability are SG and Zaino. Neither one of those has cleaning ability. Perhaps I am dead wrong.



This may be a terrible analogy, but here it goes. You order a coke at McDonalds and they give you a cup with ice (cleaners) and coke (actual "sealant"). The ice eventually melts, therefore decreasing the strength (durability in detailing terms) of the coke. Order a coke without ice and you have the same strength Coke after 3 hours- assumption of no evaporation. Do the cleaners decrease the strength at which something cross-links or bonds because they are in essence cleaning themselves or just merely by their presence taking up a fraction of the pie?



Just thinking out-loud.
 
Corey Bit Spank said:
Personally, I don't mind the cleaning ability. I don't apply more than 2 layers of anything, only because I think each layer after that doesn't do much in terms of protection of appearences (maybe with Zaino or SG it would be a different story). I think Zaino and SG are in a class of their own here. Great test though. :)



Edit: There is no reason to fight over this. The test was conducted and he presented the results clear and easy for people to understand. NXT has cleaning ability. Draw your own conclusions from it, post them, but don't put people down for it. Don't finger point: that's not what Autopia is here for. :)
Click to expand...



In addition, it is harder for a manufacturer to create a product low in cleaning ability. It requires more refined solvents (more expensive), and are typically safer. Most people associate solvent grade with quality, and I think this is a fair assumption. Crisco vs. Olive Oil?



I'm still unsure what Edwin is saying - after all, I'm just a stupid dentist who doesn't understand scientific thinking. Everyone else who disagrees must be too. Just kidding Edwin! I think it's you and not us.



:xyxthumbs :bow :up :p :D :shocked :o



With experience, we know when to accept things and when to question them. This is not the case for the latter. With some common sense, anyone who is following this thread should be able to assume that NXT doesn't layer. Of course it's not scientific, but it doesn't need to be. We don't do chemical analysis' of Big Macs every time we eat them, do we?
 
Very interesting test.



Back before I started reading Autopia, I used to use Meguiar's Cleaner Wax in the maroon bottle. It would never have occurred to me to do more than one step.



NXT Tech Wax seems like it should work well for that type of one-step Cleaner Wax user, and maybe look better and last a week or two longer. I suppose it is logical that they put some cleaners in it. This is a Pep Boys/Walmart product. Most of the people buying it will never prep their paint. Without the cleaners, they might get really lousy results, and think the product is no good.



Note to Meguiar's: when you release the Pro version of NXT, leave the cleaners out. A sealant without cleaners is more flexible for the pro and advanced enthusiast users.



In the meanwhile, maybe the way to "layer" NXT is to use the companion spray booster wax?
 
bileduct said:
Very interesting test.



Back before I started reading Autopia, I used to use Meguiar's Cleaner Wax in the maroon bottle. It would never have occurred to me to do more than one step.



NXT Tech Wax seems like it should work well for that type of one-step Cleaner Wax user, and maybe look better and last a week or two longer. I suppose it is logical that they put some cleaners in it. This is a Pep Boys/Walmart product. Most of the people buying it will never prep their paint. Without the cleaners, they might get really lousy results, and think the product is no good.



Note to Meguiar's: when you release the Pro version of NXT, leave the cleaners out. A sealant without cleaners is more flexible for the pro and advanced enthusiast users.



In the meanwhile, maybe the way to "layer" NXT is to use the companion spray booster wax?
Click to expand...



I don't think they *want* to or I don't think they *can* make one without cleaners. More refined solvents = more expensive = make less $$$
 
NHBFAN said:
Scottwax,



How can you tell?



I'm not trying to be a wise guy, I'm just trying to learn how you would know if NXT is removing some or all of the glaze (or AIO) under it.:nixweiss
Click to expand...



I can't *tell* how much remains, but applying NXT over AIO, VM, and American Shine CCC further deepened the look and I didn't notice the removal of any filling properties of the glazes...although since NXT fills in swirls and scratches to a minor degree itself....



I am happy with the appearance of NXT over the glazes I use and so far, durability is fine and that is what I am looking for.
 
BW said:
I don't think they *want* to or I don't think they *can* make one without cleaners. More refined solvents = more expensive = make less $$$
Click to expand...



What I don't understand is that #20 is clearly labeled that it contains cleaning properties and NXT isn't. Whatever solvents are in NXT I don't think are intended to act as cleaners like they are in #20 but to aid in application if that makes sense. I think the cleaning ability is just a by-product of the carriers.



Maybe Mike can get with the Meguiar's chemists and sort this out for us. :nixweiss
 
Who would benefit the most from leaving the "final word" to the Meguiar's chemist? Wouldn't that be like leaving the final word on WMD to Bush/Cheney? I mean, why look any further if Bush says they exist? Why keep searching?



In another post on Roadfly, I pointed out the shockingly similar list of ingredients (including identical CAS numbers), yet "the chemist" said the products weren't even close to one another - they were completely different. :rolleyes:



Then, just to prove it, they magically changed the MSDS...which, sort of proves how much stock we should place in them in the first place, doesn't it?



"Whoops? Did we say it had solvent? Hold on (*reaches for eraser*) - yep, there we go - see? No solvents!" (slightly sarcastic, but you get the point)
 
geekysteve said:
Who would benefit the most from leaving the "final word" to the Meguiar's chemist? Wouldn't that be like leaving the final word on WMD to Bush/Cheney? I mean, why look any further if Bush says they exist? Why keep searching?
Click to expand...



:rolleyes: I don't see what your political views have to do with this.



Why not give Meguiars a chance to respond? You are condeming what their answers might be without even giving them a listen.



In another post on Roadfly, I pointed out the shockingly similar list of ingredients (including identical CAS numbers), yet "the chemist" said the products weren't even close to one another - they were completely different. :rolleyes:



Then, just to prove it, they magically changed the MSDS...which, sort of proves how much stock we should place in them in the first place, doesn't it?



"Whoops? Did we say it had solvent? Hold on (*reaches for eraser*) - yep, there we go - see? No solvents!" (slightly sarcastic, but you get the point)
Click to expand...



Do you have the direct link?
 
I guess I don't understand something - go figure;) If NXT is so similar to #20, then how come it sounds like they perform so differently? Doesn't this suggest that there is much more to look at than just an MSDS? Why are we even comparing MSDS? If they perform differently, would it matter if the MSDS are identical?



Back on topic, NXT cleans. What's to argue? This was a simple test with clear results. At least I thought so:nixweiss
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top