Open Discussion

J

JeffM

New member
The best protection is hard to determine. Longest lasting, ya thats easier.



Who here really knows if product A or B really is protecting from harmful UV rays or fallout, or whatever?



When someone said that NXT is still Megs best protecting sealant/wax when #21 came out it made me think. #21 has been getting longer lasting reports from members, so does that mean a product can bead water, for a longer time, but yet have a lower level of true protection?



I dont know.





CG's website has a rating for the Gloss, Slickness, Protection ect. The sealant 3x nuba has a 9 for protection.



But it wont outlast Zaino.



How do we know who makes the most impermiable sacrificial barrier, forget durability.
 
Man that is deep. If anyone can answer this with real authority I would be interested.



For me the answer comes with using different products and getting what you are looking for.



I have a seven month test(Zaino) still on going at this moment. Will report on it in October.



Have tried a lot of different products. Each have given decent results but as I learn how to prepare the surface I must say that the results get better each time that i do a detail. without regard to the product. I have found that my eye is different than others. Consequently what i think is a good product is suspect in someone else's eye. For me, as long as I am happy with the results of the prep, the product of choice is the one that I am using at the time.
 
I think such an analysis falls into the realm of very high priced testing involving extensive, clinical protocol and extremely sophisticated devices. I bet even at that ,there is room for error or other threats to the overall validity.



I've read about such attempts but there still appears to be plenty of room for bias, doubt, and debate.
 
IMO the only companies with enough money to accurately test their products are the big guys- and I'm sure they do some type of testing prior to releasing products.
 
That's what amuses me about this forum sometimes : people speak with implied authority about certain products against others , but how do we really know?

Emperical knowledge can only garner so many answers. In the absence of that , we either take the word of the manufacturer or what we've heard from others ; and who knows where or how they obtain their information.

This isn't meant to slander or discredit anyone---and Lord knows I'm no expert---but I guess it comes down to what each individual is happy with and what is proven for them.



...in the absence of fact, perception is reality.
 
my opinion is simply based on simple economics. a larger company has more resources for research, development and testing. in the case of wholesalers whoever manufacturers the product probably does some amount of testing prior to release. I doubt any manufacturer is stupid enough to sell a product without testing it first.
 
Your question about products still beading and not providing good protection is interesting. I've been observing that with Klasse SG. I first suspected I was seeing it on my red volvo. Volvo 601 red is well known for oxidizing at a remarkable rate. Polish it up to a beautiful deep red glow, apply several layers of SG and admire. In a few weeks it would still be shiny and slick to the touch, beading rain nicely, but the paint would be starting to turn back to faded pink underneath the SG. I've noticed much less incidence of this with NXT on the same vehicle. Same results on several other cars now with SG.



As a followup, I started a multi layer testing of SG on the hood of my red Toyota truck. Nothing more than taping different areas off and applying different quantities of layers, marked with a sharpie so I can remember them. From 0-7 layers. All areas are fading at the same rate. Judging by the sharpie marks, about 3 layers of SG are worn off now. No washing or maintenance, just normal neglect.



This isn't meant to be an authorative summary on SG or UV protection, just my observations.
 
I tested NXT Paste vs. OCW on pretty much side by side surfaces. It was on the same car and after 2.5 months, they were both dead, however the NXT side had far more water spotting and etching than the OCW.





Furthermore I tested Klasse vs Zaino. Zaino lasted longer, but I felt Klasse resisted contaminants better and was a bit stronger.





These test were done on the same car, equal conditions, with equal prep. I didn't analyze them everyday, just noted the condition after each wash. It's a real world test, a lot of the times better than the lab stuff.
 
What i think it boils down to is, frequent washes on a slick surface provided by a LSP is the best defense from dirt or crap embedding into the paint.



What protection does a lsp give?



Some for UV



But none of them will prevent a waterspot etch if it is allowed to sit on the paint. Some products are better at "shedding" water, and keeping dust from attracting and settling on the vehicle.



I have only had Zaino on my truck for a couple weeks now, and if it rains, it flushes a good amount of simple dust off and dries to an almost original clean surface. *Almost, better than alot of them anyways.



Even a vehicle that has never had a degraded layer of LSP on it, will need to be clayed in a year, even with frequesnt washes.



I think there is this idea that a layer of LSP on a vehicle is providing protection like a Virus program does for a computer.



I read on here that people who purchase a new vehicle franticly need to get "something" on the paint in a hurry, so it is "protected".



Does this offer a sigh of relief after?



The paint is still very vulnerable.



That is interesting information FoxTrapper about your SS paint oxidizing even with multiple layers of SG on it.



Im not quite sure what causes oxidation, its UV rays right? Ive never owned a SS painted vehicle.



I guess it would be interesting to make a study out of 2 vehicles. One that has a layer of protection on it, and one that doesnt, but both get bi-weekly washes with good technique.



How much damage would the un protected vehicle have compared to the protected one?





These are just ramblings from a mind that is always spinning all day long, i am not about to stop "waxing" anytime soon :)
 
I just though of a kinda simple way to determine how much UV protection a product has.



Tell me if this sounds like it would work....



I often put empty Diet Pepsi bottles in the back of my truck, and in a week or 2 they have faded.



Now, if someone made something out of glass, and applied a lsp on it, with the bottle, or something that will fade quickly inside, this should provide a simple test to determine if any UV rays are making it through the LSP, no?
 
Well, here's a way you could test UV protection. Get a strip of glass, preferably not a UV-blocking variety. Mark off blocks for whatever products you want to compare, apply products to the blocks, and leave one block with no product. Affix a piece of colored construction paper to the back of the glass, and set it out in the sun. Keep a swatch of the paper in your house in a dark place, and if you're really picky put a swatch outside but sealed against sunlight (e.g. in aluminum foil) to control for fading caused by heat exposure. Now leave exposed to sun for a period of time, then compare the fading of the paper under different sections of glass against your control swatches.



This is the el-cheapo version of how inkjet printer companies test ink longevity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top