UV protection of Meg's Quick Interior Detailer...

6

66#1

New member
I've been using Meg's QID interior detailer pretty much exclusively for the last year or so on my vehicles. I absolutely love the low gloss look it leaves and it's super simple to use.



How much UV protection does it have?? My wife's car sits out 24/7, and I apply the QID every 2 weeks to a month.
 
66#1 said:
I've been using Meg's QID interior detailer pretty much exclusively for the last year or so on my vehicles. I absolutely love the low gloss look it leaves and it's super simple to use.



How much UV protection does it have?? My wife's car sits out 24/7, and I apply the QID every 2 weeks to a month.
Click to expand...



Little, if any. MQID may be water and scent for all I can tell. I would follow up with something like Fk1 108 or AP 303 if your concerned about it. However, allegedly, the "new and improved" version will have protective qualities.
 
The original QID had UV protection and the new for 2008 improved QID contains more. Notice the red banner on the label that states "Improved UV protection."





Source:Quik Interior Detailer - Improved - Car Care Forums: Meguiar's Online



QIDspray.jpg
 
with the advancements in today's plastics and vinyl, do you guys think UV protection really help much? When was the last time you sat in a car made within the last 10, maybe 15 years that had cracks in the dashboard? I personally have not seen any in a long time, but then again I don't do this professionally where I see a variety of cars every day.



As far as Meg's QID, I also feel it's not much more than scented water. I still have a tough time understanding why so many members love this product so much when you can achieve practically the same thing with a damp microfiber towel. QD for paint has its purposes and it boosts the shine on the paint, but an interior and wheel QD? I feel that's all marketing to get you to spend another $5 on product that's not truly necessary.



For those that love the look of QID, I highly recommend steam cleaning your interior and not applying a dressing. Not only does it clean better than QID, but it'll give your plastics and vinyl that new, OEM look.
 
BlackElantraGT said:
with the advancements in today's plastics and vinyl, do you guys think UV protection really help much? When was the last time you sat in a car made within the last 10, maybe 15 years that had cracks in the dashboard?



As far as Meg's QID, I also feel it's not much more than scented water. I still have a tough time understanding why so many members love this product so much when you can achieve practically the same thing with a damp microfiber towel.
Click to expand...



On the one hand, my car that had pretty much no love on the interior for 15 years had a pretty decent dashboard after that time, but on the other hand, my mother's Buick that is less than 3 years old I had to put 303 on the dash because it was already looking dried out, and that car spends a lot less time outdoors than mine did. Of course, the quality of GM interior materials has plummeted in the time between when those two cars were built.



Meg's QID does seem to have some surfactant action to me, arguably the same could be acheived with a really weak APC dilution. Of course, if the new QID really has UV inhibitors, that would make it significantly different than "scented water".
 
Explain alittle wfedwar. Cant just state something and not back it up.



Ive used megs QID for some time now and love the stuff. Gives the dash a nice matt finish and freshens up the interior. Heck, even if it is just scented water Ill pay $5 a month to have a nice smelling interior. :)
 
Even though I use mostly use Collinite and Zaino, my parents always give a Megs kit for Christmas. I use some of the stuff, and the rest I usually give to someone else. The one I got last year had the QID in it, elsewise I probably never would've tried it. I wound up really liking the stuff though, and the kit I got this past Christmas(that I haven't opened up yet) has a bottle of QID in it also. I don't think it's the new and improved version though.



I use the stuff on the underhood plastics and hoses of my car and my wife's car also.



I want to try 303 eventually,but I guess I'll keep on going with the QID until I run out. I was using E1 Nano protectant before that and I really liked it also. However, I got window fogging really bad after using it.
 
BlueLibby04 said:
Explain alittle wfedwar. Cant just state something and not back it up.
Click to expand...

Sure I can, people do it all the time. In fact, I've never seen a peer-reviewed journal citation here. Anyway, the reason dashes crack is almost always because the plasticizers evaporate and cause the remaining polymer to both shrink and get brittle. The best thing you can do is avoid extreme temperatures when possible.
 
I think I'm in the minority, but I didn't really like the scent of QID. That was the one thing that turned me off. I do, however, like CP. I think CP for cleaning and 303 for protection is a solid combo.
 
Pennypacker said:
I think I'm in the minority, but I didn't really like the scent of QID. That was the one thing that turned me off. I do, however, like CP. I think CP for cleaning and 303 for protection is a solid combo.
Click to expand...



I think Meg's is pretty good when it comes to product scents, but I have to agree with you about QID's eucalyptus scent. Growing up, my mom used to bring home Chinese medicinal herbs and eucalyptus, while nowhere near as strong of a scent as these different chinese herbs, it always reminded me of something that would be used for medicinal purposes. Most of Meg's scents are fruity so I'm not sure why they decided to go in that direction for QID?
 
I have to agree with BlackElantraGT on the UV protection. Having seen thousands of newer cars I have seen more damage from improper chemicals and cleaning practices than UV light. The car glass is very good at stopping UV rays. I think it is a lot of marketing hype, though as it is included in most quality dressings, it could be classified as insurance. A convertible is a different story, i would want the UV dressing insurance.



The last time i have seen any vehicle with fading was the early 90's? GM trucks. Also not sure if it was caused by UV or a problem with the material, as it was uneven and on areas that shouldn't be in direct contact with light.



Also one thing that is never brought up is the use of a liquid to clean a dirty dusty car. What happens when you mix water and dirt, you make mud, and it sits in the grain of the dash. After a few times it becomes very hard to clean out. A simple dry MF or dust cloth wipe to remove the dust first is all the is needed.



I have included a couple pics.



First one is of a dash that the top layer is letting go. This is only one area of damage. I know where this truck came from and solvent dressing has be used. Not sure if that caused it.



IMG_6423.jpg






This is a regular customer, car has never seen any dressing. Has been garaged at times. Sorry about the dash reflection, but dash is perfect.



IMG_5168.JPG
 
The first picture is a Ford truck isn't it? My 99 F150 looks the same way. The grey outer layer, in my case, flaked off after that panel was pried off twice to replace heater cores. (In addition to dashes, Ford also can't make heater cores or blend doors.)
 
It is a GM truck, 02? It would just flake or pull right off. Pics are from a couple years ago, wonder if it got any worse.
 
As salty pointed out and I forgot to mention (besides the advancements in plastics and vinyl), a majority of UV rays are already blocked by the glass used in automobiles today. Obviously we can't see UV rays, so how can you tell if the glass is actually blocking UV? The next time you run into someone that wears eyeglasses with Transitions lenses, ask them how well it works in their car. The answer you will get is DIDDLY SQUAT.



Many people, including myself, who bought into the hype of Transitions lenses were misled by the marketing of the product. Glasses can get expensive and cumbersome so if it can replace having an extra pair of prescription sunglasses in the car specifically for driving, it's worth paying for the premium right? Wrong! Transitions lenses do not work based on how bright or light it is how most people are led to believe. The dyes within the lense that makes it darken reacts to UV light. It works as advertised when you're outdoors, but when you're driving with your windows rolled up, your lenses will never get dark at all.



In other words, your car's glass is already blocking a majority (if not all) of UV rays.
 
BlackElantraGT said:
In other words, your car's glass is already blocking a majority (if not all) of UV rays.
Click to expand...



Plain glass blocks most UV rays. Tinted glass may block more but not all. It's kind of like if you smoke a pack of cigs a day...being behind glass is like smoking 5 cigs a day, and tinted is like 1 a day. Is 1 better than 20? Yes, but it's still not zero, and likely to have some effect over the long term.



I previously mentioned my old car that I had for 16 years, and I'm not sure I ever dressed the dash. I only used dressings on certain parts of the interior in the last few years, and I put some Lexol on some really dried out door trim just before I traded the car. Was the entire interior falling apart? No. Was there definitely some sun damage in certain areas or to certain pieces? Yes.
 
Car makers use all sorts of plastic. Some are obvious better at UV and heat/cold than others. This is why some older cars are in good shape (good materials selection) and some recent cars have issues (not so good materials selection). It just depends. Obviously if someone using chemicals to clean them, this can shorten the life.



You often do not know which you have unless you have seen earlier model cars with same materials or have it a few years. Therefore, it makes sense to play it safe and costs little to protect it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top