What's the point - if 1Z GW cleans up everything?

I

imported_Bence

New member
I started a similar thread in the Ask the Manufacturer section, but I'd be glad to get more exposure.



We know the fact that GW takes off all the previous coats. But what is the point in that?



Every product that contain concealers and/or carnauba (MP, WPS, or whatever that has minor filling and protecting ability), is gone when you wipe over it/them with GW. All the additional protection built up by them is gone. Although it looks killer when fresh, after a short while GW will show the even tiniest marring left. GW also needs an anally autopian prep. It is not layerable.

GW is one of the most carnauba-y-looking synthetics. The paint loses the GW-slickness if I top it with any product, though.



Final math: One layer of GW vs. multiple prep layers + sealant??? OK, further topping is optionally possible, ...but what is the point?
 
I top GW with Pinnacle Souveran(after it cures of course)and it looks absolutly stunning. If you really want good advice on the 1Z line ask JDookie, he is a beleiver in 1z. Me personally I never have the problems you speak of.
 
Hi Bence, I think you are in the age old dilemma of "what product should I use?" Like Sean mentioned, I am a firm believer in 1Z products, and have had great luck topping them with lots of various products.



Here's what's going on. 1Z doesn't specify that you *have* to top their polishes with anything at all, that's why they contain protectants. You can actually stop after PP or MP and be protected for some time. If you are looking for a longer lasting finish, they offer GW which IMHO has one of the longest lasting finishes out there. It is true that GW will remove the protectant left behind the polish, but that's okay because you are laying down a much longer lasting one instead.



Even though GW isn't *layerable* I still like to go over the car twice (24 hours inbetween) mostly to catch any areas that I missed since I apply it extremely thin, and I actually feel a difference from one coat to two.



Products like WPS and MP can be considered *one-step* products, and don't necessarily need to be topped. I look at GW like my long lasting sealant and always top with a paste wax (souveran or P21S are my two favorites) and have great luck doing so. The wax adds depth to the finish and helps my GW layer last even longer.



As with all protectants and sealants, they always look better if the surface is prepped as much as possible. So for your question "one layer of gw vs. multiple prep layers + sealant???" I think I would say that multiple prep layers are important regardless of what sealant you use, and even after that I would still seal it with GWx2 and then top it with carnauba. Hope this helps.
 
After re-reading your question, I am thinking that I might have only answered part of your question/comments.



You are actually questioning the purpose of GW if it removes any fillers you have used before it, correct?



If so, I would just say that if you have a situation where you are dealing with a surface that contains marring or any other paint defect, and don't want to take the time to remove those defects with polishing efforts, then GW might not be the product for you. You are completely correct when saying, "what's the point if GW just removes everything?" It would be like using a paintwork cleanser after a glaze or smr, they just won't work. If you are going to just fill in the paint defects, I would recommend to go right on top if it with a paste wax instead of a sealant which requires more extensive polishing/prep efforts.
 
I'm using the black, body shop Pro Line from 1Z (Intensive Paste, High Gloss Polish, etc.). Crappy prep is not for me, absolutely.



I was just used to the more formal, usual multi-step process. I'm happy with my 1Z arsenal, but at first it was like if somebody was trying to explain that a thin, high-tech rug is warmer and protects better than an arctic, 10-inch multiple sealskin.



Accumulator said he also doesn't like to put GW on, because he feels that it destroys all of his previous work:

"I was wondering if using Glanz over it removes (through solvent action) the wax/fillers that the MP leaves behind. Since MP and Wax Polish Soft both do a little "hiding" of defects, if the Glanz removes what they leave behind I wonder if that would cause the previously "hidden" (by the MP or WPS) defects to reappear.



One of the reasons I haven't used GW is that I didn't want to "undo" anything that the MP/WPs accomplished. That's why I usually top (consumer/pink) MP/WPS with something like #16 or Souveran when I top it at all."



I like the look of MP, even Wax Finish too, so that is not a problem, but I am - somehow - autopian. Wax a bit, layer a bit always more & more.

A model S 2000 on my desk has 8 coats of Sonax Xtreme1 Carnauba paste on it and counting...
 
Since 1Z categorically recommends GW over their polishes, I'm still :confused: about this even though it's not an issue for me personally either.



I don't really expect/want any "hiding", though I'll take it on the Jag with its old paint that's too thin to polish much more :D And to be honest, I don't use GW because I'm happy with KSG and UPP for my sealants. But I still wonder about the GW-removes-concealers issue, just as a theoretical quandary.



I just can't imagine Joe-consumer using something like PP or MP, having things look good, then applying GW and having an apparent "problem"...if it stripped the fillers/whatever from the PP/MP and made the defects "reappear", Joe-consumer would be disappointed and unhappy with 1Z. Yet we don't seem to hear about this.



SO- anybody ever had "hidden defects" reappear after using GW?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top