# Wax and Sealant thicknesses



## FinstP

Continued from a previous thread on thickness of wax layers. Note, I don't make any claims about effectiveness, I am only measuring the thickness!

Thanks to Caledonia, I have a large selection of waxes and also sealants to test, so I have started a new thread. Here are a few results from the last three days.

Testing as before, applying coatings to clean 6" silicon wafers.
20 random spots were measured to give some statistical significance to the results. 
Below I quote the average thickness and the standard deviation (sd). The standard deviation gives an indication of the spread in the results.
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
***** Vintage (4 coats applied at 24 hours intervals)

Wax applied with microfibre, hazed and lightly buffed with clean microfibre cloth.
Thickness after first application = 25.6 nm; sd = 2.5 nm
Thickness after second application = 26.3 nm; sd = 3.2 nm
Thickness after third application = 24.9 nm; sd = 1.9 nm
Fourth layer applied by hand.
Thickness after fourth application = 27.4 nm; sd = 1.7 nm

Because of the spread in the results, as given by the standard deviation, you can't read anything into the small differences in thickness. 
This seems to show, once again, that you can't layer wax. 
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Opti-seal

This gave me some problems at first, not having used the product before, because of the difficulty in applying a thin enough initial layer to the relatively small 6" wafer (compared to a car panel).
First attempts were definitely too thick, giving strong interference fringes on the smooth silicon wafer that changed rather dramatically as the product dried (very slowly).
The end results were very patchy. After advice from Caledonia, I then cut down the amount of product to no more than one drop, applied with a 1" square of microfibre cloth. 
This easily spread over the whole surface of the wafer and dried to a haze-free finish in a few minutes. Again, 20 random spots were measured. 
Coats applied at 24 hours intervals

Thickness after first application = 17.3 nm; sd = 1.2 nm
Thickness after second application = 16.6 nm; sd = 1.1 nm

Again, no evidence of layering being possible.

An even smaller amount applied to a different wafer:-

Thickness after first application = 21.9 nm; sd = 2.3 nm


.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Z8 

This was applied lightly with a 1" square of microfibre cloth but it did not spread evenly over the wafer surface. 
Whereas the Opti-seal obviously wetted the surface, this almost seemed to be like trying to rub water into the surface.
I wasn't too surprised by the results below (as yet, only one layer applied).

Thickness after first application = 4.9 nm; sd = 1.4 nm

.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Red Mist

This product was much more like Opti-seal, wetting the surface and spreading easily. Not easy to wipe off, so maybe too much applied.

Thickness after first application = 22.1 nm; sd = 0.7 nm (a very uniform film!)

.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................


----------



## badly_dubbed

been talking about Gordons trip with him all week!

more so on the reflective index, and that wax has a dulling effect and that its impossible to have depth and shine in paint 

Davey


----------



## Dave KG

Brilliant, really brilliant! Science in action on Detailing World. Great to see such a test being carried out, and interesting results regarding layering, especially of a wax. 

Looking forward to reading more of the findings


----------



## caledonia

Thanks for taking time to meet myself and a very interesting tour of your labs.

I came away with a very good understanding of the technology and research you carry out on a daily basis.
During the conversation that follow also gave me a get insight to finding and as you rightly said this has now been proven once again. With regards to layering products.

I am also glad the the conversation that I have had with Dave has not gone to waste, and has given us a better insight as to what an LSP does to certain paint finishes. With regard to there initial reflective rating compared the the LSP rating.

Once again thanks F.

Gordon.


----------



## Epoch

I'm rather liking this project

so developmental elements may be 

if Red Mist leaves a layer 75% thicker than Z8 yet in my testing i've found them both to give a good six weeks of visable protection, is the product left behind harder wearing in Z8 or could th thickmness be down to the fully cure of the redmist leaving more solid intact etc

Thanks again for your time


----------



## badly_dubbed

Epoch said:


> I'm rather liking this project
> 
> so developmental elements may be
> 
> if Red Mist leaves a layer 75% thicker than Z8 yet in my testing i've found them both to give a good six weeks of visable protection, is the product left behind harder wearing in Z8 or could th thickmness be down to the fully cure of the redmist leaving more solid intact etc
> 
> Thanks again for your time


i may be wrong here,

but i think the layer thickness of Z8 in this test is only because it wouldnt spread right on the sillicone


----------



## DimGR

the way i understad this post , is that 2 coats are enough. Anything more and you start removing previously applied wax therefore you loose not gaining anything

correct?


----------



## Beeste

Great test. And my arms say thankyou , thankyou thankyou


----------



## Goodfella36

from reading all these tests only benefit of 2 coats would be to make sure you havent missed anywhere thank you for your time and tests very interesting :thumb:


----------



## Leonneke

*Sealant like Z - Two*

Hello there Fin:

I would like to know if you are layering the Zaino Z 2 in one of your tests.
Especially because I have read several topics about the Z 2.

Some people claim to layer 7 times - 20 times and even 50 and 51 times.
I think a sealant is something completly different then a wax. I think it can be layered. But it would be great if you layered them in your tests.

Z - two and FK 1000 P for instance. Well, thanks so far. Usefull threads.

Holland - Your votes please: 10 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 10


----------



## needhampr

I've had very good durability from applying a wax on top of sealant. Makes me wonder if this layers well. My fav is EGP with Colli 845.
Excellent work and interesting findings so far :thumb:


----------



## HeavenlyDetail

Id love to know what mine measures up at 

Id also like to know about z2pro because if layering is not changeing thickness wise is there a possibility that these microscopically are sinking over time like paint does? I ask because to me visibly i see a difference after 4 or 5 layers on specific paints so if they are not gaining thickness almost like focals bi focals why do i sense that metallics and hues are being pronounced?


----------



## Bigpikle

vxrmarc said:


> Id love to know what mine measures up at
> 
> Id also like to know about z2pro because if layering is not changeing thickness wise is there a possibility that these microscopically are sinking over time like paint does? I ask because to me visibly i see a difference after 4 or 5 layers on specific paints so if they are not gaining thickness almost like focals bi focals why do i sense that metallics and hues are being pronounced?


good questions Marc - would like to see some tests on these.

The answer to 'why' of course might just be your brain. It knows you put multiple layers on so it is 'seeing' differences that you would be expecting. Its a powerful old thing in there (for most of us anyway :lol

The other tests done by these guys showed ALL products reduced the reflectivity of the surface, so it would lead us to think that multiple layers have an even bigger impact on the 'look' in a NEGATIVE way!


----------



## Dave KG

Durability is a very hard thing to gauge - measuring the protection in the first instance is not easy, relying on water behaviur for such measurements is a good way to get misleading results - a product can be protecting but loose its water properties due to bonded contaimination in the paintwork that would affect all LSPs for example.

I see notably better durability from two layers of a wax - but, I wonder if this is because my first layer I spend a lot of time now "working the wax in", try rather than simply wiping on and wiping off, to work the wax into all the voids of the paintwork, setting up a better base with layer two there to ensure fully even coverage and further "working in".

Something still not clear for me here is the _density_ of the wax layer, do multiple coats perhaps change the density of the wax layer but not the thickness, this would start to go some way to explaining the changes in looks some are claiming to see - but then again, are there _really_ differences or simply psychological effects. One thing's for sure and thats the effect is so small, its hard to differentiate between the two!

More food for thought though on what is a highly interesting thread with claims actually being backed up with hard science, something from which there is nowhere to hide


----------



## Leonneke

vxrmarc said:


> Id love to know what mine measures up at


Hello there Mark;

Your project is exactly one of the reasons I ask this. I have read your thread over & over & over again. Because I admire the way you prepared your white car. And I admire the way you handle these things. I like to work in that kind of methods too. So I already tried to find out what I could do best.
Your thread is my 'leading' guide. I own a white Cupra and want to layer several times. What I understood from your thread is that you SEE improvements untill layer 6 or 7.

Therefore it would be great if the tests of Fin point in that direction.
I really want to know if sealants behave different in layering. I still think they do. And I still hope they do. Keeps my goin'.....................


----------



## caledonia

Dave.
From the conversation that I have had with the OP. I am inclined to agree with what you have said. The first layer levels out the imperfections within the painted surface and bonds to these. Once cure regardless of the waxes total thickness is buffed of level with the surface layer. The second layer in turn fills and bonds to the voids left in the prior layer after the solvents ans oils have evaporated. So in turn leaving a very true and consistent surface.
There is some evidence that compaction of the layer the wax layer is there. But this cannot be built upon. Any form of wiping washing or in general friction removes this layer to the same thickness. The only true way to measure a waxes durability though adding extra layers would be a none friction wash or none contact. This way the friction would not affect the layer of wax.

But down side is the lack of cleanliness on the wax layer where this in turn could effect the layer with contamination on the surface.
Gordon.


----------



## Leonneke

caledonia said:


> There is some evidence that compaction of the layer the wax layer is there.


Mainly this is one of the real problems in the "world of detailing". At least, that is what I think. There is some evidence, but when you really start looking for the evidence, nothing really can be found. In my profession (medical & sports) I am used to work with evidence-based ''tools". In the world of detailing there is no such thing as R.C.T. ( double-blind tests ).

Would be great if this thread can make some difference or start some changes in thinkin' ... !


----------



## PJS

needhampr said:


> I've had very good durability from applying a wax on top of sealant. Makes me wonder if this layers well. My fav is EGP with Colli 845.
> Excellent work and interesting findings so far :thumb:


I'd almost guarantee your 845 has removed the EGP, from its solvent carriers used - moreso if the EGP wasn't given 24 hours before putting it on.


----------



## Dave KG

Leonneke said:


> Mainly this is one of the real problems in the "world of detailing". At least, that is what I think. There is some evidence, but when you really start looking for the evidence, nothing really can be found. In my profession (medical & sports) I am used to work with evidence-based ''tools". In the world of detailing there is no such thing as R.C.T. ( double-blind tests ).
> 
> Would be great if this thread can make some difference or start some changes in thinkin' ... !


Yes, and there are a lot of claims either with no sound backup, or simply incorrect backup, quite often through a lack of understanding of the product itself. This is of course if one wishes to consider detailing from its more cold, and clinical side of facts and figures as to what really makes a difference and what does not, and if we did do this and everyone did this then I personally think (note - this is my personal opinion, and nothing more!) that this would blow the LSP industry into the weeds such is the smoke and mirrors marketing that I see used. I stress, this is my _opinion_  Being a scientist at heart, I do tend to analyse and view things quite often from a clinical point of view, as this is how I see myself maximising my own results and for me I strive for perfection and look into the routes where I can genuinely achieve it... waxes and sealants, no matter how expensive, how fancy, how limited in number, how pretty the bottle (you name the marketing technique used...), will not deliver you perfection - they are there to do a job, a job they all do in pretty much the same basic way with largely the same results across the board (with variances in durability, but not in looks).

However, this is not the only way to view detailing and if we all viewed in only in such a way, then it would be a rather boring world - it needs its quirks, its marketing, its different products, different price brackets - thats all what makes the world go round 

I applaud threads and research like this though, it really does add something for everyone, and goes a long way to backing up (or not...) people's beliefs and busting myths with scientific fact.


----------



## Leonneke

Dave KG said:


> However, this is not the only way to view detailing and if we all viewed in only in such a way, then it would be a rather boring world -


I agree. Detailing is one of my ways to take a step away from te 'boring' world. I do a lot of things of wich I think: "Is this really nescessary"???

For instance. I live in Holland and I really had to get a grip on Finish Kare Products. Because they are not available in Holland. Same with Zaino.
I ordered it in England to. Mostly any other product will do the job just fine.

When I first used FK I was convinced it was a lot better than all the rest.
I layered it for 10 times. But therefor I think this kind of test are really good for me. I don't want to put on 10 layers when I know I buffed off 9 of them.
So indeed sometimes it's quite good to read stuff like this.

Everybody claims that a wax on top of a sealant looks better. So I tried and asked a lot off detaillers if they could see wich part of the car I did in that way. :doublesho:doublesho:doublesho No one could tell !

Thanks for your comment. Your opinion is very well balanced. Leonneke


----------



## PhillipM

The other thing to throw into the mix, is that on properly old furniture, or dress boots, you can scrape the wax layer off with a knife and it's about a quarter of a mm thick, so what went on there to allow that kind of build up?


----------



## PJS

You're talking about very different wax compositions, and substrate materials.


----------



## beany_bot

PhillipM said:


> The other thing to throw into the mix, is that on properly old furniture, or dress boots, you can scrape the wax layer off with a knife and it's about a quarter of a mm thick, so what went on there to allow that kind of build up?


The wax used on old furniture is nearly 100% bees wax, which is completely different to the 40% or less carnuba wax mix car wax.

Furniture wax is also A: applied very very generously and not buffed off to the same standard as car wax B: Designed to stick around, it main purpose is to protect not to shine.

Car wax is designed to be reapllied and make the car look nice, aswell as protect.

Also your car gets washed in a way your furniture doesnt.

Hope that clarifies for you:thumb:


----------



## akimel

I am delighted to see that the research is continuing! The results for the Opti-Seal provides initial evidence that even synthetic sealants do not really layer, yet as others have suggested, it would be very helpful if some classical sealants (Zaino Z2 and/or FK 1000p) were also tested. If the tests on these products were to also disconfirm layerability, then this would be revolutionary for detailing. Everyone believes that sealants are layerable. A lot of energy is invested in applying multiple sealant coats in the belief that one is actually building up a thicker layer of protection. The manufacturers tell us that sealants are layerable. What will happen if the empirical testing suggests otherwise? 

Science is all about measuring. If sealants are layerable, as commonly claimed, then the thickening of the sealant coat should be measurable.


----------



## PhillipM

beany_bot said:


> Furniture wax is also A: applied very very generously and not buffed off to the same standard as car wax


I've seen some very expensive old furnishings, and I can tell you that they are indeed buffed off properly - if they weren't the person doing it wouldn't have been working on them for long!


----------



## caledonia

Where both are right to an extent.
Furniture wax is totally different than a car wax. This is true and so is the fact that these are buffed off. The big difference is most furniture waxes are applied warm as in a melted state and can be thinned by the use of solvents. Methylated spirits and the like. 


So this way the wax is applied a lot thicker and cures very rapidly due to the cooling stage. Before bringing up the gloss. But as the layer increase the wax content is diluted down and refined to leave a flawless finish.

Now thats sorted can we get back to the matter in hand.
Gordon.


----------



## YoMike

I found this statement online by TOGWT maybe you could prove it or disprove it with measurements?


"Polymers- most contain a mineral or silicone oils that are use as a lubrication system, in a solvent based carrier system (these may also be in the form of an oil / water emulsion) and by the nature of this product they need to vaporise / dissipate and then its needs to cross-link (this is time dependant (unless a catalyst is added) and is quite separate from the drying process. To my knowledge, all polymer sealants are based on an emulsion system containing silicone oils. Zaino Show Car Polish is the only polymer sealant that I'm aware of that is not based on the element silicone (its lubrication system is a polymer) it contains reactive resins that cross-link and provide long-term durability and can therefore be successfully layered (a new application of Zaino Show Car Polish does not remove previous applications). Zaino also has an ultra violet (UV) protection added."


----------



## Sonic

Brilliant test and very interesting results :thumb:


----------



## andy665

Interesting results - I think the act of applying more than a couple of layers has always been about human physcology as opposed to actually creating an improvement, ie, it makes you feel better and your brain tricks your eyes into seeing an improvement.

I know that on my cars I probably apply wax more because I feel the need / want to apply it rather than needing to


----------



## kallM3

Absolutely great thread! Would want to thank FinstP, but it seems, he has vanished for some reason??

My personal thoughts are:

- Wax layers are roughly 20 nm thick
- There is no use for more than two layers (except one assumes an uneven surface on the paint, which slightly becomes more uniform probably)
- Buffing should happen at a time, where all wax has dried but not caked in, so it goes off easily
- also sealants seem not really to be "sheetable"

Now this has been a very worthwile reading, if I come across the "How much microns are taken away through polishing", my scientific hunger in detailing is satisfied )


----------



## SuperBee364

One of the year's best threads. On any detailing board. Great stuff, gents, thank you very much.


----------



## User Name

Wish someone had linked me to this thread before I "layered' the crap out of my car for the winter!


----------



## FinstP

Sorry folks, I haven't been here for a while due to a conference in China etc.
Also the equipment I have been using suffered during a power surge and I am waiting for a replacement. Since it is very expensive and built to order it probably won't be here until mid-January. I'll get back to the tests then!

PS I don't suppose anybody from the Glasgow area saw the ****** who dented my wife's Lexus last Sunday in the Costco car park!?


----------



## PipBrit

A really fascinating thread this.

From reading on this forum, I've always taken the "2 layers of wax only" as gospel, so I've never applied more than 2 (dont want to waste RG55 especially at 65 quid a tin!). Nice to see someone's taken the time to acutally measure the thicknesses to prove (or disprove) something that's been taken as a given on here!

Dave KG's made and interesting point about density. Could it be that the wax left behind is re-liquified by the solvents when applying the second layer only this time when it cures there's a higher concentration of wax product left- and maybe that this concentration is the highest it could be so when adding more layers it has no effect in the increase in concentration? I'm no scientist, so I'm just trying to qualify the results in my own twisted way!

If it is a case of "working in" the wax then maybe I should change my technique slightly and spend longer applying the wax to a panel rather than just making sure the panel is covered!

Maybe we can swab the wafer and run it through some analyser CSI style! Maybe I've been watching too much TV :lol:

I have to admit I've not really got into the sealant thing, I'm a sucker for good tight wax beading, but I am giving some serious thought for trying out the Duragloss range after seeing some of the reviews on here (especially after seeing bigpikle's audi :argie and I've always been confused about the number of layers you apply to a sealant. For example i read this thread recently:

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=139734

And on here they are applying anything up to 6 layers to get good beading on werkstat. Now I'm not saying they're wrong, they are getting better beading with more layers so surely if the layer thickness is roughly the same regardless of the number of applications, then it must be the density of the product and therefore an increase (in this case beading) in performance of the product.

My head hurts :lol:


----------



## FinstP

I have answered the question about increasing density before - a changing density would increase the refractive index, which is one of the quantities that I measure - and I haven't seen any such changes.

It would be crazy to say that _no_ product can be layered - if you apply paint and let it dry you can layer it as much as you like! There is a big difference between 6 applications and 6 layers though. It will be interesting to try the Werkstat product.

The problem with layering is, if you _were_ able to build up 6 or more layers of a sealant type product then you would eventually reach a thickness where optical interference effects would be seen (like oil films on water) and I have yet to see this from waxes or sealants. This is the reason that I started to measure the film thicknesses in the first place! You can see the same effect if you over-polish a clear coat until you are down to sub-micron thicknesses (holograms).


----------



## dooka

vxrmarc said:


> Id love to know what mine measures up at
> 
> Id also like to know about z2pro because if layering is not changeing thickness wise is there a possibility that these microscopically are sinking over time like paint does? I ask because to me visibly i see a difference after 4 or 5 layers on specific paints so if they are not gaining thickness almost like focals bi focals why do i sense that metallics and hues are being pronounced?


Interesting point..

paint is porous, hence why we feed/wax..

I recently cleaned a S plate pug 306, don't think it has seen a layer of any sort of protection. I used menzerner and the paint just drank the oils, giving me a seriously short work time, but got better as I went along..

So my thoughts are..

The paint is drawing the product in.. ( thirsty )

The product isn't curing/flashing off properly before next applied ( does a wax/sealant need more time to cure with each coat..

When you apply a second coat, even the cured wax underneath may soften slightly, needing longer to cure, so 3rd coat may be taking some of the previous coat off..


----------



## Dodo Factory

qstix said:


> Interesting point..
> 
> paint is porous, hence why we feed/wax..
> 
> I recently cleaned a S plate pug 306, don't think it has seen a layer of any sort of protection. I used menzerner and the paint just drank the oils, giving me a seriously short work time, but got better as I went along..
> 
> So my thoughts are..
> 
> The paint is drawing the product in.. ( thirsty )
> 
> The product isn't curing/flashing off properly before next applied ( does a wax/sealant need more time to cure with each coat..
> 
> When you apply a second coat, even the cured wax underneath may soften slightly, needing longer to cure, so 3rd coat may be taking some of the previous coat off..


Clearcoat itself isn't porous as a material, but the surface can be rough and pitted (microscopically), especially when UV damaged (red, dark cars). This does allow a certain amount of product soak in some circumstances. You don't need to 'feed' paint, but it can improve the look and prevent further UV damage to cover the rough surface with some form of temporary coating like wax or sealant.

You can 'feed' leather as the oils penetrate the pores of the paint and cloth to a greater degree, but clearcoat doesn't allow oil or wax to saturate through to the primer etc.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

So, does this prove that carnauba wax protects the paint better than sealants (since there is a thicker layer of protection)?


----------



## Dodo Factory

Only if thickness means better protection.

One inch of jelly won't stop a bullet.

Half an inch of steel will.

Which offers the most protection?

This is exactly why I suggested caution with these scientific tests. The results need to be interpreted. If people go along thinking a thicker layer is better, it serves no real purpose - products that could work better may be discounted by consumers and manufacturers start making products that 'test well'.

As ever, look at the real world performance.

If product A works better than product B, thickness of layer doesn't matter


----------



## mwbpsx

So if layering doesnt actaully cause an increase in the thickness of the lsp, where is all my wax going?


----------



## Dodo Factory

The excess residue is being removed at the buffing stage.


----------



## PJS

Dodo Factory said:


> You can 'feed' leather as the oils penetrate the pores of the paint and cloth to a greater degree, but clearcoat doesn't allow oil or wax to saturate through to the primer etc.


Not in the vast majority of modern car leathers (for the past 10 years?) - they are coated (like paint is clearcoated) so only water will permeate through the barrier coating.
Have a chat with JudyB from LTT Solutions for more info.


----------



## Dodo Factory

I realise that Phil, but I believe that even painted cloth is more porous than clearcoated metal - especially when it comes to oils as they may be able to penetrate the flexible paint a little more easily? I could be wrong of course, but in my experience, connolised leather does have *some* (small) absorbency.


----------



## DiscoDriver

I'd be interested to know if layering works (to increase thickness) if multiple different products were used eg Sealant X used then topped off with Sealant Y. Presumably this could work if sealant X was insoluble in the solvent used to store sealant Y?


----------



## Dodo Factory

I think surface adhesion characteristics will have more to do with it.

Once the solvent in X has evaporated, it has gone. So that is why you can layer the same product or when you wipe a wet cloth over a white wall that has been painted a week before with water based emulsion, the paint doesn't transfer.

It would be a good set of tests to do. Some products may bond better to clearcoat (perhaps the covalent ones that are meant to swap bonds with paint) and then some products may be better bonding to sealants or waxes already there. Maybe they etch themselves into the surface of them, for example.


----------



## DiscoDriver

Yes I see - that would be interesting although potentially a HUGE number of iterations/combinations to test. 

Another question would be: if you have a 6 month surface barrier (wax/sealant etc) in place, would any of us wash/wax our cars any less frequently?


----------



## Dodo Factory

It doesn't affect washing frequency so much, but you'd certainly need to wax/seal less often.

That said, we met one guy at a show who applied a layer of wax every month. A layer would last 3-4x that, so we told him he was overwaxing, but he liked the process and said he'd carry on doing it anyway... fair play!


----------



## Gruffs

One thing i have noticed on this thread is that we need to be very careful with the substrate here.

These were *SILICON* wafers which is very different from *SILICONE* which is not the element but a group of polymers.

It makes sense to me that if an applied wax (or sealant) is dissolved in a solvent to make it easier to apply. Then when you apply more (second layer) some if not all of the original layer will be re-dissolved to and spread about more. I can see a case for increased material density within the surface texture but not necessarily *Thicker*.

If you look at the wax on your paint as dirt on your shoe sole (bare with me), then if you put more dirt on and scrape it back to the tread then you have just compacted more material into the same tread space. But you have still levelled it off to the same height until you reach the point where you can get no more in. You may also have got some bits that you missed the first time around by applying at a different angle. So layering possibly makes the wax (or sealant) layer more homogenous but not necessarily thicker.

Alternatively. A Silicon wafers are usually highly polished, you may fill the surface up with one layer so a second layer has little or no effect.

It would also be a lot easier to get a homogenous layer on something the size of a wafer compared with a car panel. That may be why you SEE a difference on a car.

Just a few things that i thought made sense.


----------



## Gruffs

Sorry,

I should add that this is a great thread and it is great to see some scientific testing going on here.

We must remember though that these results only suggest that Waxes/Sealants do not layer within the context of this set of experiments.

Thanks very much to the OP.


----------



## caledonia

As for sealant yes it is possible for some layering to take place. But because most sealants and waxes have a higher reflective index, than nature well finished clear coat. Then you are masking or muting the finish. Sealants or LSP in general are only protecting what you have already created. So in short if you layer up a sealant you are increasing the reflective rating each time. EG 2+2.

On the subject of covalent bonding. I would like someone to explain how this is possible to create this bond by mearly rubbing an LSP. over the surface of your car.??

Even if your car was negatively charges and you then tried to apply a positively charge LSP. Or the oppisite. You would still have to displace or add an atom in the process, to create covalent bonding. How can this be possible by meary rubbing the cars finish?? 
Gordon.


----------



## Dodo Factory

Rob at G-Techniq mentioned something about hydroxyl(?) bonding, info on his website or something. I think only he can explain. I've been told off for asking too many questions on another thread... Gordon, you're the nominated product inquisitor now


----------



## caledonia

I have always had a very inquisitive nature. But deal with cold hard facts.

I have been very fortunate i having spent some considerable time With the OP, as you can see from is first post. There was a very extensive tour and varying demonstration given and where I already new a lot of the marketing Blurb. As in a deep shine. Which can be possible, as in you cant have depth due to absorption and a reflection. The most fascinating feature of the day was the RI rating of clear coats in comparison to LSPs. Covalent bonding was also demonstrated in one of the labs, as well as Teflon coatings and eventually bonding various coatings to products that are more prone to resist.

But like any other thread on DW this one only covers Thicknesses not durability. But in the search to increase the thickness there are certain down falls associated. As in increased RI rating.

But it is all good and very interesting.


----------



## Dodo Factory

Good man, Gordon.

It is certainly funny to watch gloss go down after more product is applied... you'd think it would make it shinier, but there's always that trade off with look vs protection


----------



## caledonia

This is eventually the challenge laid down to all LSP manufacturers. Fined the right balance and thats the golden egg. :thumb:

Durability with long lasting good looks.


----------



## Amused

caledonia said:


> As for sealant yes it is possible for some layering to take place. But because most sealants and waxes have a higher reflective index, than nature well finished clear coat. Then you are masking or muting the finish. Sealants or LSP in general are only protecting what you have already created. So in short if you layer up a sealant you are increasing the reflective rating each time. EG 2+2.
> 
> On the subject of covalent bonding. I would like someone to explain how this is possible to create this bond by mearly rubbing an LSP. over the surface of your car.??
> 
> Even if your car was negatively charges and you then tried to apply a positively charge LSP. Or the oppisite. You would still have to displace or add an atom in the process, to create covalent bonding. How can this be possible by meary rubbing the cars finish??
> Gordon.


Getting to the party late...

I don't know how sound my basic chemistry is now, but one of the first things I learned was that "like dissolves like". So, taking this to the simplest of levels, I don't know if layering is all that effective...I'm implying more than a couple of coats for coverage. And, since the thickness of an individual layer is so thin, I wonder now much remains of the original layer after another coat is applied. I'm no chemist, but this is something that I've pondered since getting into detailing.

As for Gordon's question, I don't know if it's necessary for anything but 2 atoms being in proximity of each other for a covalent bond to form. I'm sure there are certain environments/conditions that make for ideal bonding though. 
What I would like to know is which elements/molecules in automotive paint are being targeted for these bonds to form with LSPs. There must be some commonalities if an LSP is to be able to bond with various formulas of paint. Tell me the secret!


----------



## VALE TUDO

another F N awesome thread


----------



## Flakey

Rise undead! what an epic thread. No more layering a wax over a sealant for me. Just one coat of either.


----------

