# Nano Future!! Gtechnik vs Nanolex



## Vyker (Sep 17, 2008)

We've been using waxes and sealants for years! [or 9months in my case  ]

Is nano technology going to be the end of LSP's as we know them today?

Will Nano products end up mainstream?

Are the likes of Nanolex and Gtechnik the future Zaino and Swissvax?

Your thoughts....


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

My honest opinion is the technology will most definatley be the future, however current wax/sealant companies mentioned will no doubt bring out their own versions at some point.


----------



## spitfire (Feb 10, 2007)

I think there's a bit to go on paint technology aswell as the nano advances. Exciting times ahead I think.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

With our (the UK's) history of adopting newer and better technologies, i expect we will be scraping our Collinite out of our tins for a few years yet.

You just can't convince some people who are only just starting to use calculators.

Yes, they will become more commonplace and displace waxes/trad. sealants. But, only after the traditional train of thought has been changed.


----------



## perm (Oct 26, 2005)

I think both type of products will live side by side.... the nano type products are great for daily driven cars where the owners wants long lasting protection and hassle free easy to clean surface which require only the mildest of shampoo to keep clean.

They are not very suitable for people with OCD…. as they do not need topping up and are not designed to have other products layered over them. Hence no need to worry about :
What Shampoo 
What Glaze
What Wax
What Quick detailers
What Sealants toppers ect

All you need to do is wash and dry your car to get it back into top condition. Some may find this approach just a little boring….. Hence why there will always be a market for the traditional products.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

Do you not think that our OCD revolves around cleanliness so the traditional method will become an unecessary chore?

I want a clean, shiny car. If i can get it without spending 8 hours working very hard......all the better.

I do have other things/hobbies to do. I just can't bare a dirty car.


----------



## gt5500 (Aug 6, 2008)

Gruffs said:


> Do you not think that our OCD revolves around cleanliness so the traditional method will become an unecessary chore?
> 
> I want a clean, shiny car. If i can get it without spending 8 hours working very hard......all the better.
> 
> I do have other things/hobbies to do. I just can't bare a dirty car.


I think you will always get people that will enjoy detailing their cars.


----------



## perm (Oct 26, 2005)

Gruffs said:


> Do you not think that our OCD revolves around cleanliness so the traditional method will become an unecessary chore?
> 
> I want a clean, shiny car. If i can get it without spending 8 hours working very hard......all the better.
> 
> I do have other things/hobbies to do. I just can't bare a dirty car.


If that is the case the the Nano type products would be a good choice.

All I am saying is if you enjoy "playing" with different products and combinations and like spending lots of time detailing your car then the Nano products may not be the best choice for you.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

If you want ultimate durability, spray another layer of clearcoat on your car.

The fact is that paint technology is a bigger 'threat'. But even then, people will want to layer the paint with a sacrificial layer of product that may also make it look a bit nicer.

Also, the covalent silane technology used by G-Techniq and Nanolex has been around for quite a while - it is making it user-friendly that is the problem. And the performance offered by non-covalent sealants can be extremely good anyway, so it depends on what you want in a product. Does the cost justify it? Is it easy to use? How much durability do I really need? A permanent bond with your paint or glass may not suit all amateur applications.

As Epoch says, manufacturers (like us) always keep an open mind re the latest technology and may bring out our own covalent products. But it is best to look at each product individually rather than lumping them together. For example, Red Mist contains an ingredient of the type found in 'nano' products, but we don't go around shouting 'nano' from the roof tops. We just let people find that it works quite nicely 

We may end up making Rainforest Rub v4 fully covalent and no-one would ever know.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

perm said:


> If that is the case the the Nano type products would be a good choice.
> 
> All I am saying is if you enjoy "playing" with different products and combinations and like spending lots of time detailing your car then the Nano products may not be the best choice for you.


Don't get me wrong. I enjoy a good detail.

But, i also like playing my guitar and a little bit of photography too.

Sometimes, you just want to wash it in 10 mins and still be happy with the results.

I guess i begrudge my car the amount of time it takes to keep it clean. Even though i love cleaning it and having it clean. If Nanolex/GTechnique can free up my time, i'll be using it.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> If you want ultimate durability, spray another layer of clearcoat on your car.
> 
> The fact is that paint technology is a bigger 'threat'. But even then, people will want to layer the paint with a sacrificial layer of product that may also make it look a bit nicer.
> 
> ...


So the reality is Dom that the advancing tech will be adopted even by those who think they are using a trad. wax?

P.S I've got a pot of RR on my desk and i can't pinpoint what it smells of. Can you enlighten me?


----------



## AndyC (Oct 25, 2005)

The Saab will be getting Nanolex'd within the next 4-6 weeks as part of its annual detail. It's covered 38,500 miles in less than 10 months and I need something which means it can wash back to looking good quickly and easily without the need for a religious weekly wash.

The 205 will continue to wear whatever paste wax takes my fancy - no longlife stuff needed at all.


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

I don't think nano sealants/crystalline coatings will ever replace the need for a nice wax, but as a business it's nice to have the options to offer the customer.
I have done a fair amount of Nanolex applications lately, but the vehicle I have just finished had Vintage applied because the customer prefered the appearance of a wax.
For me the van has a nano sealant applied because it makes life easier and less timing consuming in it's maintenance.


----------



## Mr Face (Jan 22, 2009)

For my little two peneth :

The market is big enough for everyone and I personally do not see Nano taking over the world. I have had one of our three motors Nanolex'd and for the reason we had it done are as pleased as punch. The Land Cruiser you may remember has now been sign written and as such our logic was you can not run around in a sign written car if it's dirty :wall::wall: as it sets the wrong impression of the company involved. Nanolex will give us the opportunity to give it a quick (less than 15 minute ) touchless wash and brush up every weekend. Something if you have ever tried to clean a LandCruiser isnt the easiest of tasks even for the fit.

Our other two vehicles WILL NOT get the Nano treatment as they do not get the hard life the LC gets and I take great pleasure in spending the time when I can making them look sweet. 

If in any doubt, ask yourself a question I asked Florian. " is there 'anything' I can do to add a little bling to the LC's Nanolex finish ?? the answer was no, and I have to admit almost put me off. 

Given this, I have to believe I am not the only one who likes to 'play a little' try new things and old, & see what they can get out of thier paintwork by applying different applications.

Like I said, my little two peneth.:thumb:


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

perm said:


> I think both type of products will live side by side.... the nano type products are great for daily driven cars where the owners wants long lasting protection and hassle free easy to clean surface which require only the mildest of shampoo to keep clean.
> 
> They are not very suitable for people with OCD…. as they do not need topping up and are not designed to have other products layered over them. Hence no need to worry about :
> What Shampoo
> ...


Spot on, mate and I totally agree with all of that ^^^ :thumb: There is a clear and defined market for both types of product and I see no reason why they can't co-exist happily.

To use an analogy, many would say CDs were the death of the LP, but not really - they still thrived with the vinyl enthusiasts.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

Pit Viper said:


> Spot on, mate and I totally agree with all of that ^^^ :thumb: There is a clear and defined market for both types of product and I see no reason why they can't co-exist happily.
> 
> To use an analogy, many would say CDs were the death of the LP, but not really - they still thrived with the vinyl enthusiasts.


CD's were the death of the Cassette though PV


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Gruffs said:


> So the reality is Dom that the advancing tech will be adopted even by those who think they are using a trad. wax?
> 
> P.S I've got a pot of RR on my desk and i can't pinpoint what it smells of. Can you enlighten me?


If the current market is anything to go by, where 'waxes' are often sophisticated chemical soups and some hi-tech products fail to live up to their promises, it would suggest that it is best to go on a 'product by product' basis than believe what the marketers tell you. Some products marketed as simple waxes in the future could be just as sophisticated as those that openly profess to being at the cutting edge of technology.

There are some great products out there, that really do work, by G-Techniq and Nanolex, for example. But the market will not be confined to these two players and rival products may offer similar characteristics - whether they are marketed in that manner or not.

It's really a question of interrogating the product at hand, rather than making an assumption based on product type or marketing spiel. We made a few assumptions about products based on what competitors were marketing them as, then raised an eyebrow or two when we realised the scientific reality.

Car care is car care, and the higher the tech the better in many cases. But whilst some people obsess about durability, technology also allows products to be easier to use, cheaper to buy, safer to use, better for the environment or whatever. Every product on the market is likely to benefit... even the simpler waxes.

I think you will find the common or garden waxes starting to perform more like the hi-tech wonderproducts, and the hi-tech wonderproducts becoming as easy to use as the common or garden waxes  There will be a bit of a meeting in the middle, probably.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

The only thing I want to last a year on my car is a sealant for the alloys I always end up putting something on my car every 3-4 months.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

AndyC said:


> The Saab will be getting Nanolex'd within the next 4-6 weeks as part of its annual detail. It's covered 38,500 miles in less than 10 months and I need something which means it can wash back to looking good quickly and easily without the need for a religious weekly wash.
> 
> The 205 will continue to wear whatever paste wax takes my fancy - no longlife stuff needed at all.


Ruddy hell thats a lot of driving :car:


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

going to slightly throw my toys out of the pram here. nanolex is nothing like c1. if anyone wants to run a side by side half half or just take a look at the products then i can arrange something.

that our products both take advantage of new work in nano chemistry tells you nothing about the characteristics of the product. there are tonnes of nano products on the market but lumping us all in the same boat is a bit like saying that because we breathe air and have hair on our head then we must be the same as everthing else that breathes air and has hair on its head.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

loboil said:


> going to slightly throw my toys out of the pram here. nanolex is nothing like c1. if anyone wants to run a side by side half half or just take a look at the products then i can arrange something.
> 
> that our products both take advantage of new work in nano chemistry tells you nothing about the characteristics of the product. there are tonnes of nano products on the market but lumping us all in the same boat is a bit like saying that because we breathe air and have hair on our head then we must be the same as everthing else that breathes air and has hair on its head.


I think Nanolex and GTechniq have been grouped together because they are new types of coating and both are different from the norm rather than any similarity between the two.

However, if you want to detail my car and do a side-by-side comparison then i'm up for that


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

Gruffs said:


> I think Nanolex and GTechniq have been grouped together because they are new types of coating and both are different from the norm rather than any similarity between the two.
> 
> However, if you want to detail my car and do a side-by-side comparison then i'm up for that


yes that's understandable although it is a mistake to think that they are the same. these types of coatings will vary much more than say traditional waxes for example.

if you want to bring your car here with its paintwork already corrected then we would be happy to put c1 on one half of it :thumb:


----------



## perm (Oct 26, 2005)

great offer....... would be good to see a side by side comparision of both products. 

Is there any plans to launch a C1 type product could be made into a formula suitable for use by amateurs ?


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Cost is the major issue IMHO. How many applications can I get out of a £15 tub of FK1000p compared to these latest products?

I can get 6 months durability from alot of products now and that is great. Maybe this will be 1/2 to 1/4 of what you may get from these latest products but that isn't worth the huge premium for me right now.

I do like and use GTechniq C4 for my trim, it is super expensive compared to other trim dressings but it is a significant pain keep grills dressed all the time so was worth it.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

With respect to both GT and Nx, the use of the "N" word is misleading, but not in an intentional manner. Nano only describes a scale of molecule size, which Auto-balm already usurps by creating a film on the Ånsgtrom level.
So, try not and get too hung up on the use of the "Nano inside" phrase - this is really market speak, and as Rob and Dom have somewhat pointed out, it's the chemistry that matters, not the scale.

Outside of detailing circles, numerous companies could legitimately use nano this, and nano that, but how then do you differentiate between them?


----------



## perm (Oct 26, 2005)

For the the reason GT and Nx get classified together is that they both share simialr properties. As far as I know they both deliver.....

1) Long lasting protection
2) Glass like shine
3) A surface that is easier to clean
4) Self cleaning properties
5) Tend not to be topped with other products
6) Based on similar chemial principals of covalent bonds

I am sure there is whole lot of things which are different about them also....... would be good to see that information posted.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Do they offer self-cleaning properties in themselves, or is it just that the car is easier to clean after application? If so, 1-4 could apply to Zaino, Duragloss or another sealant.

As for 5), they tend not to be, but you could always top them with something if you wanted. It doesn't really define them as a class.

And as for 6), certainly covalency seems to be the main class distinguisher. But Rob claims that G Techniq C1 is quite different from Nanolex for paint finishes so you really need one or both manufacturers to establish what commonality there is. It is too difficult to guess...

The point is, they seem to be similar and 'of a type' and maybe they should be lumped together just as Zaino/Duragloss tend to be, if it helps the market understand the broad position, but in many ways it is useless to hunt for a more focussed definition. All products should really be treated in isolation. Just because a horse and a dog both have four legs and a tail doesn't mean they are both the same  And when the canine marketing board claim that the have a dog that neighs and enter it into the grand national, you know confusion will result. So maybe the hunt for a specific category is a red herring - although 'covalency' (if proven in the way a product works) may be useful in definition terms


----------



## Dream Machines (Mar 13, 2006)

Thanks to Dodo, loboil and PJS for their input
I am a G Techniq C1 user.
applying the product is a total no brainer. anyone can put this on.

Though many say not too, I tend to multi coat c1 on top of itself after each five hour curing period for more and more shine
The price is not so bad when 20ml of it will coat the trim, wiper arms and paint on an Astra VXR 2 door and 25 to 30ml will coat an aussie Ford Falcon or Holden Commodore 

You have two choices for putting it on.
Put 1 to 2ml on a make up removal pad spread it around then leave it to bond and cure (not on textured surfaces) smooth plastics, urethane's and other trim, rubber seals and tonneau covers for a nice rich satin black shine

same as above but after 10 to 30 seconds, buff in with a microfibre towel and then finish with another towel for a clean glossy surface.
Honestly it is so easy to apply. It's like putting some methylated spirits on a generic make up removal pad and spreading it around
it spreads incredibly easy

So to say they need to make it easier for amateurs to apply, well it already is
those who wish to put some waxes on top of it most certainly can. Treat it just like it's paintwork. clay, polish, wax, seal it, QD it, spray wax it. whatever. 

In my testing so far, it has self cleaning properties and the best part - it makes the paint harder to scratch and makes black paints even darker and optically better

The reason I now use it exclusively to protect the paint, trim, fabrics, rubber seals, dashboards, door cards and other surfaces) is because the protection is out of this world, cleaning the car is almost not needed and my customers are very fussy, just like me (I'm pedantic) 
they want their car looking perfect but also for the results to last for a very long time and so washing is so much easier.


----------



## perm (Oct 26, 2005)

If only C1 was available to the non proffesional..... I am sure we would be reading more postive reports like above. 

Loboil.... any chance of a change in policy or a new formulal being made for non proffesional ?


----------



## gt5500 (Aug 6, 2008)

Dream Machines said:


> The reason I now use it exclusively to protect the paint, trim, fabrics, rubber seals, dashboards, door cards and other surfaces) is because the protection is out of this world, cleaning the car is almost not needed and my customers are very fussy, just like me (I'm pedantic)
> they want their car looking perfect but also for the results to last for a very long time and so washing is so much easier.


Any pics of it on exterior surfaces, I have never heard of it being used on dashboards before.


----------

