# Gtechniq c1 VS OPTI COAT 2.0.



## Aderet (Dec 11, 2012)

hello (-:
first of all i have to say that English is not my first language.
i am planning a project during the weekend on my 2006 Citroen c4.
the plan is to end the project with paint coating.
i am debating between 2 options.
my first option is the "optimum opti coat 2.0" and the second is "gtechniq c1"
i understand that the C1 will be better on resistant to swirls,my question is how much better.
my main concern about the "Gtechniq c1" is that i believe he will be much harder to apply then the OPTI COAT.i know that the C1 is not a very "forgiven" to any application mistake.
what do you say? Gtechniq c1 or the OPTI COAT 2.0?
thank you.


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

Can you tell me where you heard C1 was harder then Opticoat as Opticoat has hardness of up to 9H after 30 days depending on paint its going on.

I would have to go Opti-Coat 2.0 but double coat it.

here is my you tube chanel http://www.youtube.com/user/BespokeCarCare

There is videos on there of C1 and Opti-coat and many other sealants against chemicals Opti-coat came top for resistance to wide range of chemicals.

C1 came middle of all sealants tested.

After 12 months on my car Opti-coat was still there.

Here is a video of Opti-coat after 18 months on friends car.






I would top Opti-coat with sonax BSD this will stop any water etching problems.


----------



## caledonia (Sep 13, 2008)

Being right down the middle here. Both products have plus and minus points. 
Opti coat 2 will over the coarse of time out live C1. But will require a longer period to gain it full hardness and chemical resistance. It also does not release dirt or grim as readily as C1. And is more prone to hold onto this and a hand wash is required to remove. On a plus point what you get with opti coat is the same from start to finish and there is very little drop back of the coating performance.

C1 on the other hand is not what is class as a workable substrate and relies on it slick nature to protect from wash marring not it hardness. There are two version available and dependant on whether you are approved or not determines the version you get. This is mainly down to application techniques and having the correct condition to apply the approved version. Which can be tricky. 

The slick nature of C1 will aid in the removal and shedding of grime and grit on the panel. Not grit means no marring and the slick nature of the product reduces friction again reducing the risk. 

There is very little to notice in looks between the two. So it is as much as what you are comfortable in using or what suites the owners vehicle and his wash techniques also. Also remember opti coat requires very little to no maintenance to safe guard the coating also.


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

caledonia said:


> Being right down the middle here. Both products have plus and minus points.
> Opti coat 2 will over the coarse of time out live C1. But will require a longer period to gain it full hardness and chemical resistance. It also does not release dirt or grim as readily as C1. And is more prone to hold onto this and a hand wash is required to remove. On a plus point what you get with opti coat is the same from start to finish and there is very little drop back of the coating performance.
> 
> C1 on the other hand is not what is class as a workable substrate and relies on it slick nature to protect from wash marring not it hardness. There are two version available and dependant on whether you are approved or not determines the version you get. This is mainly down to application techniques and having the correct condition to apply the approved version. Which can be tricky.
> ...


They actually Recommend to top C1 with Exo V2 now as C1 does not seem to have as good hydrophobic properties as old version.


----------



## caledonia (Sep 13, 2008)

Goodfella36 said:


> They actually Recommend to top C1 with Exo V2 now as C1 does not seem to have as good hydrophobic properties as old version.


I left that one for you. Open door as it where. :lol:
But dont get me started on the pencil hardness test please and that goes for them all.


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

caledonia said:


> I left that one for you. Open door as it where. :lol:
> But dont get me started on the pencil hardness test please and that goes for them all.


Why I did mention dependant on paint type lol but at least Opti-coat have tired to back up there claims with with independent lab testing while others just say but don't back up any claims. but yes pencil hardness test does not prove a lot in real world and word scratch resistance should be banned.

Though you did see pics after 12 months of the car how some marks had actually been reduced from being purposefully put in as the coat wore down the marks did was interesting.

Still Coatings are moving on weekly it seems wont be long before they get a steady 5 micron increase in thickness and less problems with water etching.

Though I have found Sonas BSD really does help on top of all coatings to help stop this water problems more so then the manufactures own versions.

http://www.optimumcarcare.com.au/product/13/about_opti-coat_paint_protection.html


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

No point posting that test Lee, No one understands that the test used there uses a 1mm spherical tip to penetrate right through to the base underneath, not 'scratch' as you would think (try scratch your paint with a fat ball point pen lol). Sounds cool until you actually look into it..... And not all vital info given that's required by the Standard like what thickness was used. These aren't tested on car paint either..... 

Most important thing, *YOU MUST ALSO COMPARE APPLES WITH APPLES!!!* You don't need me to tell you that though. 

Same goes with Pencil Hardness. There's lots of different standards for that one test. The Australian standard doesn't use any weights or machine, just use your hand to do it. Other Standards use 500g, 750g, and 1000g weights. Obviously a ton of variables there too.

PM me your email address, I'll send you some Standards to look at. Very interesting stuff! Got me some test panels here and I'm waiting on some test equipment for some 'real world' testing. Should be extremely interesting to see how manufacturers claims (often done to an International Standard) differ from the real world etc.


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

-Raven- said:


> No point posting that test Lee, No one understands that the test used there uses a 1mm spherical tip to penetrate right through to the base underneath, not 'scratch' as you would think (try scratch your paint with a fat ball point pen lol). Sounds cool until you actually look into it..... And not all vital info given that's required by the Standard like what thickness was used. These aren't tested on car paint either.....
> 
> Most important thing, *YOU MUST ALSO COMPARE APPLES WITH APPLES!!!* You don't need me to tell you that though.
> 
> ...


Cheers Matty I think I was more trying to get at at least they try to show something while a lot say lots but prove nothing.

Looking forward to seeing what you find out have a feeling it might disappoint a few though :thumb:


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Yeah for sure. Should be fun seeing what it takes to replicate test results, and if that is even possible! Funny when you ask these people how to do it, they don't answer you....


----------



## Aderet (Dec 11, 2012)

thank you for your replay.
i think it's going to be opti coat 2.0..
if i am doing some double coat on opti coat 2.0..do i have to Wait between the 2 layers?
do i have to Wait to let it cure before i can drive ?how about exposing to rain?
what is the different between the opti coat 2.0 and the professional version?
i know that there is a different on the thickness of the layer and that the 2.0 is easier to apply..anything Else?

thank you guys for your kind replay..


----------



## Andrew Byrne (Dec 12, 2013)

Hello I'm new here this my first post, I'm just wondering if I give my car a double coat of opti coat 2.0 do I apply the second coat straight after the first coat or do I leave the first coat time to cure.


----------



## sm81 (May 14, 2011)

Goodfella36 said:


> Still Coatings are moving on weekly it seems wont be long before they get a steady 5 micron increase in thickness and less problems with water etching.
> 
> Though I have found Sonas BSD really does help on top of all coatings to help stop this water problems more so then the manufactures own versions.


Yes I have notice that.


----------



## Beau Technique (Jun 21, 2010)

I think you need to ask when copying text next time sm81.


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

You still banging on with this BS Matty?

This is the guy that claims to know everything and anything about chemistry, but when Dr Ghodoussi posts some pretty basic info, you disappear up your own backside and change the topic.

Amazing some people.

PS - give me a 1mm tungsten carbide tip and 5 minutes alone with your Lexus and see how it holds up...



-Raven- said:


> No point posting that test Lee, No one understands that the test used there uses a 1mm spherical tip to penetrate right through to the base underneath, not 'scratch' as you would think (try scratch your paint with a fat ball point pen lol). Sounds cool until you actually look into it..... And not all vital info given that's required by the Standard like what thickness was used. These aren't tested on car paint either.....
> 
> Most important thing, *YOU MUST ALSO COMPARE APPLES WITH APPLES!!!* You don't need me to tell you that though.
> 
> ...


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Here's the distributor of Opti-Coat now! Loves the attention, but hates when people give the facts! :lol:

Nice one Joel! Tell the truth mate! A 'David' made one single post only (if that was him and not you bull****ting on your own forum) and never seen again..... Didn't answer my questions either..... 

So you still don't think a silica coating can be permanent? 

I don't mind questioning things mate, I'm not trying to sell products like you. 



.


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

blake_jl said:


> PS - give me a 1mm tungsten carbide tip and 5 minutes alone with your Lexus and see how it holds up...


It's going to take a bit more than the 1100g like Opti-Coat tested with this to get through the nice thick factory clearcoat! 










I'll take nice thick factory clear over 1 or 2 micron of coating in a test any day, and if you told the truth about factory clear, you wouldn't sell anything now, would you? :wave:

Lets play a game. You post how we can replicate the test results, and I'll post the Standards used so everyone can play along at home. :thumb:


----------



## Porta (Jan 3, 2007)

Easy now, guys. No need to trigger each other.


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

You have the standards in front of you, but you still don't understand how it works?

The test doesn't require the to
tip to completely pass through the coating. Only "penetrate" it. 

The tip is also 1mm wide to make the test less sensitive and easier to measure. Pretty logical stuff.

No one has time (or inclination) to respond to all your dribble all the time so I will leave it at that.


----------



## Aderet (Dec 11, 2012)

Aderet said:


> thank you for your replay.
> i think it's going to be opti coat 2.0..
> if i am doing some double coat on opti coat 2.0..do i have to Wait between the 2 layers?
> do i have to Wait to let it cure before i can drive ?how about exposing to rain?
> ...


can you guys help me? thank you


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

Aderet said:


> can you guys help me? thank you


12 hours before it gets wet is recommended some say you can get it wet quicker but i prefer to leave any sealant i use as long as possible before getting wet.

Don't wash car for 7 days

Opti-coat pro is just slightly thicker coating and flashes quicker.

As for double coating its something I practised a lot and without sounding rude i dont want to give all my secrets away but there is information by others on the net a search would help.


----------



## evotuning (Oct 16, 2009)

> Though I have found Sonas BSD really does help on top of all coatings to help stop this water problems more so then the manufactures own versions.


Could You say a bit more about it ? Did You apply BSD on fresh layer of coatings (what coatings did You test with BSD ? ), or after dedicated topper, like Reload or C2 ?


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

blake_jl said:


> You have the standards in front of you, but you still don't understand how it works?
> 
> The test doesn't require the to
> tip to completely pass through the coating. Only "penetrate" it.
> ...


BS Joel. They test to failure, then take off 100g and try again. If they don't get a failure with up to 2100g, then the results will be 'greater than 2000g'.

The Standard also states it *shall* contain the thickness of the coating under test. Something conveniently missing from your report. How can anyone compare apples to apples when we are not given all the information required by the Standard? :tumbleweed:

Now come on Joel, how can us as consumers replicate these results mate? How many layers of opti-coat must we use on our cars? 5? 10? Because sure as sh!t we certainly not going to get near it with the 5ml or so everyone uses on a whole car now, are we? How about the customers that get the 10ml pro version applied for warranty?

Is this all hype?


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

evotuning said:


> Could You say a bit more about it ? Did You apply BSD on fresh layer of coatings (what coatings did You test with BSD ? ), or after dedicated topper, like Reload or C2 ?


I wont say names as i was issued a solicitor letter by one company last year when doing all them test all on the sealants so I am a bit more careful now.

Lets say i covered most of the common ones used on DW.

First test was bare panel and applied multiple topper products on there own to see which would leave the largest water marks after rain then sun.

Then applied over varied coatings same manner,

As when I used no toppers at all for 12 months on that test I did I was left with some quite deep water etchings in the paint which is expected minerals attracting minerals and all that.

But even with toppers I was getting water etchings with some of the coatings.

BSD seemed to perform best but also there net protect one seemed very effective.

I don't top any sealant until after there full cure time so varies between manufactures but I would say best time would be after first wash.

Its something you can test yourself easy enough with different toppers though summer months make for better testing.

Its something ill be playing with more myself next year.

As my new car come in january will be having 3 coats of Opti-coat then 2 coats of nano and most likely bsd used every few washes.

Then depending on contamination will get a decontamination every 5-6 months and will do couple of washes with iron x soap.

Di water filter will be used for rinsing stage so not using towel it will not be machine polished for 2 years to show you can keep a daily driver virtually swirl free with right methods. without spending a fortune.


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

-Raven- said:


> BS Joel. They test to failure, then take off 100g and try again. If they don't get a failure with up to 2100g, then the results will be 'greater than 2000g'.
> 
> The Standard also states it *shall* contain the thickness of the coating under test. Something conveniently missing from your report. How can anyone compare apples to apples when we are not given all the information required by the Standard? :tumbleweed:
> 
> ...


Raven now me and you have lots of talks on coatings now i do see your side about these tests but as these are automotive standard then joel as such has tried to do the right thing and show some things while many manufactures state loads and show nothing at all hell recent conversation one claiming 10+ micron thick coating yet fail to back it up anywhere.

I don't think as such the standard automotive test can be quite suited to what we as detailers are wanting to know with a sharp point scratch etc

Now I am a fan of opticoat it does have couple of downsides but these can be avoided with right products.

we can talk about hardness etc but the average user still does not get what 9h really means this is something that needs to be talked about more mohs v pencil hardness people still get confused about that like we know a fingernail can scratch paint yet that is 2.5 on mohs scale a pencil is 2 to 3 on mohs scale so 9h is a bit confusing for people we need to get basics right before moving on.

Until all manufactures can agree on a standard test to use then I will still applaud the ones that at least try to show something.

Matty what test would you like to see being used for all manufactures you never know some might take it up but the fear for me is no one would like to look worse then the other so test results would not come out if that was so, its one thing I don't think will happen in this industry unless a home user tests them all with the right calibrated equipment.


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

For sure Lee.

The amount of product needed for a 10 micron thick coating (of anything) would be very surprising! You'd be looking at 1ml of coating per square meter for 1 micron thickness, not accounting for any losses like solvent evaporation what so ever! How many square meters of paint area on a car? 10 or so? (see why I question things like thickness ) Don't worry, I know exactly what product you're talking about, and questioned that one too lol! 

Yep both manufacturers and consumers seem to be hell bent on hardness. Should be fun testing all my heaps of different silica coatings and see where they stand compared to what they're advertised at! More interested in seeing what it takes to get to 'as advertised' though. 

For testing, the American Taber test would have to be the most appealing one I would think.

It's a very popular abrasion test, and seems to be most relevant for what we would want I would say. :thumb:


----------



## DJ X-Ray (Sep 2, 2012)

Accidentally thanked that post above..I'm sorry about that


----------



## Rascal_69 (Sep 20, 2009)

Pa coating that you's 2 are talking about with 10 plus thickness claim?


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Rascal_69 said:


> Pa coating that you's 2 are talking about with 10 plus thickness claim?


The claim made by them is 10-14um.

I'd love to see if it's achievable (I do have it as well and its good stuff), that's 10ml-14ml per 1 meter squared with not accounting for any losses what so ever. I don't think anyone is going to use the realistically 200ml+ on a single car to see those results.

Very nice product though :thumb:

(and I will say I am only aiming at 'marketing' not the products themselves, there's a massive difference )


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

Good to see you quoting me now Raven and adding some factual information about coating thickness.

With regards to what tests should be used, if that's the one you think should be used then buy the equipment and do it yourself with all your coatings you said you own.

No manufacturer owes you any explanation or data like you seem to think anyway.


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

blake_jl said:


> No manufacturer owes you any explanation or data like you seem to think anyway.


Actually they do, if a product maker makes claims they should be more than willing to back them up when asked about it, with test results from recognised bodies not just anecdotal evidence.

Modesta has claims of up to 10 microns, but whenever I've asked for someone to show ptg readings they get defensive or ignore me.

So you can understand why people pick holes in manufacturers claims.

It the coating side of LSPs theres a lot of bold claims but not much proof.


----------



## Alex L (Oct 25, 2005)

Heres a nice little video someone posted on the Polish Angel Facebook page:


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

blake_jl said:


> Good to see you quoting me now Raven and adding some factual information about coating thickness.
> 
> With regards to what tests should be used, if that's the one you think should be used then buy the equipment and do it yourself with all your coatings you said you own.
> 
> No manufacturer owes you any explanation or data like you seem to think anyway.


pity you won't do the same and provide us with some factual information about coating thickness you used, and how we can achieve the same results. :tumbleweed:

We all want the best out of the products that we as consumers spend our hard earned money on, and want them to live up to the hype of advertising. Is that too much to ask? 

If you want to spread it around, you got to be prepared to answer questions about it. Is it that you have no idea yourself? 

old photo but this should be enough to get me started


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

Alex L said:


> Actually they do, if a product maker makes claims they should be more than willing to back them up when asked about it, with test results from recognised bodies not just anecdotal evidence.


Hi Alex

I absolutely agree with you there. But what I am referring to is when a company does provide test results from a recognized body, and some forum troll tries to pick it apart THINKING they know better than the scientists who performed the test.

This is what I am referring to when I say no manufacturer owes an explanation.


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

Alex L said:


> Modesta has claims of up to 10 microns, but whenever I've asked for someone to show ptg readings they get defensive or ignore me.


I have no comment on any particular manufacturer here, but Raven quoted me almost word for word on this topic to make himself look clever. So you will also get no argument from me here either.


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

blake_jl said:


> Hi Alex
> 
> I absolutely agree with you there. But what I am referring to is when a company does provide test results from a recognized body, and some forum troll tries to pick it apart THINKING they know better than the scientists who performed the test.
> 
> This is what I am referring to when I say no manufacturer owes an explanation.


Call me what you like but nope, the tests are done on what they're given. Just want to know what we have to do to replicate the results, if that's even possible. You didn't get Opti-Coat tested on car paint, did you? :wave:

I have asked you a few times in this thread alone, still no answer... :tumbleweed:

The manufacturers, traders, and detailers that pay for the privilege to be on here to promote their products want to help out us consumers in getting the best out of their products, unlike you...

.


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

The test is not for you to replicate. It is for other manufacturers to replicate. You've been told this previously but it has to be repeated. Again.


----------



## Rascal_69 (Sep 20, 2009)

How many layers do I need to do so I whack my paint with lighter?


----------



## Aderet (Dec 11, 2012)

*Chemical guys ss6 over opti coat 2.0 .*

hello guys..:wave:
few weeks ago i finished my paint correction project with a layer of OPTI COAT 2.0 and it was not bad actually..and then some idiot in the parking lot rub/scratch my car door.. 
i can sure repair the local damage with some manual hand polish but i don't have another OPTI COAT 2.0 to add and i don't want to buy it only to coat one door. 
i don't want to polish the full door with a machine , only the scratch and then apply some protection on the door (protection on the correction area+the rest of the door). 
what i do have is a little amount of "chemical guys second skin (SS6) " that will be enough for the all door panel but not for more.
what is your opinion about a coat of "chemical SS6" over "opti coat " that will cover the local paint correction area + the rest of the door?
and what is your opinion on she same issue with a good paint sealant(CG jet seal 109 ) instead of the SS6 for that purpose .

thank you.


----------



## sm81 (May 14, 2011)

-Raven- said:


> If you want to spread it around, you got to be prepared to answer questions about it. Is it that you have no idea yourself?
> 
> old photo but this should be enough to get me started


Which one of those you prefer nowdays?


----------



## Aderet (Dec 11, 2012)

Opti coat 2.0. No doubt.


----------



## sm81 (May 14, 2011)

Aderet said:


> Opti coat 2.0. No doubt.


Was asking from Raven. Thanks for your opinion though.:thumb:


----------



## Goodfella36 (Jul 21, 2009)

sm81 said:


> Was asking from Raven. Thanks for your opinion though.:thumb:


Raven will give different answers depending on what you want from your coating as all coating have there merits and disadvantages which i am sure he will agree on his climate is different from uk so certain coatings benefit him more he does love his ADS though and zen zero

we have even been speaking about paint dyne etc recently and i am hoping he will be doing some interesting testing which i never got chance to finish


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

sm81 said:


> Which one of those you prefer nowdays?


Short version: Over all in the coating world, my favourites have got to be the PHPS coatings mate. Zen Xero, ArtDeRaven, ArtDeKeegan, Gyeon Q2 Mohs, etc. They truly are the perfect blend of awesome looks with durability to match! Still waiting to break out the G'Zox Hi-MOHS kit I just got! 

But like everything, depends on what you're after haha!


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Goodfella36 said:


> Raven will give different answers depending on what you want from your coating as all coating have there merits and disadvantages which i am sure he will agree on his climate is different from uk so certain coatings benefit him more he does love his ADS though and zen zero
> 
> we have even been speaking about paint dyne etc recently and i am hoping he will be doing some interesting testing which i never got chance to finish


Getting there Lee, just waiting on some more toys to turn up! :thumb:


----------



## Flakey (May 5, 2013)

Does Opti coat count as a PHPS coating?


----------



## -Raven- (Aug 26, 2010)

Flakey said:


> Does Opti coat count as a PHPS coating?


Nope. Completely different tech.

PHPS is the type of silica (per-hydro-poly-silazane) used.


----------



## sm81 (May 14, 2011)

-Raven- said:


> Short version: Over all in the coating world, my favourites have got to be the PHPS coatings mate. Zen Xero, ArtDeRaven, ArtDeKeegan, Gyeon Q2 Mohs, etc. They truly are the perfect blend of awesome looks with durability to match! Still waiting to break out the G'Zox Hi-MOHS kit I just got!


Goodfella&Raven: Have you tested ADS Raven chemical/marr resistance against Opticoat?


----------

