# Sealant from Germany, does anyone has experience?



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

Hey Guys,

a buddy of mine had ordered a nanotechnology sealant in Germany and he's flattered so far (3 months now). That stuff is supposed to last at least a year, has anyone else tried it? As far as I know the brand has just recently started to sell outside Germany, but maybe anyone knows more... The brand is called "Nanolex".

TIA

Frank


----------



## Bulla2000 (Jun 5, 2007)

I´m from germany, hold my ears open, but never heard from that.


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

Possibly a similar product to G-techniq, don't know.


----------



## Jaygo (Apr 7, 2008)

A few more know about it now 

Welcome to the Forum with your first post.

It doesn't seem very cheap and makes similar claims to other products.

IIRC best to apply indoors and avoid getting wet for 12 hours - I didn't bother reading further.


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

interesting first post.....

might be worth introducing yourself in the other forum rather than a first post with a reference to a 'wonder product', as some might interpret that as spam....


----------



## tdm (Feb 2, 2007)

interesting:thumb:


----------



## mark1319 (Sep 9, 2007)

Their site for those interested


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

actually I'm looking for something else cause this is to difficult for me to apply I guess...
I was looking at the G-techniq stuff but they state that their sealant contains wax, and that was not what I was looking for...
Any suggestions for other products? experiences?
I did not intent to Spam or whatever, just curious cause I was looking for sealants and found this forum and after I read a couple of posts I thought it might be worth asking...

And sorry about not introducing, that was sort of rude, I apologize  
As I stated I live in the greater London area, but I'm natively from Switzerland. I work @ a larger bank in London and have always bean obsessed with cars, right now I'm glad to push a 07' Porsche Cayenne S.

Thanks for your replies

Frank


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Bigpikle said:


> interesting first post.....
> 
> might be worth introducing yourself in the other forum rather than a first post with a reference to a 'wonder product', as some might interpret that as spam....


LOL, about as subtle as Barry Scott saying:

"Hi guys, a friend of mine was cleaning his kitchen the other day with something called Cillit Bang the other day. I wonder if you've heard how good it is and how you all should buy some very soon, like tomorrow if possible?"



I love the whole 'nano' thing as well.  There are guys like G-Techniq who seem to be doing some interesting stuff at a pretty advanced level in Japan... but then there seem to be a raft of companies now slapping 'nano' on to any old product like a 'turbo' badge on an 80's hoover. I mean, do people know what 'nano' means? You know it's size... OK... can you refer to any particle that's sub-micron as nano? Or does it really have to be a nanometer in size? What about the US govt's interest in regulation of 'true' nano products? The health risks? The possibilities? What products in your home already have nano technology in (yes, the Ipod nano can make that claim). It's a great subject but I fear it'll just become a cheap badge  Shame.


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

Dom - dont forget you already do a nano product........















Banano Armour :lol:


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

DetailFreak said:


> I was looking at the G-techniq stuff but they state that their sealant contains wax, and that was not what I was looking for...


Not sure it contains wax, it forms a crystalline coating that is extremely hard, seen a sample thats fully cured and it is like a sheet of thin crystal like material.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

LOL, well you could argue that some of the ingredients within it are sub-micron.

Maybe I'm being too harsh on Frank. He wrote like a German and he claimed he was from Greater London. Anyone who spells and writes English as well as Frank couldn't be from Greater London.  Frank, if you're just a swiss chap and genuine, I apologise. My moderator's sixth sense (from another forum) sometimes goes overboard.


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

Ok, just to make it clear, I did not intent to Spam or advertise.
I already used Liquid Glass (had it done at a retailer) and Swissvax (dito) I mean the time that stuff lasted was ok, but I heard that there are existing products that last much longer and also protect the paint better! I can only repeat that I didn't want to advertise, this was only supposed to be an example!

What do you people use/prefer/recommend?


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Gleammachine said:


> Not sure it contains wax, it forms a crystalline coating that is extremely hard, seen a sample thats fully cured and it is like a sheet of thin crystal like material.


Let's not forget that everybody with an 80s Casio watch was wearing nano technology back in the day. And you're probably reading this now thanks to it. LCD = liquid crystals = nanotechnology (AFAIK). 

The German website had a lot of pseudo-science in it, but not enough meat really. There are lots of different nano substances, fullerenes etc. Maybe I missed the interesting stuff.


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

The Zaino & Duragloss system are worth a look for durability and finish.

Waxes will give great results but need regular top-ups every couple of months to obtain optimum results.


If your ever in the Lakeside/Thurrock area I'd be happy to have a look and advise you better.


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

I read what the wrote on the .co.uk site and on the German site, then I did some research on google and what I found about the technology is more or less what they say. I mean thats ok for me and the information you get is fine, but still I would like something to compare, and others don't even show references + they are even more expensive.
Despite that, what do you use right now/in general?

@ gleammachine: you are a professional, what do you use?


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> Let's not forget that everybody with an 80s Casio watch was wearing nano technology back in the day. And you're probably reading this now thanks to it. LCD = liquid crystals = nanotechnology (AFAIK)


I feel educated now thanks. :lol:


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

G-Techniq seems to be the most popular and credible supplier of 'nano' products to the detailing market at the moment.

I would be very suspicious of most other products making 'nano' claims. Some may be genuine, but I fear many others are simply on the bandwagon.

Whether the ease of use in terms of application, the cost (proper nano products like fullerites are too expensive to chuck wholesale into car care products at the moment, it would be like grinding down diamonds and spraying them on a car as clearcoat) and other issues allow products that truly harness this technology to supercede traditional sealants and waxes remains to be seen. But good luck to it. Look up 'fullerenes' in wikipedia and you can see the potential is there.

Maybe in years to come, all cars will have a genuine fullerene/fullerite clearcoat. But then we'll still wash it and wax it as it'll still get dirty. Just not as badly. So washing will take half the time and swirls may become a thing of the past. So we'll just be adding our glazes or whatever and trying to outdo each other in terms of shine


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

DetailFreak said:


> I read what the wrote on the .co.uk site and on the German site, then I did some research on google and what I found about the technology is more or less what they say. I mean thats ok for me and the information you get is fine


Erm, this is the problem.

They talk around what is in the products, but don't say what actually _is._

There is a lot of scientific waffle on there, going into great details about what nano technology is. But they don't mention anything about whether the products are stuffed full of carbon nanotubes or whatever. I mean, even carbonfibre golf clubs (Yonex etc) go on about the nanotubes.

It doesn't say what nano-technology is in the product, it just says how good nano-technology is. I would be sceptical.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Gleammachine said:


> I feel educated now thanks. :lol:


LOL


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

Gleammachine said:


> Waxes will give great results but need regular top-ups every couple of months to obtain optimum results.


See, this is one of the points, I used Swissvax etc. all the time, but it seems so much easier to have something you only apply once a year or so...
I'll take a look @ Zaino & Duragloss!


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

DetailFreak said:


> See, this is one of the points, I used Swissvax etc. all the time, but it seems so much easier to have something you only apply once a year or so...
> I'll take a look @ Zaino & Duragloss!


Even with durable products like above they still need maintenance ie, detailing spray wipe downs in between washes.


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> Erm, this is the problem.
> 
> They talk around what is in the products, but don't say what actually _is._
> 
> It doesn't say what nano-technology is in the product, it just says how good nano-technology is. I would be sceptical.


Good point, I think I'll just write them and others a mail and maybe I'll find something out. I heard that some use nano-scaled waxes or silicons, but maybe they'll tell me!?


----------



## Kris1986 (May 19, 2008)

I've tried a product called NanoLotus, search for it on youtube and four videos of a Kangoo will appear.. The videos is made by me.. I layed one layer of it on my dads kangoo, so it will be interesting to see if it will last the freakin winter here in norway 

NanoLotus windowsealer is just awesome!


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

I took a look at the Zaino & Duragloss sites and I got the feeling that it is almost like Liquid Glass? May that be right?


----------



## chrisfr (May 25, 2008)

But it's better. 
At least Zaino imho looks better, plus it performs far better with less layers. (I mean, 2 layers of LG last like some months and need two days, with Zaino and Z-FX you can add 3 layers in one day and this should be enough for half a year under normal conditions.)
And with Z-8, you can even increase look and slickness after every wash and maintain the "I just detailed my whole car!"-look.

Didn't try DG yet, but already got it ready for testing on the next car.


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

What I think is most interesting about the whole nano-sealings is that supposedly they have outstanding UV-blocking and self cleaning characteristics, and that is something other sealants don't provide. And they are also said to be a very good protections against tree resins and bird feeces...
Or did I miss that when I read about that Zaino & DG stuff?


----------



## timmyboy (Jul 6, 2008)

*german sealants*

i got hold of some lana, from munich, anyone heard of it???
looks good, not sure on durability yet though:thumb:
does give a nice shine tbh!!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Zaino and D aren't nano-technology products, but they are good polymer sealants.

This is why I advise caution.

True nano ingredients cost from between 20 GBP and 1000 GBP per gram. Acrylic wax (sealants) and carnauba wax (natural waxes) is much, much cheaper per gram. These 'normal' ingredients can have very good UV blocking characteristics and give good protection. When layered, they may also give good durability.

The fact is, they will be a lot cheaper than any current and genuine nano-product. And with the hype surrounding nano-technology, I would love to know more about what is in the supposed 'nano' products. We could put a gram of a useless nano product into a wax and call it 'NANO WAX' but unless the fullerene is bonding with something or reacting with something, what good does it do? I would love to see these nano-technology manyfacturers declare what nano compounds they are using - C60, C70, C85 etc. My understanding is that these need to bond with other substances anyway, and aren't just added in like a magic potion, but until there is more transparency, all I would advise is caution and look at the results for yourself. The G-Techniq technology looks compelling but even they hide specific ingredients from public view. It would be like a car wax manufacturer hiding carnauba or beeswax from view, so I don't know why these fullerenes are kept so quiet.

Whilst the nano technology thing develops and you have an eye on it, I'd look at the top performing acrylic sealants like Zaino and Duragloss. They aren't nano products but they're cheaper and they work.


----------



## charger17 (Mar 28, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> Zaino and D aren't nano-technology products, but they are good polymer sealants.
> 
> This is why I advise caution.
> 
> ...


I think this is quite a confused reply. Nano comes from a greek word simply meaning 'dwarf', so to speak of nano technology we're simply talking about things that are engineered to a small scale.

My guess is that no one is using fullerenes. If they are, they are putting 0.001% in the formula. Fullerenes would be overkill for an auto polish.

Most people are using fluorine type nano technology. It's more main stream. The Zonyl products from DuPont are an example. The amino-functional silicones used in some paint sealants could also be considered nano technology. Also several abrasives use an ultimate crystal size of 0.1 to 0.5 microns. Those could be considered "nano" too.

The phrase 'nano' is just another marketing tool, no different to wax companies using natural sounding ingredients like banana oil, when they're actually using a solvent called Isoamyl acetate (known as banana oil because of it's scent, actually nothing to do with bananas).


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

Hey guys!

I wrote an email to Nanolex asking what their sealings contain, and they gave me some details (it's what stands on the label)
The sealings contain Iso-Alcanes C9-C12, Hexamethyldisiloxoxan,Methylperfluorisobutylether and other stuff.

Does anyone know if this is good bad or whatever?

I wrote emails to other companies, too, but no answer yet.

Have a nice day,

Frank


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

charger17 said:


> I think this is quite a confused reply. Nano comes from a greek word simply meaning 'dwarf', so to speak of nano technology we're simply talking about things that are engineered to a small scale.
> 
> My guess is that no one is using fullerenes. If they are, they are putting 0.001% in the formula. Fullerenes would be overkill for an auto polish.
> 
> ...


Damn right I'm confused, and the chances are so is everyone else. My understanding is that the small number of true nano ingredients are scrutinised by governments primarily due to health/safety concerns as no-one really knows the long term effects of breathing in (or absorbing through the skin) 'true' nano particles. These 'true' nano substances include fullerenes and nanotubes from what I can tell.

What confuses the issue is that 1) nano could indeed be merely used as a marketing label, as in a wider sense it does just mean 'very small' even though a nanometer is an official and specific measurement of size, and 2) there are some existing and less hyped substances like amino-silicones that could qualify already for nano status. As you state.

So the issue is, are these 'nano' products a genuine leap forward in technology, or just slightly more advanced sealants? And behind all the potential BS about nano technology, are the ingredients actually used in these products really worth the premium in price that is often commanded?

I would love someone like Loboil (Rob) to get involved in this thread as he obviously may have some interesting info to share... everyone would love to hear about genuine advancements and be receptive to them, but no-one wants another 'carnauba myth' with the market misled or the hype out of proportion to the reality.

Frank, thanks for finding out the ingredients in the Nanoflex. It will be interesting to see a) whether they are truly 'nano', b) what they are and c) what advantages they bring.


----------



## hartzsky (Dec 23, 2007)

DetailFreak said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> I wrote an email to Nanolex asking what their sealings contain, and they gave me some details (it's what stands on the label)
> The sealings contain Iso-Alcanes C9-C12, Hexamethyldisiloxoxan,Methylperfluorisobutylether and other stuff.
> ...


You got alot of fancy words there, so unless you are a Chemistry major then those words are useless to the average joe detailer. I could care less what 25 letter syllables are in a product. Does the product do the job? Thats what I want to know. Like has been said time and time again, your pre-work will be the determining factor in how well the car looks in the end, how well you burnish and polish the paint is the key that unlocks the door to a brilliant finish, the wax/sealant is a secondary issue. The only German wax/sealant I have used is Menzerna's FMJ, which in my humble opinion is a very very good product. PS..I did look at there website, if this product is the cats meow, then why don't they have any testimonials from individual users of this product? I would call them and ask for some references of people and or companies who use the great "nano". See what there response is. PPS Nano in my opinion is nothing more than a slick marketing word, used to lure you into curiosity.


----------



## Bilt-Hamber Lab (Apr 11, 2008)

DetailFreak said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> I wrote an email to Nanolex asking what their sealings contain, and they gave me some details (it's what stands on the label)
> The sealings contain Iso-Alcanes C9-C12, Hexamethyldisiloxoxan,Methylperfluorisobutylether and other stuff.
> ...


First two incorrectly spelt, but 1. an iso-paraffin (a low odour carrier) 2. is a volatile silicone ( carrier) 3. a fluoropolymer.

Nano Nano - Wasn't that from Mork & Mindy?


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

So fluoropolymers mean it's just a sealant, right?


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Bilt-Hamber Lab said:


> Nano Nano - Wasn't that from Mork & Mindy?



I suspect those who know what Mork & Mindy was, are giving away their age.


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

Bilt-Hamber Lab said:


> First two incorrectly spelt, but 1. an iso-paraffin (a low odour carrier) 2. is a volatile silicone ( carrier) 3. a fluoropolymer.


Ok, but what does that tell us?

Since you seem to know a lot about that stuff, here are the other ingredients which they tell (I guess some are secret)

Siloxanes & Silicones; Dimethyl 3-(oxyranylmethoxy)propyl terminated


----------



## Bilt-Hamber Lab (Apr 11, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> So fluoropolymers mean it's just a sealant, right?


 I've never seen it, but it could contain any number of film formers, I suspect the intention is to provide a low surface tension by including a fluorinated molecule, these are difficult to get to bond to paint at ambient temp, although a coupling agent, which it appears to be there from the below post, may assist.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

DetailFreak said:


> actually I'm looking for something else cause this is to difficult for me to apply I guess...
> I was looking at the G-techniq stuff but they state that their sealant contains wax, and that was not what I was looking for...
> Any suggestions for other products? experiences?
> I did not intent to Spam or whatever, just curious cause I was looking for sealants and found this forum and after I read a couple of posts I thought it might be worth asking...
> ...


just to clarify our product range.

c1 is a Crystal Lacquer and is a pro only application because you only get one chance to get it right otherwise time to get out your wet sanding paper!

c3 is a carnauba co polymer but this is no sealant. It sits between a QD and a hand applied wax. Almost as easy as the former and almost as long lasting as the latter.

more info here

pm me if you want more info :thumb:

out of interest are nanolex a manufacturer or a distributor?


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

btw - seems a lot of people are tripping up on what nano is.

nano is just a description of scale. there are a lot of people jumping on the nano bandwagon and in Asia almost everything is nano. in Asia we don't mention our products are nano as there is already a negative reaction to the term.

anyway the most important thing about products are how they perform which is why we test products to destruction. if the product doesn't offer something significantly better than what's currently on the market we don't continue with it. bold claims i know and undoubtedly someone will come along with a product range that blows us out of the water. that's what's pretty exciting about this tech - that being nano tech and we are under no illusion that once the knowledge base builds product performance will advance. for eg with c1 we can engineer it to be hydrophobic or hydrophilic, adjust the amount of uv absorbtion it has, it's bonding mechanism. 

germany is throwing up a massive amount of nano products but a lot of german nano companies turn out to be distributors. we've evaluated hundreds of products from companies like this one (not this one in particular) as well as products from japan and the states. there are some that are excellent but there are a huge amount that in real world tests don't hold up massively well. in fact we source one of our marine products from a lab in germany where we've specified exactly how it should work to prevent uv and staining damage to teak yacht decks that thanks to the problems in Myanmar have become even more expensive and difficult to replace.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> Zaino and D aren't nano-technology products, but they are good polymer sealants.
> 
> This is why I advise caution.
> 
> ...


dom - fyi we don't release ingredients other than what's on the msds sheet. as i'm sure you are aware it's pretty risky to patent liquids since if you change a couple of ingredients by a few percentage it's technically a different product. so in fact if you choose to patent you give your competitors a head start as you will have very helpfully listed the ingredients and processes of your product. we adopt the coca cola and guiness approach and not apply for patent in favour of keeping the ingredients a closely guarded secret.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

and another point re ingredients. you are partially right re expense of ingredients but what makes our crystal lacquer prods so expensive is the manufacturing process.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

thought it might clarify where we are with the crystal lacquer group of prods (c1, c4, c5) to give a couple of wiki references.

first one is on the deposition tech

second is the bonding tech


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Great stuff Rob  As you can probably imagine the science and the marketing of nano products fascinate me, especially the fact that there are these fullerenes and nanotubes around and some of these are already used in commercial products.

I wasn't prying for a list of ingredients (ourr techs are too busy to make D-Techniq anyway!) but was interested if there was a nano ingredient that can be divulged to help educate the market (as we know, the process and other ingredients tend to be what make the product work, not the knowledge of just one ingredient itself). So if fullerenes were inside a nano-coating (which they are not from everything I have seen) then that would be an interesting use of them, but it wouldn't help reverse engineering as they'd be pretty useless on their own. They'd need to bond with something for a start. But then we'd know that Product X used fullerenes and Product Y used fluoropolymers etc. If Product X was more expensive then that may explain its positioning.

Anyway, thanks for your contribution, I must admit to knowing jack all about nano-technology compared to someone in your position, but I hate to think of seriously good technology and materials being mis-marketed from the beginning by some companies - that you have had to withdraw your nano label in some markets is a shame and evidence that the term is neither properly understood or marketed


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> Great stuff Rob  As you can probably imagine the science and the marketing of nano products fascinate me, especially the fact that there are these fullerenes and nanotubes around and some of these are already used in commercial products.
> 
> I wasn't prying for a list of ingredients (ourr techs are too busy to make D-Techniq anyway!) but was interested if there was a nano ingredient that can be divulged to help educate the market (as we know, the process and other ingredients tend to be what make the product work, not the knowledge of just one ingredient itself). So if fullerenes were inside a nano-coating (which they are not from everything I have seen) then that would be an interesting use of them, but it wouldn't help reverse engineering as they'd be pretty useless on their own. They'd need to bond with something for a start. But then we'd know that Product X used fullerenes and Product Y used fluoropolymers etc. If Product X was more expensive then that may explain its positioning.
> 
> Anyway, thanks for your contribution, I must admit to knowing jack all about nano-technology compared to someone in your position, but I hate to think of seriously good technology and materials being mis-marketed from the beginning by some companies - that you have had to withdraw your nano label in some markets is a shame and evidence that the term is neither properly understood or marketed


heh - no worries.

other than what you already know re quartz there's not much more i can reveal.


----------



## Blazebro (May 18, 2007)

1) This is getting way too complicated.

2)


DetailFreak said:


> What do you people use/prefer/recommend?


See here:

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=74719&highlight=tropicare

(page 4 is my review btw)


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> .....that you have had to withdraw your nano label in some markets is a shame and evidence that the term is neither properly understood or marketed..


Oh, I think the term is wholly understood, and its use in marketing is because of the public's limited understanding, but perceived as new and exciting due to various areas where it has been shown to be a break-through technology - medical science mainly, is what springs to mind for me.

You only have to think back to Star Trek, with 7 of 9.....mmmm...







and nano probes!
The word nano is synonymous with very small 'things', which is wonderful because....er....um....nope. Sorry, haven't a clue!
So, because we've some clue about what nano means, we get taken advantage of in that regard by marketeers whom are trying to make their products more appealing/desirable.

Of course that means Pete will now launch a campaign based around Ångström scale coatings, which will completely pass over the head of everyone bar the scientists, and result in no additional sales, since no-one will have any perception of how an Ångström relates to their everyday life in a positive or negative manner.
Mark my words, just you watch those tubs of Autobalm fly off the shelves when the campaign kicks in! :lol:

Autobalm - same old formulation, but with extra Ångströms in every layer!
Maybe Al will devise and write up The Ångström Diet ©™, and how it transformed him overnight, and keeps him looking good for months on end.

Meanwhile, I'll probably generate a spectrum chart of solar radiation that expresses the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum in multiples of one ten-millionth of a millimetre, or 1×10⁻¹⁰ metres - when I can ever find my colouring pencils again!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Yup, we are working on Green Fullerene Dodo sealant at the moment. Full of green fullerenes, which are better than other colours, naturally 

It is funny as well with all the quartz liquid crystal stuff to wonder how many more casio watches they could have sold if they made more use of the 'nano' marketing angle. Mind you, I think 'turbo' was the buzz word back then.

Anyway, top thread for the geeks  I think PJS's smiley says it all







, LOL


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

F*ck it, we are going to make the first nuclear sealant. It'll make your car glow in the dark and everything. Just apply with lead lined microfibre gloves. Nano is dead. Long live nuclear!!! In fact Wolfang do a wax called Fuzion already, so maybe they got there first... damn.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Dom, I do wonder about you sometimes!








......wibble indeed!

:lol:


----------



## chrisfr (May 25, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> F*ck it, we are going to make the first nuclear sealant. It'll make your car glow in the dark and everything. Just apply with lead lined microfibre gloves. Nano is dead. Long live nuclear!!! In fact Wolfang do a wax called Fuzion already, so maybe they got there first... damn.


That would be cool! Bring it on! Wouldn't it be possible basing on fluorescence?


----------



## moisty (May 29, 2008)

Yeah it would be great to see an eerie glow coming from my car at night!! Goes with the whole supernatural thing too!

DoDoGlo :thumb:


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

Thanks to all of you for the help/hints etc. I think this became a nice discussion actually. I personally also think that what matters in the end is how long a product lasts on the surface and how it performs... I guess I'll just wait a couple more weeks and then get the Nanolex stuff for my car and just try it (I still don't want to advertise for them, but they are the only ones with real reference pictures and at least some information on the nano-topic)

@loboil: I talked to a friend of mine who lives in Germany, is there any chance to find a German detailer who applies your products?

I also sent the link of this thread to the nanolex guy who sent me the ingredients, maybe he has something to say...


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

DetailFreak said:


> Thanks to all of you for the help/hints etc. I think this became a nice discussion actually. I personally also think that what matters in the end is how long a product lasts on the surface and how it performs... I guess I'll just wait a couple more weeks and then get the Nanolex stuff for my car and just try it (I still don't want to advertise for them, but they are the only ones with real reference pictures and at least some information on the nano-topic)
> 
> @loboil: I talked to a friend of mine who lives in Germany, is there any chance to find a German detailer who applies your products?
> 
> I also sent the link of this thread to the nanolex guy who sent me the ingredients, maybe he has something to say...


no detailers in germany yet. have had it trialled by a couple of german nano distributors who were very impressed.


----------



## DetailFreak (Aug 14, 2008)

@loboil: so is Gtechniq a distributor or a producer? I'm interested because I read a lot about the whole process of producing nanotechnological products and it seemed to me that it is quite difficult/costly and mainly done by companies in Germany?!

Do you guarantee the period of effectiveness of your products? Who would a detailer I could go to in London?


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

we are a product developer. our approach with the crystal lacquer group of products was to fund a group of researchers to develop this type of technology to perform in a particular way. incidentally these particular group do a lot of work for large plcs who as well as having in house product developers also outsource product development to universities (which afterall is where a lot of break throughs in this kind of technology are being made). the university research dept that we use also develop products for Bayer, BASF and Philips amongst others.

this allows us to remain very flexible and not get constrained by capital investment in manufacturing plant.

for example with p1 we could only find one mixing plant in the world that could mix the product (west coast USA).

if you wanted your car treated or want more info on the product it's possible for you to come to our UK distribution and service center (sounds very grand - it's a small industrial unit!) located just north of Watford.

email me at robearle at gtechniq dot com if you want to take this further. :thumb:


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

as for guarantees - we don't give them.

reason is that if you actually read between the lines of any of the guarantees given by so called long term sealants you will see they only guarantee that there will be paint on the car by the end of the guarantee period.

there is no promise of certain gloss level or scratch resistance or lack of markings from bird lime.

instead of guarantees we test products to destruction either in labs or in real world tests. here's an eg of one of our test panels:


----------



## lanciamug (May 18, 2008)

No Dom you've got it all wrong! Barry Scott would say

"HI GUYS, A FRIEND OF MINE WAS CLEANING HIS KITCHEN THE OTHER DAY etc" (you get the idea)

By the way Barry Scott isn't a real person, Reckit Benkiser's ad people invented the annoying character to promote their cleaning products!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Barry Scott not real!!! There's now a Barry Scott myth to go with the carnauba myth! Awesome


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

*I guess my name tells it all...*

Hey guys!

I read this thread and found it quite interesting. I do not intent to advertise my products, if you should have questions, please write me a private message and I'll be glad to answer.

Just one general thing about this board that I'd like to say - unlike other forums/boards (especially in Germany) it seems that one can find a high number of experienced professionals here that actually help others out and give advice rather than talking trash etc. so keep up the good work!

Greets F. Kessler


----------



## chrisfr (May 25, 2008)

Nanolex said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> I read this thread and found it quite interesting. I do not intent to advertise my products, if you should have questions, please write me a private message and I'll be glad to answer.
> 
> ...


Okay, noticed - we're only talking trash. Great first post dude! :thumb:


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

chrisfr said:


> Okay, noticed - we're only talking trash. Great first post dude! :thumb:


I did not mean to say this in general, but my personal opinion is that a lot of people (not all, and I sure did not mean you in person) in German boards are either totally swept away with products they absolutely count on and which they advertise heavily and / or they have a negative attitude towards new products. Again, this is reflects only my personal opinion and is not meant to offend someone.

And since you are obviously from Germany, too, I guess you have a reason to check this board instead/among checking local boards... ?!

However, my apologies to you if you thought this was meant personally to you, and my apolgies to every other German member of this forum who might have been offended by my post.


----------



## chrisfr (May 25, 2008)

You're right that there is a far better variety of products in this forum and in one from Germany, some for example still think Liquid Glass is the one and only product - but that's not what I'd call "talking trash".

By the way I have a question but I think it's not the sense of this forum to ask via PM: It would be nice if you could explain the difference between other sealants like Zaino, Duragloss, LG, JetSeal, ... to yours - what's special about your products? What kind of real "nano technology" do you have that they do not use?
I think this is something many are curious about.


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

Ok, so first of all the main difference is that all of our sealants do not contain any kind of waxes or silicones. This is important since a lot of "nano" products contain either one of them in small scales, but this is not a real nanotechnology sealing. Additional to that the the layer of our nano-sealants is only between 5-10 µm.

The sealants contains 3 different ingredients, a detention component (so the sealants sticks to the surface), a detention-component (so nothing sticks to the outer layer of the sealant) and the actual nano parts. These 3 components have self-organizing characteristics once they were applied.

The nano parts are the variable in the whole process, they can be altered to have the characteristics most customers look for - e.g. easy-to-clean (Lotus effect), UV-protection (100%), shine etc. These particles we use in our sealants are nano-scaled and 100% chemical (though they are absolutely harmless to your car paint and plastic in any case).

The difference between the 2 sealants is that the Premium sealant is a product developed for professionals (we make that clear to private users before we sell it) - the application process is way more difficult. This comes because the Premium sealant becomes way harder over time, but therefor has less shine produced by itself (you usually have to cut back on one characteristic in order to push another).

We also had all sealants tested by several institutes like Tüv, DEKRA and FIGR. 
The testing is described relatively easily and makes sense: basically a painted surface is taken, prepared and sealed like we advice in our manuals. 
After that a washing process is simulated, therefor a machine is used: The machine has a arm, equipped with a cleaning device used in a automatic car wash that moves back and forth, the cleaner that is being used is a basic Nigrin Car Shampoo. This machine simulates 500 wash-moves on the sealed surface (=50-70 times washing your car). After that the contact angle is measured. If the contact angle is >100° the sealant is still working 100%.
This test is repeated until the angle falls below 100°.

That way we make sure that our and our customers quality standards are met and we can guarantee the durability.

So I hope your questions are answered, if not please keep on asking!

Greets Florian


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Great stuff Florian. Nice to have you on the thread 

How do you measure the contact angle though? Presumably you mean contact angle of a water bead on the surface? As you will know in physics every contact angle will be 100% at the very point of contact itself... it is how close to 100% the angle can be sustained as you rise up the bead that is important.


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> Great stuff Florian. Nice to have you on the thread
> 
> How do you measure the contact angle though? Presumably you mean contact angle of a water bead on the surface? As you will know in physics every contact angle will be 100% at the very point of contact itself... it is how close to 100% the angle can be sustained as you rise up the bead that is important.


You are totally right!
The 100° angle is actually the results we got from the institutes - I saw the test being done once and at the end they take the surface, put it underneath a syringe and then form a water-drop on the surface. The numerical number of the angle was quite unimportant to me since I saw the result, which was a pretty impressive, pearl-like water drop. 
But I will look that up tomorrow and then let you know how they measured this angle!

Thanks for the question, I really need to figure this myself...


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

LOL, just curious as I love testing our waxes... usually by eye, although we do measure gloss, look at coefficients of friction etc.


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

That is what a lot of companies better should... in my opinion this is the only way to guarantee quality to your customers and to yourself and therefor the only way to sustain periodly. 
We actually had all these tests done although we knew the (approximate) results just from simply using the sealants, but since a lot of people doubted the durability this was one of the ways we could prove what we promise.
Actually I would really appreciate a certified way to test the durability of sealants etc. that would be recognized worldwide or at least across europe so that customers could make sure what they are buying actually works... 

Maybe we should found a lab specialized in that 

Greets Florian


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

@ dodo: I looked it up and what they state is that the durability was proven through a washability-test referring to ASTM D 2486 (this is the testing scheme I talked about) with sponge and shampoo. The result was that the contact angle to water after 500 washing routines is >100°
Since that test was done by DEKRA the info should be correct!?
The next time we have a product tested I will have them explain that to me...

But thanks again for raising my interest about that!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

LOL, yes, do ask them the question. Is the sponge and shampoo automated?


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

yes they are automated. As soon as I get there the next time I'll ask to take a pic of the machine...


----------



## petenaud (Feb 17, 2008)

Well heres my view.

I have not got the foggiest idea what you are on about, but is this nana technology ?


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

I guess this is grandma-with-technology, sounds almost the same but won't do your car any good...


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Nanolex said:


> @ dodo: I looked it up and what they state is that the durability was proven through a washability-test referring to ASTM D 2486 (this is the testing scheme I talked about) with sponge and shampoo. The result was that the contact angle to water after 500 washing routines is >100°
> Since that test was done by DEKRA the info should be correct!?
> The next time we have a product tested I will have them explain that to me...
> 
> But thanks again for raising my interest about that!


Have you considered putting the product through the salt spray test in accordance with ASTM B117, to assess durability?


----------



## lanciamug (May 18, 2008)

Davekg's not going to be happy, a manufacturer measuring presence of LSP by contact angle! Do they not know of the'squeak test'?


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

PJS said:


> Have you considered putting the product through the salt spray test in accordance with ASTM B117, to assess durability?


We had the boat sealants tested that way, I think that was the 1000 h saltwater spray test, is that what you mean?

@lanciamug: never heard of the "squeak test", what is it supposed to show?


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Nanolex said:


> We had the boat sealants tested that way, I think that was the 1000 h saltwater spray test, is that what you mean?
> 
> @lanciamug: never heard of the "squeak test", what is it supposed to show?


24 hour spray test in fact - but the number of hours is relevant to durability, so a continuous one to see how long it took before the product failed.

Squeak test is dragging something like a piece of foam over a surface with a sealant/wax supposedly on it. If the surface is devoid of any/all protection layer, then it will squeak. Normally done whilst wet, after rinsing.


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

PJS said:


> 24 hour spray test in fact - but the number of hours is relevant to durability, so a continuous one to see how long it took before the product failed.
> 
> Squeak test is dragging something like a piece of foam over a surface with a sealant/wax supposedly on it. If the surface is devoid of any/all protection layer, then it will squeak. Normally done whilst wet, after rinsing.


Ok I got it. I thought that was some mechanical test or so! I haven't tried that out (at least not on purpose) but I will, although it won't be something I can put as a proof. But I guess it should be considered the next time we test how long the layer lasts...


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

petenaud said:


> Well heres my view.
> 
> I have not got the foggiest idea what you are on about, but is this nana technology ?


:lol:

thought it was just me


----------



## DIESEL DAVE (Jul 26, 2007)

:lol:


:lol:


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

Hey guys again thanks for your interest, after a talk with Whizzler he was so kind and gave me the opportunity to open a group buy where you can get the Nanolex Basic Set @ 20% off, so for all of you who are interested you can check

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=85445

Greetz Florian


----------



## chrisfr (May 25, 2008)

Nanolex said:


> Ok, so first of all the main difference is that all of our sealants do not contain any kind of waxes or silicones. This is important since a lot of "nano" products contain either one of them in small scales, but this is not a real nanotechnology sealing. Additional to that the the layer of our nano-sealants is only between 5-10 µm.
> 
> The sealants contains 3 different ingredients, a detention component (so the sealants sticks to the surface), a detention-component (so nothing sticks to the outer layer of the sealant) and the actual nano parts. These 3 components have self-organizing characteristics once they were applied.
> 
> ...


To be honest, that was not was I meant, but thanks for taking the time.
For example, do Zaino, JetSeal etc. contain silicons or waxes? I always thought they wouldn't.
Another, general question I have and hope you can answer: Isn't a layer of 5-10 µm much? I'm seeing this as an advantage, as I was told it wouldn't be possible to layer up any sealant to more than maybe 1 µm. More sealant != more protection? Especially if nano sealants really should get so much harder than polymer sealants: Wouldn't that mean less scratches in the lacquer?

Could you please explain the real, technical difference between Nanolex and Zaino or JetSeal?
Do you use other ingredients? Which?
What is the difference in bonding between polymer sealants (maybe together with a product like Polycharger, if you heard of that and it isn't just marketing (better interlinking --> better performance blabla ) and your nano sealants that makes nano better?
And why do your products have a better lotus effect than Zaino?

By the way: Is your own car sealed with one of your sealants? Can you tell me how long it really lasts under real conditions? (About that point where you say "I think I need a new application as performance just is not as good as it was when new", not "Holy crap there's nothing left at all". )

I'd really like to believe in nano products, they would be perfect for my family's and friends' cars... but until now, most "nano" stuff seems to be a huge disappointment.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

chrisfr said:


> For example, do Zaino, JetSeal etc. contain silicons or waxes? I always thought they wouldn't.


Err, sealant is just a term for a synthetic wax. These will be acrylic/polymer waxes rather than natural waxes like beeswax/carnauba. They are a similar hydrocarbon but have a more regular 'man made' chain structure allowing better crosslinking etc. If I was a betting man, I would also put a heavy wager on most sealants containing silicones.

Interestingly, if I am not mistaken, silicone itself can be classed as a nano product due to its particle size. So half the car care products on the market and even Pledge/Mr Sheen in your home are likely to be 'nano'.


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

chrisfr said:


> Another, general question I have and hope you can answer: Isn't a layer of 5-10 µm much? I'm seeing this as an advantage, as I was told it wouldn't be possible to layer up any sealant to more than maybe 1 µm. More sealant != more protection? Especially if nano sealants really should get so much harder than polymer sealants: Wouldn't that mean less scratches in the lacquer?


5-10µm is normal for a nanotechnology sealant, as far as I know this is thinner than the layer you add with a wax, but actually the thickness of the layer has not a whole lot to say, the ingredients are more important.
The nano-sealants do get harder, and actually they prevent scratching, after the sealant was applied the paint is protected from the micro-scratches caused by most automatic car washes. I have to say that I talk about automatic car washes using textile fibers, anything else is suicidal for the paint anyway.



chrisfr said:


> Could you please explain the real, technical difference between Nanolex and Zaino or JetSeal?


Since I don't know about the ingredients they use I have to admit that I can't tell you. If you can tell me what ingredients they use I might be able to explain the difference



chrisfr said:


> Do you use other ingredients? Which?
> What is the difference in bonding between polymer sealants (maybe together with a product like Polycharger, if you heard of that and it isn't just marketing (better interlinking --> better performance blabla ) and your nano sealants that makes nano better?


I have to say that I'm not a specialist when it comes to these really specific chemical things, we have scientists for that, but what I can say is that the nanotechnology sealants give you the opportunity to apply many different characteristics to the sealant, I doubt that other "regular" sealants are able to do so. Right now we are working on a sealant that is supposed to add the maximum amount of shine to the car, and one thing we use for that is a derivate of glass (that's all I can say, because this technique is new and confidental).



chrisfr said:


> And why do your products have a better lotus effect than Zaino?


I never said they have a better lotus effect, all I said is that we guarantee the durability of our sealants.



chrisfr said:


> By the way: Is your own car sealed with one of your sealants? Can you tell me how long it really lasts under real conditions? (About that point where you say "I think I need a new application as performance just is not as good as it was when new", not "Holy crap there's nothing left at all". )


Yes, my car is sealed with the Nanolex basic sealant, it is the car you can see on the very first page on the website (the videos). I usually drive about 12000 miles per year and the car is washed every weekend by hand with a little car shampoo and a microfiber cloth. I had to redo the windshield after 10 months, because the effect started to fade partially, though it wasn't necessary, I'm just a perfectionist when it comes to that. The paint sealant was applied 14 months ago, I re-sealed the hood and the front grille 3 weeks ago, because I had bird-feeces on the hood and massive insect remains on the grille. I have a business customer who had 3 BMW's, a Mini Cooper S and a Peugeot sealed about one year ago. 2 cars had a complete Premium sealing done and both look like it was just applied. A Z4 had the Basic sealing and the textile sealing for the top, still good, just like the mini. I have to say though that they drive less than I do, about 10Tmi a year. If you would like to talk to them let me know and I'll arrange the contact.



chrisfr said:


> I'd really like to believe in nano products, they would be perfect for my family's and friends' cars... but until now, most "nano" stuff seems to be a huge disappointment.


I hope I took you a at least a little step closer in your belief,

Florian Kessler


----------



## charger17 (Mar 28, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> Err, sealant is just a term for a synthetic wax. These will be acrylic/polymer waxes rather than natural waxes like beeswax/carnauba. They are a similar hydrocarbon but have a more regular 'man made' chain structure allowing better crosslinking etc. If I was a betting man, I would also put a heavy wager on most sealants containing silicones.
> 
> Interestingly, if I am not mistaken, silicone itself can be classed as a nano product due to its particle size. So half the car care products on the market and even Pledge/Mr Sheen in your home are likely to be 'nano'.


Sealants are not simply synthetic waxes, this is complete misinformation. Synthetic waxes are exactly that, man made waxes which are engineered to mimic waxes like carnauba, but with maybe a higher melting point, better shine or increased detergent resistance. Montan wax is a good example of a synthetic wax. Just like natural waxes they have no crosslinking abilities nor do they cure, rather they 'set' on the surface.

Sealants are typically made using some form of silicone polymer. They can just be simple silicone polymers, or they can be co-polymers, re-actional silicones or amino functional silicones. The top of the range being the amino functional co polymer silicone. Unlike waxes sealants can crosslink or cure, and contain elements which bond to the surface of the paint and therefore increase durability. A good quality sealant will offer greater protection and durability than any wax. Some manufacturers add a wax to the sealant to give a little extra depth and shine.

There is nothing unique or special about nanotechnology, most sealants that use the amino functionals can be classed as nano and these have been in use for decades. It's only the term nano that has recently become popular.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

I thought Montan was a natural wax... it comes from fossilized plant deposits, ie basically an extracted coal wax? How can that be man made... man refined, sure, but no hydrocarbons have been fiddled with?

Thanks for clearing up the sealant definition... I confess to this not being my area of expertise as we haven't developed a sealant yet, but the way they are talked about here and their general image is one of being 'synthetic' vs 'natural' as an LSP. I had therefore assumed that sealants (especially the paste sealants such as poorboys wheel sealant) would therefore contain something like a polyethylene wax as well as silicones and that would be the main point of distinction. Funny how Zaino never want to tell me exactly what they put in their products though?


----------



## charger17 (Mar 28, 2006)

Montan is a microcrystalline or petroleum wax. It is produced from one of the by-products of the refining industry. The by-product is heated, mixed with solvent and then cooled. As it is cooled, wax crystallizes out leaving oil in solution. 
It goes through several processes before it becomes a raw ingredient, such as filtration (to remove some of the remaining oil), distillation (to remove some of the solvents) and is then decoloured and deodorized.
Wax specifications such as melt point, penetration, and oil content are controlled primarily by the amount of solvent added, the rate of cooling and the temperature from the crystallization process. 
Additional compounds are added (resins, polymers etc) to give specific properties to the wax such as durability, flexibility and gloss. Because the product is altered to give these characteristics it is therefore a synthetic product.


----------



## chrisfr (May 25, 2008)

charger17 said:


> There is nothing unique or special about nanotechnology, most sealants that use the amino functionals can be classed as nano and these have been in use for decades. It's only the term nano that has recently become popular.


Exactly that's my problem!

Thanks to everyone for your answers!

Florian, maybe you can ask someone from your team to explain the difference and why/if it is better than sealants how charger explained it.
Ok, contains no silicone - what then? And what difference does it make/why?

By the way, charger: Do almost all those sealants we currently know, Zaino, DuraGloss, different CG products, base on silicones?
Somewhere else I read about a comparison between 1Z Hartglanz and other sealants and learned only the 1Z product would be made of silicons, while the others based on... dunno what.

So maybe Nanolex' sealant isn't special because of "nano technology", but because of something else? If that would be advertised instead of nano... who knows, maybe I would have already bought some of your stuff.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

charger17 said:


> Montan is a microcrystalline or petroleum wax. It is produced from one of the by-products of the refining industry. The by-product is heated, mixed with solvent and then cooled. As it is cooled, wax crystallizes out leaving oil in solution.
> It goes through several processes before it becomes a raw ingredient, such as filtration (to remove some of the remaining oil), distillation (to remove some of the solvents) and is then decoloured and deodorized.
> Wax specifications such as melt point, penetration, and oil content are controlled primarily by the amount of solvent added, the rate of cooling and the temperature from the crystallization process.
> Additional compounds are added (resins, polymers etc) to give specific properties to the wax such as durability, flexibility and gloss. Because the product is altered to give these characteristics it is therefore a synthetic product.


From what you say above, then wouldn't that make something like T1 grade carnauba wax a 'synthetic wax'? It also "goes through several processes before it becomes a raw ingredient, such as filtration... and is then decoloured and deodorized."

I would also be interested to know how much additional tinkering goes on to montan wax in terms of resins and polymers... not much for the shoe grade wax I should think, the industry would never pay for it... I have some black unrefined montan and you're telling me that it is synthetic?

You obviously know a lot about waxes and sealants so help clear these things up for me.

I would have classed a synthetic wax as being a polymer/polyethylene type wax... acrylics, plastics, man made materials, whatever... not refined products of natural origin.

I am fascinated by your suggestion that montan is synthetic


----------



## charger17 (Mar 28, 2006)

Montan has many uses, in a less refined state it is used to formulate carbon paper. However, for the auto wax market it has to undergo much more refining and alterations to it's characteristics. How can you engineer something to act in a certain way and still call it natural. 
Oil companies take natural mineral oil and they refine it and add compounds to improve it's performance in exactly the same way, and what do we call it, fully synthetic motor oil. I think we're basically just arguing semantics.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Fair enough  You are more of an expert than me anyway, so I will learn from you willingly


----------



## SimonVW (Jul 16, 2008)

IMO something is only synthetic if its chemically altered at a molecular level. Refining, distilling, crystallising etc etc does not constitute this. The addition of additives does not make a carnauba based wax or a mineral oil based product synthetic.

You could argue semi-synthetic or synthetic base if the additives are man-made waxes, resins or oils, (with analogies to motor oils). I wonder if this is a good description for Collinite?

Interesting thread this


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

That was what I was thinking but charger is obviously a pro and made that slightly odd statement re montan.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2008)

charger17 said:


> Montan is a microcrystalline or petroleum wax. It is produced from one of the by-products of the refining industry. The by-product is heated, mixed with solvent and then cooled. As it is cooled, wax crystallizes out leaving oil in solution.
> It goes through several processes before it becomes a raw ingredient, such as filtration (to remove some of the remaining oil), distillation (to remove some of the solvents) and is then decoloured and deodorized.
> Wax specifications such as melt point, penetration, and oil content are controlled primarily by the amount of solvent added, the rate of cooling and the temperature from the crystallization process.
> Additional compounds are added (resins, polymers etc) to give specific properties to the wax such as durability, flexibility and gloss. Because the product is altered to give these characteristics it is therefore a synthetic product.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montan_wax



> *Montan wax*
> 
> *From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*
> 
> ...


uhhh every reference I've read about Montan follows what Wiki says.


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2008)

charger17 said:


> Montan has many uses, in a less refined state it is used to formulate carbon paper. However, for the auto wax market it has to undergo much more refining and alterations to it's characteristics. How can you engineer something to act in a certain way and still call it natural.
> Oil companies take natural mineral oil and they refine it and add compounds to improve it's performance in exactly the same way, and what do we call it, fully synthetic motor oil. I think we're basically just arguing semantics.


Sorry I don't know your qualifications but I do know a few things.. Mineral oil is just another way of saying paraffin oil.

Also synthetic oil is usually a soy-bean derived base stock. And that goes back to about 1947 in the development of gas turbines. Castrol, I believe it was, won a decision to be about to say a petroleum based oil could be classified as a synthetic. And If you want some real experts opinion of oil, then I'd like to see what these people say about your classification of oil on this site. The AMSOIL guys will give you a run for your money.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php


----------



## charger17 (Mar 28, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> That was what I was thinking but charger is obviously a pro and made that slightly odd statement re montan.


Ignoring the sarcasm I think I've found the answer to this. I took this from Wiki, it basically says that in the US slax wax (where we get the microcrystaline waxes from) is known as synthetic, whereas in europe it cannot be classed as synthetic. 
My knowledge of chemicals comes form the US, ( The Mark-V blending facility is in california).

Mineral oil
This term is used to encompass lubricating base oil derived from crude oil. The American Petroleum Institute (API) designates several types of lubricant base oil identified [1] as:

Group I - Saturates <90% and/or sulphur >0.03%, and Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) viscosity index (VI) = >80 to <120 
- Manufactured by solvent extraction, solvent or catalytic dewaxing, and hydro-finishing processes. Common Group I base oil are 150SN (solvent neutral), 500SN, and 150BS (brightstok)

Group II - Saturates >90% and sulfur <0.03%, and SAE viscosity index >80 to <120 
- Manufactured by hydrocracking and solvent or catalytic dewaxing processes. Group II base oil has superior anti-oxidation properties since virtually all hydrocarbon molecules are saturated. It has water-white color.

Group III - Saturates > 90%, sulfur <0.03%, and SAE viscosity index >120 
- Manufactured by special processes such as isohydromerization. Can be manufactured from base oil or slax wax from dewaxing process.

Group IV - Polyalphaolefins (PAO) 
Group V - All others not included above 
Such as naphthenics, PAG, esters, and etc.

In North America, Groups III, IV and V are now described as synthetic lubricants, with group III frequently described as synthesised hydrocarbons, or SHCs. In Europe, only Groups IV and V may be classed as synthetics.


----------



## SimonVW (Jul 16, 2008)

charger17 said:


> Ignoring the sarcasm I think I've found the answer to this. I took this from Wiki, it basically says that in the US slax wax (where we get the microcrystaline waxes from) is known as synthetic, whereas in europe it cannot be classed as synthetic.
> My knowledge of chemicals comes form the US, ( The Mark-V blending facility is in california).
> 
> Mineral oil
> ...


Thanks for taking time to post that :thumb: I can see how III sits in a grey area.

Perhaps we should go closer to topic. The US / EU classification of motor oils is a long way from a sealant manufactured in Germany :lol:


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

lanciamug said:


> Davekg's not going to be happy, a manufacturer measuring presence of LSP by contact angle! Do they not know of the'squeak test'?


OI!! That is a very scientific test you know!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

charger17 said:


> Ignoring the sarcasm I think I've found the answer to this. I took this from Wiki, it basically says that in the US slax wax (where we get the microcrystaline waxes from) is known as synthetic, whereas in europe it cannot be classed as synthetic.
> My knowledge of chemicals comes form the US, ( The Mark-V blending facility is in california).
> 
> Mineral oil
> ...


There was no sarcasm in my post at all, at least non that was intended. I think you should stop being so defensive.

I have stated that you must obviously be a professional chemist from your answers. As everyone knows, I am not a professional chemist, but I have some that work with me.

Why not tell the forum a little about who you are?

And it seems like definitions are a grey area though I was happily and openly amenable to being proved wrong - as I always am


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> Fair enough  You are more of an expert than me anyway, so I will learn from you willingly


I think this previous post shows my open and friendly attitude.

And Charger has basically admitted that we could both be correct due to US vs European definitions (if I read the Wiki post correctly) showing that we were both 'right' on this point and it was a vaild query for me to raise.

Anyway, I take it Charger works at Mark V? Am I correct? It would be nice to know people's knowledge base simply as it allows a certain value to be put to their statements. I have always held Charger's comments highly as his statements have revealed a deeper level of knowledge. That would never prevent me asking questions or challenging them though, for the simple reason it's nice to know more. I would hope to be able to do that without being accused of 'sarcasm'.


----------



## chrisfr (May 25, 2008)

But Simons right - we should get back to the topic: Who cares if it's "synthetic" or "natural", what counts is what different sealants and waxes are made of - silicon, wax, or something else, what makes nano nano if the silicon in sealants is already small enough to call it nano and is the whole nano marketing maybe counterproductive because the only persons who are mad enough to invest so much money are used to "nano" being a rip-off? 

I mean, if those so-called nano sealants are made of something ceramic- or glasslike, then that is - as far as I understood - a new approach, right?
In this case, I could imagine there's a difference in performance compared to sealants that are made of silicons. Maybe the new ones do bond better, maybe they really get harder so that they can protect our cars a little bit from swirls.

As I stated before, my problems with "nano" products are that this word is used quite often just for marketing reasons and that nobody so far was able to explain to me why their product should be better. I mean, wow, it's "nano"! Of course it's scratch resisting, of course it has a good durability! Nano always does that. Can't be explained, it's just nano! If something is smaller, then it's better. Technique > size or what?


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Agreed 

I think you basically have the nano-crystalline (liquid crystal or 'liquid glass') type products that are a technological step ahead of the usual silicone/polymer sealants, and these are potentially a technical step ahead of what nature has to offer in the form of raw waxes. So three basic categories.

The problem is that true nano fullerene technology, if it can be harnessed and has a use for this application, could be a mysterious fourth level above the crystal products.

And the even wider problem is that waxes/sealants are always likely to be a mix of products. I mean, you can see confusion with what counts as natural/synthetic... so how confusing is it when many 'waxes' have more sealant-type ingredients in them? In fact, I tried a really nice paste sealant yesterday that was labelled 'WAX' on the front, presumably to help a consumer know what it was. But it probably didn't have any 'natural wax' in it. So you end up with a sealant in a wax test doing very nicely, when it perhaps should be in a sealant test doing averagely... there is just too much confusion and misinformation. I certainly think sealants and waxes have become muddled already to a certain extent. My presumed 'clearcut' definition of synthetic for sealant and natural for wax didn't work, or certainly doesn't stand up to scrutiny, so maybe it's just time to call everything LSP and be done with it 

The real issue facing nano technologists will be an improvement to clearcoats. If the technology becomes accessible (cheap) enough, the ingredients will just end up in paint, whether crystal, ceramic or whatever.

And then people will end up putting a carnauba back on top just to make it bling. (Even if they don't need really need to).


----------



## SimonVW (Jul 16, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> Anyway, I take it Charger works at Mark V? Am I correct? It would be nice to know people's knowledge base simply as it allows a certain value to be put to their statements. I have always held Charger's comments highly as his statements have revealed a deeper level of knowledge. That would never prevent me asking questions or challenging them though, for the simple reason it's nice to know more.


OK, I will lay my cards on the table  ......and get the ball rolling :lol:

I am a professional chemist and have a PhD in the subject. I work for a company involved in pharmaceutical discovery, but I do have strong technical knowledge in the subjects discussed. My interest in this thread comes from that I am a car enthusiast as well as a chemist and there is some good stuff in this thread.

Nano tech is set to be the next big thing in many areas including health, electronics and automotive (the list goes on!). The current level of investment proves it. I would be most interested, if the company in question has secure IP, in a technical description of what their product is and why its better


----------



## SimonVW (Jul 16, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> Agreed
> 
> I think you basically have the nano-crystalline (liquid crystal or 'liquid glass') type products that are a technological step ahead of the usual silicone/polymer sealants, and these are potentially a technical step ahead of what nature has to offer in the form of raw waxes. So three basic categories.
> 
> ...


That is a very good post and summary.

And technologically more advanced does not always mean better! But I dont need to tell you that & people will always love natural products


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

LOL at Simon... a chemist with a PhD... you could have said earlier... I always end up as the least qualified person on a thread like this  My qualification is in fecking around with molten carnauba and natural oils for a few months until I called in the chemical cavalry to do things properly... whatever knowledge I pick up is probably dangerously spartan and amateurish but it is of interest so I try and make sense of it all... there probably aren't many people out there who know words like Fourier Transform or Silverson, let alone get a chance to misunderstand the concepts behind them  Think of me as the one eyed man in the kingdom of the blind. There will be plenty with two eyes open and some with just poor vision pretending to be blind...



SimonVW said:


> I would be most interested, if the company in question has secure IP, in a technical description of what their product is and why its better


Anyway, not sure re Nanolex, but Rob at G-Techniq basically explained that for him it's cheaper and more secure not to have IP, in case someone makes a small modification. This will mean that marketing will be a bit woolly though, as you can never say 'product contains this' or 'product contains that'. In some respects, this is probably not as bad as the deliberate misleading of consumers that goes on when a company states some BS ingredient being present in a product, or when a company deliberately denies the presence of a specific ingredient in a product. Both of which can happen in the industry, sadly.


----------



## SimonVW (Jul 16, 2008)

Hi DF!

Yes, you have picked up on what is probably a very unrealistic request.

I have huge respect for the way you *see* the bigger picture


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> Anyway, not sure re Nanolex, but Rob at G-Techniq basically explained that for him it's cheaper and more secure not to have IP, in case someone makes a small modification. This will mean that marketing will be a bit woolly though, as you can never say 'product contains this' or 'product contains that'. In some respects, this is probably not as bad as the deliberate misleading of consumers that goes on when a company states some BS ingredient being present in a product, or when a company deliberately denies the presence of a specific ingredient in a product. Both of which can happen in the industry, sadly.


See, this is exactly why we don't tell more than we have to, just like others do. This is also the reason why I can't tell you the difference to Zaino etc. I mean even if I could I wouldn't, because of the comparison I would tell things we don't want to be told.

I personally see things this way: Since our products keep what we promise, I'm ok if the whole process of placing them on the market and them being accepted takes a little longer than usual. 
I do agree that one should considder not taking the "nano"-reference into account, but we did on purpose because what we sell is nano-technology and can't be compared to other products like wax or LG. But, since especially professionals are picking up more and more, I'm pretty confident that things will work out. I think this is mostly what every new technology has to face at the start.
But I also think that this thread became an amazing discussion and some stuff written here is really really interesting, so keep on going guys...


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

can't recall if i mentioned on this thread already but the usp on c1, c4 and c5 (ie the Gtechniq crystal lacquer family of products) is the bonding technology.

i think we will shortly be at the stage where every man and his dog will be producing nano this and nano that. it's not that difficult to mix in some nano scaled ingredients into a product but as i'm sure i mentioned before saying something is nano tells you virtually nothing about how the product will work. 

we have purposefully not used nano as a lead marketing point for this reason.


----------



## Nanolex (Jun 8, 2008)

loboil said:


> can't recall if i mentioned on this thread already but the usp on c1, c4 and c5 (ie the Gtechniq crystal lacquer family of products) is the bonding technology.
> 
> i think we will shortly be at the stage where every man and his dog will be producing nano this and nano that. it's not that difficult to mix in some nano scaled ingredients into a product but as i'm sure i mentioned before saying something is nano tells you virtually nothing about how the product will work.
> 
> we have purposefully not used nano as a lead marketing point for this reason.


Since we both offer products that are comparable, maybe it didn't become so clear what else really distinguishes these sealants from other products.

Since my company is actually called Nano Surface Solutions we don't only sell car care (though car care is my favorite since I'm an enthusiast myself), but also sealants for ceramic, concrete, metal, textiles, paper and many others. We also have sealant for stainless steel with anti-fingerprint characteristic, the same for frosted glass. 
What I want to say is, that the self-cleaning characteristics, the protection and the long durability are the essential characteristics of these sealants and also the ones that distinguish them from waxes and other sealants.

Especially the self-cleaning characteristic are important - since the dirt is kept from bonding with the surface (not totally, but to a very high degree), rain is sufficient to wash a big part of the dirt away, this means the intervals in which you usually wash your car become longer, also you save car-shampoo and other cleaners because you need a lot less (or none) of them any longer. 
This saves you time and a little money and has a positive effect on the environment. These are actually the main reasons for a lot of people who have their cars sealed (despite the paint protection and the improved sight by rain) and I think they were not really a topic yet.

Another characteristic of "nano"-sealants is that you can give them the characteristics you want - p.e. can we produce a glass sealant that is hydrophilic instead of hydrophobic and mostly used in asia, or a sealant that is used in tire factories that prevents the tires from sticking to the rolls they pass while production. 
I mean this whole technology is already able to do things we couldn't imagine before and as the research goes on, who knows what will be next...

The point is that a lot of people (no insult to anyone specific) do judge nanotechnology in a negative way (especially in the car care section) right now because of frauds or people selling weak products to make fast profits, but I think that in the near future the image might change. But I also have to admit that I was sceptical at first when the whole nano-approach came up and that it is necessary to tell people what it really is about.

Thank you all for asking / this discussion, I think it really brings up some answers and helps understanding.


----------



## CleanYourCar (Jan 23, 2006)

Our units are actually next door to a company that make 'nano technology' products, both the chemicals and actual design and invention of the grinding machines to make particles sub micron. They also create their own sub micron products in house but mainly export these products in the Health care sector.

They have two full time chemists and I've given them loads of different products to play with over the past year or so as he is keen to have a go at creating a car sealant using their sub micron technology.

They are mega busy so I never see the boss for more than 5 minutes at a time, but he keeps bringing me samples (from sub micron shampoos to sealants) every so often to try and some are very good. They have all the equipment and testing equipment to make a really fantastic sealant. Everytime he sees me he gets feedback and asks how I'd like to see it improved......so watch this space!


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

look forward to seeing how this develops :thumb:

I really like the idea of a car that stays cleaner and dirt that washes off when it rains  but I wonder how I marry that with enjoying the 'fiddling' element of messing with the car and products 

I think you need to have a base 'sealant' that provides the protection and durability, but also a 'booster/refresher' product like a super QD, that gives the enthusiast something they can use on a regular basis, after washing, to boost looks, maintain the performance of the base coating and meet the need for a regular 'fiddle' 

I hope we get to the stage that these products are available to the enthusiast so we can apply them ourselves at lower cost


----------

