# Wax - Had Its Day??



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Its been an interesting few months of late for me, trialling different LSP systems and bringing in more and more sealents into my armoury... This I have to say is in a complete turnaround to my previous opinions on sealents, where the claimed plasticky and cold looks always put me off, along with many assertions that sealents were difficult to use and fussy to bond.

However, of late, sealents have started to arrive in my arsenal and are getting more and more use as they find their way to the front of my LSP cupboard... Sealents have been around for a while and I confess I have shyed away from them for a variety of reasons and the ones I have seen up until now didn't really impress me with the exceptions of EGP and TW Gloss Guard whose durability kick most, if not all waxes, firmly into the weeds.

But now - two particular sealent systems have arrived with me, and both have served to thoroughly impress me on many fronts. Indeed more so than any wax has done previously. These of course being Zaino, and Duragloss. Now both of these have been around for a while, but they are new to me, however with each application and test I find myself impressed with the slightly glassy nuance they offer and there does seem to be something small that they offer over waxes. Couple this to durability of these products, where Zaino is beginning to impress me and reports suggest that both of these ranges are hugely capable and ready to kick most waxes for six. 

Sitting looking at all the waxes in my collection now, I do wonder how many of them will be used again... Having been suitably impressed with each of application of sealents and their offering over a well prepped finish and in one case, the durbaility, I find myself wondering why I didn't go down that route sooner! :doublesho Thinking about it, I wonder if carnauba waxes are now more and more becoming limited by the fact they work with the same raw ingredient (albeit in various quantities, but let us not start that discussion!!)... its always carnauba wax that is left on the surface which presents some sort of glass ceiling at least to the durability but also to any look (if at all) that can be offered. Sealents, being man made, are open to advancements beyond what the "wax-tree" has to offer and this seems to be showing in typical performances of the products - they can offer more and are continually being developped to be better.

Now, I'm quite sure its not so cut and shut as that... I mean there are huge variances in wax durability (and some claim in looks, I'd venture to say highly subtle nuances are the only difference), so there's obviously more to it than simply carnuaba... the blend is important. But is the carnauba ultimately going to represent a limit that the man-made polymers are capable of exceeding by virtue of the ability to enhance them with chemistry research. Comapre durability of Concours and Souveran, both using carnuaba, and you can see huge differences, but I wonder how much of this is actually down to solvents carrying the wax and they way they prepare the underlying paint to take the wax? Or are there other ingredients around that can affect the durability significantly, and are these man made? 

Its food for thought for me, definitely, and a lot of questions will be answered by the big LSP test in July, whether or not looks wise any LSP offers any differences to the real-world human eye that I, and the rest of us happen to have. But in terms of performance, it does seem to me that after trying so many different waxes of varying prices, there is a glass ceiling which they are struggling to break through. In my opinion, and that is dominating my LSP thoughts right now - if a product relies on a natural ingredient, then surely it must be limited by this, regardless of how much you wish to pay for it. Can man-made products as raw ingredients be tuned, developed to go beyond the natural products and then exceed still further... citing Bilt Hamber Autobalm as an example here, and its ability to withstand the salt test and protect unprotected metal. Not exactly a real-world test, but it is evidence of just what serious chemistry R&D can develop.

I'm in two worlds right now as far as LSPs go - but its certainly fun, and an entertaining thought to see just how these two LSP styles develop and whether wax can one day blast through its apparent glass ceiling that I myself feel I have stumbled on.


----------



## Mixman (Dec 18, 2007)

Thanks for taking the time out to type this in. I've read it with interest. I look forward to reading replies!


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

oooh you controversial scotsman you, i bet you were giggling with anticipation when you typed the thread title.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Mixman said:


> Thanks for taking the time out to type this in. I've read it with interest. I look forward to reading replies!


I word this as my thoughts right now, essentially me thinking out loud and trying to place some hard facts in and around my superfluous thought process! :lol:

Its an interesting train of thought my mind is on right now...

I'm not saying wax products are bad, and we should all switch to sealents, far from it - waxes have proven themselves for years! But I wonder more on a future development sense, they are reaching a hard limitation.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

I like using waxes but iam going to be using Zaino Z2 on my machined paint this afternoon


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> oooh you controversial scotsman you, i bet you were giggling with anticipation when you typed the thread title.


Not aiming to be controversial here... I'm looking for information and people's thoughts on this as I'm becoming more and more interested in peeling back the layers of LSPs and getting down to "brass tacks" as it were. I'm one of those sorts that likes to know everything I can, and doesn't mind asking difficult questions to find out the info


----------



## dominic84 (Jan 27, 2007)

I think you raise a very a good point and with regards to the development of sealants we have certainly started to see this already with Polycharger and ZFX, which shows how traditional waxes are struggling to keep up in the durability stakes.

However personally I think the appeal of a traditional wax and using something natural will never go away, and therefore waxes will always remain popular even if more technically advanced products exist


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

dominic84 said:


> I think you raise a very a good point and with regards to the development of sealants we have certainly started to see this already with Polycharger and ZFX, which shows how traditional waxes are struggling to keep up in the durability stakes.
> 
> However personally I think the appeal of a traditional wax and using something natural will never go away, and therefore waxes will always remain popular even if more technically advanced products exist


I agree - I mean, you wouldn't eat processed peas if you could grow your own in your back garden  ... Waxes will always have that appeal, and that appeal exists to me too, which is why I will always have waxes...


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Not aiming to be controversial here... I'm looking for information and people's thoughts on this as I'm becoming more and more interested in peeling back the layers of LSPs and getting down to "brass tacks" as it were. I'm one of those sorts that likes to know everything I can, and doesn't mind asking difficult questions to find out the info


I know mate, i was just pulling you leg, however i bet this one is gonna be a LONG thread, with some lengthy responses from the manufacturers, i am especially keen to hear dom's response as he is often very informstive on such things!


----------



## Gandi (Dec 18, 2007)

I think for the Ultimate finish the Sealants can go that bit further, especially when the Zaino system can show Flaws in what was previously a flawless finish finish.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

I see what you mean Dave about most waxes looking not much diffrent find 476 looking the same as megs #16 ect


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> I know mate, i was just pulling you leg, however i bet this one is gonna be a LONG thread, with some lengthy responses from the manufacturers, i am especially keen to hear dom's response as he is often very informstive on such things!


I relish some real brass tacks info here, and I'm quite sure Dom will be on hand with that :wave:


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

It's a great discussion topic, Dave, so well done for bringing it up. We will certainly develop some sealant products in the future as it would be silly to 'limit' yourself to one technology or the other.

However, it is never as cut and dried as you think.

A lot of 'sealants' will contain products that 'waxes' do and vice versa. There are even some product out there that are perceived to be waxes but are really sealants. There is no hard and fast line in the sand. For example, one manufacturer makes a big thing about how natural their products are and you'd think it was a smoothie you're applying to the paintwork. But the spectrum analyser takes no prisoners and shows some rather more 'modern' ingredients hiding within. From a technical perspective a pure wax could be 70% identical to a pure sealant in terms of content (as solvents can be shared etc). So these are brothers and sisters we are talking about, not completely different animals.

Performance wise, a good carnauba wax can still outperform a poor sealant in the durability stakes, although technically a sealant has an advantage. So you need to pay a lot of attention to the overall recipe and the purpose of the product to ensure it suits your need. A great product in one application may be a poor product in another.

And finally - a contentious point I am sure - I humbly question the topic of durability beyond 3-4 months as being a real world advantage... why? Because a 'temporary' wax or sealant layer is going to pick up embedded contaminants over the course of its time on a car's paintwork, and these need to be thoroughly cleansed/clayed/removed after they have built up. Under normal use, I would suggest the wax or sealant layer will be dirty or degraded enough to require removal and replacement every few months, especially in built up areas where the industrial and traffic fallout is higher. Even if your supersealant is undiminished in a year's time, it will have dirt and contamination within it that washing can't shift and the necessary clay bar will undoubtedly damage the applied layer enough to require its replacement. It is like putting on a pair of keks and leaving them on for a week to save on washing powder 

The real benefit to waxes will always be the look/warmth in a vinyl vs CD kind of way, and that will always be quite subjective. Now that there are some sealants that offer a better look than ever before, waxes - especially ludicrously priced one - are under heavy fire.


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

I have to say, Dave that I find myself with almost identical thoughts as you right now. I've been suffering with water spotting problems after using various carnauba wax LSPs lately and since trying the Tropi-care TC3 sealant, this problem seems to have more or less gone away without having to sacrifice anything in terms of looks (to my eyes anyway) as opposed to a wax. Have you tried the Tropi-care sealant yet btw?

I admit that the above problem was the primary reason for experimenting with a new sealant LSP, and not because I was seeking a better look or better durability etc. but seeing as the latter is usually a strong point of sealants anyway I'm glad I've set off down the sealant route.

I think I'll still carry on using my various carnauba based waxes on my XR2's solid black paint (if only just for the sake of using them up), but for the Puma which lives outside, it's sealants all the way for me from now on.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> It's a great discussion topic, Dave, so well done for bringing it up. We will certainly develop some sealant products in the future as it would be silly to 'limit' yourself to one technology or the other.
> 
> However, it is never as cut and dried as you think.
> 
> ...


On this point am i right in thinking that sealents will better withstand UV and not "yellow" as quickly as a wax?


----------



## Steve-z4 (Mar 17, 2008)

Food for thought indeed. Being a relative newbie to the forum, and very limited with my experience of various waxes and sealants, I have found, to my eye, the man made element has something to offer.
Example....... maybe a poor one and could get shot down in flames, but I have tried a few waxes from Dodo (including the panel pot version of one) and AGHD on our black Z4 and Clio all of which gave good results... shine, beading, and still offering the same qualities after a few washes.Then a few weeks ago bought Megs NXT 2.0 to use on our work van but tried it on the Clio as I was still prepping the van. In my opinion The MEGS gave as good results as the waxes but better performance with water sheeting after washing..........nano technology?????
My next step is to try the Zanio Z6, Z8 and as Dave KG as suggested has wax reached a Concord moment.


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

good question Dave, but you havent even touched on 1 important aspect for me...the incredible ease of use from 'wipe on walk away' products like Opti Seal, Ultima PGP and Z-CS, combined with a look I like 

I used to be able to add a complete layer of very durable and good looking protection to our CR-V in <5 mins - done! I honestly think as technology develops we will see so much more benefits like this come along, and I am sure durability will be one of them. Who know's whats next, but maybe something that builds on the anti-static properties of certain LSP's and reduces dirt adhesion, self cleaning almost.....


----------



## Serious Performance (Oct 26, 2005)

I've always been a big fan of sealants and still use sealants way more than waxes. 

It's nice to see that some of the 'wax guru's' on here are seeing how good some of the more modern sealants have progressed over the last few years from being plasticy (sp?) and lifeless to actually giving enough vibrance to the finish to even question if a wax would be needed to improve the looks of the paint.

I also agree with Dom that it isn't always a case of two camps... Waxes and sealants. The crossover of the use of polymers and waxes in either seems to be more and more common, or maybe just more and more noticed.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

rmorgan84 said:


> On this point am i right in thinking that sealents will better withstand UV and not "yellow" as quickly as a wax?


Yes, this is generally true. Carnauba itself is naturally pale yellow which never helps but a lot of yellowing occurs due to the surface being broken down by UV light and this rougher surface absorbing and trapping dirt more easily whilst also reflecting light less - which sealants will also do but to a lesser extent. But the amount of industrial fallout on the surface etc may still be as high with a sealant as with a wax after, say 6 months, even though it hasn't picked up as much surface dirt as badly. And also, some waxes/sealants will yellow more/less than other ones, so it is only a general rule.


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

I have tried LOTS of waxes in the past 6 months or so, but I always seem to end up going back to AG SRP and 3 x EGP for MY preferred finish on MY car - its a VERY tough combo to beat for looks and durability and not to mention VALUE.

It's ultimately down to personal preference on finish - my step dad MUCH prefers the look of Dodo Blue Velvet on his black car...

I look forward to Dodo Sealants...


----------



## Garry Spight (May 20, 2008)

Hi Dave an excellent post there it is a question that has been on my mind for a while now. (As well as a lot of other people).

I see where you are going in the case of sealents with them being man made products containing no caranuba.
But in my opinion as the advances in the sealent front move forward so will the advances in the waxes. 

IE:
They will have better carriers to help lay the wax down on to the paint. While some waxes contain a high amount of wax they still contain solvents which carry them. The advances in the solvent front will soon allow to have less of them and more wax.
Like the Dodo juice paperweight which is raw carnauba, If They can find a way of laying down such a hard wax there would be little in its way to protect paint as well as that cause its as hard a concrete.

On the sealent front I know the cemisty behind them is advancing but I dont think we will being noticing wax phased out until a good few decades from now if ever. when all the options for carriers have been exhausted.

Thanks for viewing your point Dave in such an interesting read I'm sure there will be many people posting there views on here.


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

Bigpikle said:


> but maybe something that builds on the anti-static properties of certain LSP's and reduces dirt adhesion, self cleaning almost.....


Your never going to cure the static problem fully, especially if the car has had a going over with a machine, the friction from the pad creates a huge static charge, i have an anti static device, as used in body shops, fitted to my compressor which helps alleviate some of this problem but its still not perfect.

As for reducing dirt adhesion and almost self cleaning abilities, take a look at the GTechniq sealant  If you haven't seen it ask Rob to show you the back end of the WRC Scooby they applied it to.


----------



## Jaygo (Apr 7, 2008)

There'll be a lot of money being invested by those turning out expensive wax products for some time to come and money talks.

It seems to me most likely that sealants will become the norm and wax will become the ‘designer products’ where people buy them for the 'feel good factor' and because they can afford to buy a more ‘exotic’ product even if the tangible benefits are dubious, limited or at best highly subjective.

I’m not knocking the 'feel good factor'. Feeling good is highly desirable.

Perhaps there will still be a market for good quality wax at modest prices such as those offered by Dodo and a few others but my initial assumption is that there may not be in the not too distant future.

Then again with advancing technology perhaps wax will still have its place incorporated in sealants and the definitions will continue to blur.


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

It could be that in the future 'waxes' become like vinyl is to hardened Hi-Fi buffs - by that I mean that the sound of a vinyl LP on something like a top of the range Linn Sondek LP12 system can still blow your socks off (and it does have the 'feel good' factor that has been mentioned), but a more modestly priced CD/MP3 system has many other 'real world' advantages, and is therefore more akin to a sealant in the detailing world.

Vinyl and CD/MP3 have found a natural balance and manage to co-exist, so I don't see any reason why wax and sealant LSPs wouldn't do the same.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

drive 'n' shine said:


> Your never going to cure the static problem fully, especially if the car has had a going over with a machine, the friction from the pad creates a huge static charge, i have an anti static device, as used in body shops, fitted to my compressor which helps alleviate some of this problem but its still not perfect.
> 
> As for reducing dirt adhesion and almost self cleaning abilities, take a look at the GTechniq sealant  If you haven't seen it ask Rob to show you the back end of the WRC Scooby they applied it to.


let me show you 










and here's a shot of a test plate (ok the top of an airconditioner painted with marine paint) on the roof of G|techniq's secret lair in Hong Kong (Central) which as those who have been there will know is horribly polluted plus has a huge amount of humidity as well as a lot of UV exposure (ie one of the harshest climates for paint finishes). The product on the left is a market leading teflon (ptfe) based pro only applied polymer wax.










what you are seeing here is the difference in stain resistance. c1 is incredibly dense = great durability and great stain resistance.


----------



## Affection to Detail (Jul 6, 2006)

Sealants all the way!


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

drive 'n' shine said:


> Your never going to cure the static problem fully, especially if the car has had a going over with a machine, the friction from the pad creates a huge static charge, i have an anti static device, as used in body shops, fitted to my compressor which helps alleviate some of this problem but its still not perfect.
> 
> As for reducing dirt adhesion and almost self cleaning abilities, take a look at the GTechniq sealant  If you haven't seen it ask Rob to show you the back end of the WRC Scooby they applied it to.


good points about static...and I have seen those WRC pics which are mighty impressive :thumb: Maybe the next steps will include advances that makes these products more suited to DIY detailers as well?

On a personal note I have to say that products like OCW, DG AW and Z8 just make it sooooo easy to keep a finish looking superb after every wash, with just the smallest amount of time and effort involved. Each offers something slightly different IME (but I havent used Z8 yet) and combined with some durability and UV protection etc, they really do become the ideal products for many people to use regularly.

There is something to be said about setting out to spend time perfecting the cars appearance and lovingly waxing it etc, and that will always have a place, but for many who would prefer to minimise time spent AND maximise looks and protection then I honestly believe advances in sealant technology will deliver much


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

I think you will really find the market dividing into three.

1) Temporary waxes and sealants, all boundaries will be pretty much blurred, there is a lot of ingredient cross over even now; the performance advantages will not be down to improved carriers (as it is like inventing a thicker paint... two coats of a thinner one have the same effect, which is why we advise layering) but down to improved additives/ingredients that help protect against dirt, aid bonding, prevent UV degradation etc.

2) Permanent cross linking products and improved paint coatings; either improved paint clearcoat itself or stuff like Gtechniq, which is really a permanent coating improving certain paint characteristics. The only disadvantage to these is perhaps that they can't be removed and will need some cleaning and maintenance to remove embedded contaminants, just as you cleanse paintwork, but the technology should make it easier. I can see people waxing a gtechniq car but maybe that defeats the purpose of it?

3) Paint films... paintshield's new 3M films are very thin, don't yellow, laser cut and are optically very good. These can be removed at sale time and are far more durable than any other physical coating from what I can tell as the car is covered in plastic. Again, people will use products on these to maintain them and clean them.


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Massive sealant fan and much less a wax fan, although I do like the odd wax.

Personally, on a daily driver that is driven a fair way each month, I cannot see a reason to use a wax.

On a special car, a garage queen, I can see why you would want to use a wax and would probably keep sealants for a daily driver and a wax for a special car myself, if I could resist Zainoing the special car!


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Its great to see so many great views and opinions here, I was hoping for an interesting and educational (for me at least  ) discussion to come from this and it further feeds my mind and thinking process. 

With the huge blurring of the lines mentioned between various products, where indeed they share much the same DNA  - well, they would, they are being designed to do the same job of protecting the paint after all  To that end, I wonder why sealent/carnuaba mixes are not quite as popular as they might be (EX with Carnauba for example) as this is a product which clearly advertises that it is both and is very much in the blurring boundary.

To that end, staying in that boundary rather than being specifically one or the other would have the best of both worlds? Perhaps this is a main way for waxes to advance, and sealents to advance too... taking the raw carnauba ingredient that will never change at the end of the day, no matter how many virgins you get to harvest it and what price tag you want to slap on it and combining it with more and more advanced polymer technology...

Or do we get to a point where the polymer technology is interrupted by the wax prescence or vice-versa... just goes to show in many ways that developping an LSP system has a huge number of considerations!


----------



## Boyd (Aug 4, 2007)

I really like good carnauba waxes. Also very keen on the results. But after reading I'm very tempted to buy some Zaino.... This place is no good for me


----------



## toni (Oct 30, 2005)

Dave KG said:


> - well, they would, they are being designed to do the same job of protecting the paint after all


I was hoping it would get here ...

What exactly is a wax/sealant protecting the paint from? Consider the following scenario: you get the car prepped, clayed, polished and wax with a wax of choice. You top up that wax at a good interval, so that every time you have 'some' protection left on the paint. After a year or so, the car gets clayed prepparing for a new session of polishing (meanwhile the paint was 'protected'), BUT the clay picks up CONTAMINANTS!

How can this be possible? If contamintants are there again, with wax applied, has the wax dissapeared? Is the durability lower than with expect and with top it too late, therefore the contaminants have a clean go at the paint? Or is the wax not protecting the paint as we though?


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

toni said:


> I was hoping it would get here ...
> 
> What exactly is a wax/sealant protecting the paint from? Consider the following scenario: you get the car prepped, clayed, polished and wax with a wax of choice. You top up that wax at a good interval, so that every time you have 'some' protection left on the paint. After a year or so, the car gets clayed prepparing for a new session of polishing (meanwhile the paint was 'protected'), BUT the clay picks up CONTAMINANTS!
> 
> How can this be possible? If contamintants are there again, with wax applied, has the wax dissapeared? Is the durability lower than with expect and with top it too late, therefore the contaminants have a clean go at the paint? Or is the wax not protecting the paint as we though?


Contaminants are things that will stick to the paint, much like dirt will stick to the paint only your can wash it off, contaminants stay there, they can be bonded on and get stuck... The wax layer or sealent layer in my eyes is more there to protect the finish from things like UV radiation, but one should note that the typical wax layer is going to be phenomenally thin.

I would, for amusements value, love to see the transmission characteristics of various waxes and sealents for various wavelenghts, clearly they pass visible light as thet are not opaque on the surface, but what is the transmission loss (if any) for UV? I would hope high, but is it really?


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

toni said:


> I was hoping it would get here ...
> 
> What exactly is a wax/sealant protecting the paint from? Consider the following scenario: you get the car prepped, clayed, polished and wax with a wax of choice. You top up that wax at a good interval, so that every time you have 'some' protection left on the paint. After a year or so, the car gets clayed prepparing for a new session of polishing (meanwhile the paint was 'protected'), BUT the clay picks up CONTAMINANTS!
> 
> How can this be possible? If contamintants are there again, with wax applied, has the wax dissapeared? Is the durability lower than with expect and with top it too late, therefore the contaminants have a clean go at the paint? Or is the wax not protecting the paint as we though?


I think you need to distinguish between contaminants and general dirt. Dirt would sit on the layer and be washed off by regular washing, while contaminants either bond with whatever LSP you have, or penetrate the LSP and bond to the paint. Regular washing is not sufficient to remove these.

This talks to Dom's point above, which is that a finite life of 3-4 months may be ideal, as we would want to be removing the contaminants and degraded LSP at this interval anyway.... I remember him talking about this at the Dodo training day and it made a lot of sense to me 

The only thing that would impact this would be if an LSP could be devised that reduced the ability for bonded contaminants and didnt suffer a reduction in looks over time


----------



## Shug (Jul 13, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> I would, for amusements value, love to see the transmission characteristics of various waxes and sealents for various wavelenghts, clearly they pass visible light as thet are not opaque on the surface, but what is the transmission loss (if any) for UV? I would hope high, but is it really?


Dave KG - The Heston Blumenthal of the detailing world


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

loboil said:


> let me show you
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's very interesting, but i would like to see it compared with a different sealent such as Zaino or Duragloss or Jetseal and see if there is still such a clear difference!


----------



## toni (Oct 30, 2005)

Dave KG said:


> Contaminants are things that will stick to the paint, much like dirt will stick to the paint only your can wash it off, contaminants stay there, they can be bonded on and get stuck... The wax layer or sealent layer in my eyes is more there to protect the finish from things like UV radiation, but one should note that the typical wax layer is going to be phenomenally thin.
> 
> I would, for amusements value, love to see the transmission characteristics of various waxes and sealents for various wavelenghts, clearly they pass visible light as thet are not opaque on the surface, but what is the transmission loss (if any) for UV? I would hope high, but is it really?


UV radiation isn't a great problem anymore for clear-coated paints. One of the purposes of the clear coat is to minimise/stop the UV radiation from reaching the paint and causing disscoloration.

Maybe the wax layer is UV reflective (not UV absorbant) ... just a thought.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Contaminants are things that will stick to the paint, much like dirt will stick to the paint only your can wash it off, contaminants stay there, they can be bonded on and get stuck... The wax layer or sealent layer in my eyes is more there to protect the finish from things like UV radiation, but one should note that the typical wax layer is going to be phenomenally thin.
> 
> I would, for amusements value, love to see the transmission characteristics of various waxes and sealents for various wavelenghts, clearly they pass visible light as thet are not opaque on the surface, but what is the transmission loss (if any) for UV? I would hope high, but is it really?


I would hope they would be quite high, when you think of sun block, if you put factor 25 on, once it is dried the coating it leaves on your skin is microscopic but it still stops oyu getting sun burnt!


----------



## toda_k20 (Jul 6, 2007)

I enjoy this post as this same subject has been in my mind for a very long while.

The fact that natural = hamless to paint and chemical = harmful to paint is mainly marketing IMO. I like the gloss associated with carnauba but the main problem esp in hot and humid climates is they simply lack the durability needed.

There will always be an interest in carnauba as much as tube amplifiers appeal to a nich group of audiophiles. Certain properties of it are very desirable but they do carry a far bit of limitations.

I have an open mind and objectively, I am willing to explore better sealants who can offer the shine I like without having to need reapplication so often.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> Contaminants are things that will stick to the paint, much like dirt will stick to the paint only your can wash it off, contaminants stay there, they can be bonded on and get stuck... The wax layer or sealent layer in my eyes is more there to protect the finish from things like UV radiation, but one should note that the typical wax layer is going to be phenomenally thin.
> 
> I would, for amusements value, love to see the transmission characteristics of various waxes and sealents for various wavelenghts, clearly they pass visible light as thet are not opaque on the surface, but what is the transmission loss (if any) for UV? I would hope high, but is it really?


as a side issue to car care - one of c1's biggest markets is protecting marine finishes which as you can imagine are by and large exposed to much higher UV concentrations than cars. there are two ways of protecting from UV - reflective filters and absorption filters. c1 has both and polymer waxes use filters too - we've done a lot of UV testing in the arizona desert on one of these bad boys:









we use these natural sunlight concentrators because they are reputed to be more accurate than any lab UV testers. We measure gloss retention and colour stability both of which c1 excel at (nearly double the gloss retention).

we're currently getting some electron microscope images of the coating - will post when we've got them.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

toni said:


> UV radiation isn't a great problem anymore for clear-coated paints. One of the purposes of the clear coat is to minimise/stop the UV radiation from reaching the paint and causing disscoloration.
> 
> Maybe the wax layer is UV reflective (not UV absorbant) ... just a thought.


absolutely


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

toni said:


> UV radiation isn't a great problem anymore for clear-coated paints. One of the purposes of the clear coat is to minimise/stop the UV radiation from reaching the paint and causing disscoloration.
> 
> Maybe the wax layer is UV reflective (not UV absorbant) ... just a thought.


Yes, the clearcoat is protecting the colour coat underneath, that is true... presumably it is stopping UV by absorbing it? And the absorption reduces the amount of UV reaching the colour coat, or is it reflecting it? If its absorbing it, then does this damage the clearcoat in any way as this is after all paint as well, and if that is the case, protection of the protection as it were would till prove useful. 

What is it that causes the clearcoat to flake on many cars - being thin is one cause, reduces the adherence. But, is this UV damage thinning it, or does the UV damage it at all?

Re: reflection, good question. My take on it in a very simple sense without thinking about it - all boundaries (and this is a boundary, wax/air) will act to reflect at the correct angle - dependant on the dielectric constant of the material in the case of a ray analysis of the system... but I dont think that these layers are acting as mirrors to light or UV - perhaps the chemistry behind them is such that UV of the UV frequency oscillates molecules in the wax or sealent layer at the correct frequency for it to represent a boundary to reflect UV, but allow transmission of visible (as you can see through the clearcoat so it must be low-loss transmission for this). The clearcoat absorption may be high in the UV, and is clearly low in the visible. Not sure on its reflectivity properties though, I confess, this kind of physics is not my specialty (microwave engineer at the end of the day  )

I imagine though, that additives could be put in paints to make the boundary a reflective one?


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> *Yes, the clearcoat is protecting the colour coat underneath, that is true... presumably it is stopping UV by absorbing it?* And the absorption reduces the amount of UV reaching the colour coat, or is it reflecting it? If its absorbing it, then does this damage the clearcoat in any way as this is after all paint as well, and if that is the case, protection of the protection as it were would till prove useful.
> 
> What is it that causes the clearcoat to flake on many cars - being thin is one cause, reduces the adherence. But, is this UV damage thinning it, or does the UV damage it at all?
> 
> Re: reflection, good question. My take on it in a very simple sense without thinking about it - all boundaries (and this is a boundary, wax/air) will act to reflect at the correct angle - dependant on the dielectric constant of the material in the case of a ray analysis of the system... but I dont think that these layers are acting as mirrors to light or UV - perhaps the chemistry behind them is such that UV of the UV frequency oscillates molecules in the wax or sealent layer at the correct frequency for it to represent a boundary to reflect UV, but allow transmission of visible (as you can see through the clearcoat so it must be low-loss transmission for this). The clearcoat absorption may be high in the UV, and is clearly low in the visible. Not sure on its reflectivity properties though, I confess, this kind of physics is not my specialty (microwave engineer at the end of the day  )


Maybe and again to use the sunblock as an example it manages to convert the ultraviolet in to heat energy in the same way?


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

Bigpikle said:


> I think you need to distinguish between contaminants and general dirt. Dirt would sit on the layer and be washed off by regular washing, while contaminants either bond with whatever LSP you have, or penetrate the LSP and bond to the paint. Regular washing is not sufficient to remove these.
> 
> This talks to Dom's point above, which is that a finite life of 3-4 months may be ideal, as we would want to be removing the contaminants and degraded LSP at this interval anyway.... I remember him talking about this at the Dodo training day and it made a lot of sense to me
> 
> The only thing that would impact this would be if an LSP could be devised that reduced the ability for bonded contaminants and didnt suffer a reduction in looks over time


correct! natural and synthetic waxes can actually pick up contaminants more easily than unprotected paint. they (waxes) are less dense than the paint they are protecting and so the wax layer whilst it's doing a good job of protecting the paint actually picks up contaminants more easily than paint. the key to making a surface as stain resistant as possible is to have the most densely packed particles on the surface. most coatings are less dense than the paint they are protecting - here's an image of the test at a different angle. the near strip has no coating on which illustrates this point (if you remember the far strip is a polymer wax and the next ones towards you are c1 v2 and c1 v1 respectively)








i'v hijacked this thread enough so i'll butt out now


----------



## Wheelie_Clean (Jun 16, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> this kind of physics is not my specialty (microwave engineer at the end of the day  )


So that's why you make such exceedingly good cakes


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

> Dave KG Wrote:- I would, for amusements value, love to see the transmission characteristics of various waxes and sealents for various wavelenghts, clearly they pass visible light as thet are not opaque on the surface, but what is the transmission loss (if any) for UV? I would hope high, but is it really?


Dave I think it's time you stopped, go and get a coffee a cigarette (if you smoke). This is 'Detailing World' mate not Scientific American! :lol::lol:

You've started me thinking outside the box and I don't like it!! :lol:

Please leave my waxes alone


----------



## Wheelie_Clean (Jun 16, 2007)

I am with you there G.

I do this for fun not to make my head hurt:lol:


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

loboil said:


> correct! natural and synthetic waxes can actually pick up contaminants more easily than unprotected paint. they (waxes) are less dense than the paint they are protecting and so the wax layer whilst it's doing a good job of protecting the paint actually picks up contaminants more easily than paint. the key to making a surface as stain resistant as possible is to have the most densely packed particles on the surface. most coatings are less dense than the paint they are protecting - here's an image of the test at a different angle. the near strip has no coating on which illustrates this point (if you remember the far strip is a polymer wax and the next ones towards you are c1 v2 and c1 v1 respectively)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


liking the look of this stuff a lot, and was talking with Neil about its use on wheels 

I guess I am put off by the need for pro application (totally understandable) and wondering about how you then polish the paint underneath (accepting it helps reduce swirls as well)....

Look forward to the next open day


----------



## stargazer (Aug 9, 2006)

Wheelie_Clean said:


> I am with you there G.
> 
> I do this for fun not to make my head hurt:lol:


:lol::lol:


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Wouldn't it be soooo much simpler if swirl marks were cool and car care products had never evolved further than Simoniz original paste wax :lol: :lol:

Seriously though this is a very interesting thread so far :thumb:


----------



## CupraRcleanR (Sep 2, 2007)

I'm a fan of Zaino. My car has never looked better. Just got my second bottle of Z2pro. 

For the pros turning round a car in a day, then I can only see wax as the real answer. To machine polish apply ZAIO and a couple of layers of Z2pro would be too time consuming even if you missed out the ZAIO.

Wax with a top up of Z8 is an option and would give good results but Zaino needs time particulalry in our crappy climate.

Zaino is fantastic but for the non-enthusiast or the time concious Pro Wax is king.




Only my thoughts guys.


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

CupraRcleanR said:


> For the pros turning round a car in a day, then I can only see wax as the real answer. To machine polish apply ZAIO and a couple of layers of Z2pro would be too time consuming even if you missed out the ZAIO.


Never had a problem getting 3 layers of Z2 down, i don't tend AIO if the car has been fully machined as i really don't see it adds anything (IMO), by the time you've got round the car ZFX'd Z2 is normally ready to come off, and if not then theres always other bit and pieces to be done while its curing.


----------



## kgb144 (Jun 5, 2007)

So far a lot of the comments/discussion has centred around durability. To me this is of secondary importance. The primary issue for me is appearance and to date I believe the more natural appearance of a good wax (my preferred flavour is Harly) looks better than the plastic coated appearance of a sealant. Moreover, I tend to use AG SRP followed by AG UDS and then apply a coat of wax on top to soften the appearance. I suppose its a bit like using a soft focus lens on a camera, in that it will help disguise any remaining defects.

As to durability I find with good washing technique two coats of wax can last anything up to 12 weeks without needing a top up.

In summary I still prefer waxes, but then again I still prefer my record player and needle as my primary hi-fi source.

ft


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

With SRP & UDS i think you're wasting your time and money just stick to one as they are almost identical prodcuts, i'd go with SRP!


----------



## talisman (Nov 20, 2006)

i love zaino and duragloss and have been a avid user for years, all my wax sits unused in the fridge....what really draws me to sealants is the PRICE!!!!!!!.......now even the most expensive sealants is still cheaper than the bottom of the rung wax....why i,m sure there no dearer than each other to produce....keep a eye out as i see a super sealant with a price premimum appearing very soon.....but we all know better don,t we???.....


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

kgb144 said:


> So far a lot of the comments/discussion has centred around durability. To me this is of secondary importance. The primary issue for me is appearance and to date I believe the more natural appearance of a good wax (my preferred flavour is Harly) looks better than the plastic coated appearance of a sealant. Moreover, I tend to use AG SRP followed by AG UDS and then apply a coat of wax on top to soften the appearance. I suppose its a bit like using a soft focus lens on a camera, in that it will help disguise any remaining defects.
> 
> As to durability I find with good washing technique two coats of wax can last anything up to 12 weeks without needing a top up.
> 
> ...


I appreciate where your coming from here, but I'm the other way around personally with what is important to me as I simply cannot see the differences between various waxes and sealents, even if it is claimed that they are there... I've tried this at detailing meets too, and nobody can ever spot the difference, I wonder if the differences really are just so small that they are nigh on impossible to spot. I guess the big LSP test at the end of July wil answer a lot of questions in this regard.

I mean, you say sealents look plasticky, but I dont personally see this from for example Zaino, Duragloss, EGP or TW Gloss Guard... But if there is indeed a difference there, then the wax will always gold this advantage- until polymers are developped to mimmick the look of course.


----------



## Boyd (Aug 4, 2007)

Probably all the wax lovers think this :lol:


----------



## Planet Man (Apr 12, 2008)

I think it is fair to say most of us suffer from OCD on here!! 

Where will we be and what will we all do if the progress and durability continues to increase for sealants stopping us from what we like doing best on weekends. (and weekdays for the pro's) 

For me, yes, I like to try new things and experiment. For a time I thought that paste waxes were going to be a thing of the past however since the short time I have been a member here I have seen more paste waxes eulogized than I ever thought possible, so much so I have invested in them myself and have been amazed by the results.

I have been impressed by sealants so much that I even had my own finger print sealed between the paint and sealant on my last car:doublesho

It's funny though how things that go around come around!! I am sure that for many of us the thought of using a longer term sealants that does not give us the excuse to put just 'one more coat of wax on the car dear' fills us with dread. It does me anyway

I think for a pro, I would want to give my customer something that lasts as long as possible so that he/she felt he/she was getting good value for money and would make recomendations etc.

However I enjoy a good regular workout with a tub of wax and a car that looks great just after completion:thumb:

Perish the thought of a sealant that offers unlimited protection especially for the pro's, after all, what customers will want to come back for another detail if their car still looks fantastic!!!!

Bit like the mistake the tyre companies made years ago. Built tyres that would last and last, they almost killed their businesses. Had to lay off loads of staff and start producing other features in tyre technology but with not quite so much durability. Food for thought. 

Great Post Dave:thumb:


----------



## roscopervis (Aug 22, 2006)

I go through phases. Last year I was using sealants until the Autumn, when I went mad for Collinite 915. Now I'm back to sealants.

They do look different, and maybe I'm getting bored of one look and switching to the other? I agree with Dave that between waxes, its very hard to tell the difference on a well prepped car and that's why I like Collinite, as its durable as well.

With sealants, I've tried a few, and I like what they offer in terms of a sharpness to the paint that waxes mute. The trick is to find one that adds depth. I'm a big fan of the humble Turtlewax Gloss Guard and its newer brother the Platinum Extra Gloss Protection which adds a bit more depth than the old Gloss Guard can, especially with 3+ layers.

I'd love to get the Zaino system, but with so many other things to buy for the house, I cant justify it at the moment.


----------



## toni (Oct 30, 2005)

I'll leave the protection discussion for a later time and concentrate on the looks now. Just one last thought about UV protection: glass is a very good UV absorber and does this without any damage to itself! 

Look wise, the higher end sealants have caught up to carnauba waxes and have a more 'natural' finish. Comparing high-end sealant to high-end carnauba, I belive the end result would be very similar. The final decision belonging to the user, whether he likes to one or the other, with the content of hand-made or natural ingredients having no influence. I belive the 'great LSP test' will show this.
When looking at lower-end sealants, they tend to have that sterile look, but some lower-end carnaubas also have similar characteristics. This is supported by the 'theory' posted before, that both share some of the ingredients (solvents).

Durability wise, some prefer to apply a wax as rarely as possible, so that is a concern.


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

Well I have always been impressed with zaino and have been trialling some duragloss products and they have been equally impressive so far. 

There is something 'nice' however about a great wax job:thumb:


----------



## TeZ (Oct 28, 2007)

I have seen this thread coming for a while from you dave.

Nice write up tho , But for me a good prep job and wax is still a fav.


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

toni said:


> I'll leave the protection discussion for a later time and concentrate on the looks now. *Just one last thought about UV protection: glass is a very good UV absorber and does this without any damage to itself! *


not quite true.....

laminated glass absorbs UV but it is the plastic substrate layer between the glass that does that, not the glass itself...otherwise it is the heavy tints in coloured products that do the same job...guess you dont want plastic wrap or a heavy tint on your paint though


----------



## Affection to Detail (Jul 6, 2006)

Bigpikle said:


> liking the look of this stuff a lot, and was talking with Neil about its use on wheels
> 
> I guess I am put off by the need for pro application (totally understandable) and wondering about how you then polish the paint underneath (accepting it helps reduce swirls as well)....
> 
> Look forward to the next open day


Polish first then the sealant afterwards. The issue with pro application as you are no doubt aware of is that when this stuff goes off, it isn't coming off easy.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Brazo said:


> There is something 'nice' however about a great wax job:thumb:


Smooth back, crack and sack?
No more mono-eyebrow?

*TAXI!*.......


----------



## lanciamug (May 18, 2008)

Bigpikle, I believe you are incorrect. Ordinary borosilicate glass is essentially UV opaque. Specialist 'quartz' glass is used in applications where UV transmision is desirable. If the glass in a windscreen allowed UV through, the plastic laminate layer would suffer rapid UV degradation. Not a good thing!


----------



## projibber (Dec 29, 2007)

As Mr Dodo man says..

And finally - a contentious point I am sure - I humbly question the topic of durability beyond 3-4 months as being a real world advantage... why? Because a 'temporary' wax or sealant layer is going to pick up embedded contaminants over the course of its time on a car's paintwork, and these need to be thoroughly cleansed/clayed/removed after they have built up. Under normal use, I would suggest the wax or sealant layer will be dirty or degraded enough to require removal and replacement every few months, especially in built up areas where the industrial and traffic fallout is higher. Even if your supersealant is undiminished in a year's time, it will have dirt and contamination within it that washing can't shift and the necessary clay bar will undoubtedly damage the applied layer enough to require its replacement. It is like putting on a pair of keks and leaving them on for a week to save on washing powder.

Totally agree with this and also believe that 99% of us are on this forum because we actually like detailing cars.. Claying, polishing a waxing is part of that process and I think its something that we all like to do, some more frequently than others.. I tend to re-do the whole car every 4-6 weeksish, not because I need to but because I enjoy it..
Anyone else see where Im coming from or am I mad?


----------



## Griff (Aug 11, 2007)

Totally fasinated by this thread 
At the end of the day we are after perfection, and there are different way's we see this for me the gloss is the most important thing, I want my paintwork to be like a mirror showing all the glitter and sparkle of the flake, dont mind about durability as i love cleaning my car (and the families) we all have a different opinion on what is the best finish for us but at the moment no products satisfy us on all counts as we keep buying more and more looking for nirvarna. suddenly we find something that seems to give just that tiny bit more and for a short time we are happy, but then someone say's I have tried this product and it's the mutts a couple more try it and off we all go again. sealants seem to be in vouge at the moment but that could change if a megatastic wax comes out.
Tom still searching for nirvana


----------



## Eurogloss (Jan 22, 2008)

I have always been a wax fan until i tried Zaino !:doubleshot
Waxes tend to have a more warmer look than there synthetic counterparts but 
all that has changed with the creation of products like Zaino Z2 and a product i have been testing extensively which is called Wurth High Gloss sealant .

The Germans have led the world in Polymer technology and as far as i know all the products that are manufactured in USA have German sourced Polymers !


----------



## Eurogloss (Jan 22, 2008)

projibber said:


> As Mr Dodo man says..
> 
> And finally - a contentious point I am sure - I humbly question the topic of durability beyond 3-4 months as being a real world advantage... why? Because a 'temporary' wax or sealant layer is going to pick up embedded contaminants over the course of its time on a car's paintwork, and these need to be thoroughly cleansed/clayed/removed after they have built up. Under normal use, I would suggest the wax or sealant layer will be dirty or degraded enough to require removal and replacement every few months, especially in built up areas where the industrial and traffic fallout is higher. Even if your supersealant is undiminished in a year's time, it will have dirt and contamination within it that washing can't shift and the necessary clay bar will undoubtedly damage the applied layer enough to require its replacement. It is like putting on a pair of keks and leaving them on for a week to save on washing powder.
> 
> ...


A bit of both :lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Andythescientist (Nov 25, 2005)

Bigpikle said:


> not quite true.....
> 
> laminated glass absorbs UV but it is the plastic substrate layer between the glass that does that, not the glass itself...otherwise it is the heavy tints in coloured products that do the same job...guess you dont want plastic wrap or a heavy tint on your paint though


It depends on the type of UV 

Normal window glass will absorb 99.9% of UVB light, but UVA passes straight through.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Andythescientist said:


> It depends on the type of UV
> 
> Normal window glass will absorb 99.9% of UVB light, but UVA passes straight through.


Thats just down to different frequencies though and harks back to what I was saying earlier about different materials presenting different "boudaries" or "windows" to different frequencies of EM radiation (light, UV, infrared ya de ya da...)...

So if normal glass absorbs 99% of higher frequency UVB but passes lower frequency UVA - so it lets to lower energy stuff through, suppose that is the reason we dont get a sun tan behind glass... What about UVC, glass pass or block that?

Taking this back to waxes and clearcoats, I will presume that clearcoats are in some way similar to glass in that they may absorb some of the UV light (someone know which, UVA, UVB or UVC or all, or two of three?)... Thus if you have a coating which can absorb what the clearcoat cannot then this is an enhancement to the protection, surely? 

I'm going to make an assumption here that carnauba wax must have some defence against the likes of UV, in order to protect the plant leaf that its originally made for protecting... unless of course they like UV? I know not... someone must though 

If a clearcoat can reflect UV rather than absorb it, I imagine it will be less damaged by it - but if its absorbing any of the UV light then it is absorbing high energy photons, does this damage the clearcoat? If so, then an LSP capable of additional protection against UV is a highly relevant consideration, especially if it can guard against ranges of UV that the clearcoat itself cannot guard against.


----------



## Saqib200 (May 13, 2008)

A quick google search found some scientific papers on UV degradation of Automotive Clearcoats. However: they are $32 to download!

Someone must have some info on this.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Saqib200 said:


> A quick google search found some scientific papers on UV degradation of Automotive Clearcoats. However: they are $32 to download!
> 
> Someone must have some info on this.


I'll see if I can get them, I'm a member of a few journals...


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Whilst _I'm_ finding this thread very interesting (as are most other DW members, I assume), I really hope the people I've recommended come and have a browse around DW from other forums, don't choose this as their first thread to read, as it'd put them off for life! :lol:


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> I'll see if I can get them, I'm a member of a few journals...


You're like a kid ina sweet shop, Science + Detailing = 

:lol:


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Some other food for thought, do metallic cars do better than solid colours due to the flake scattering the UV?


----------



## Saqib200 (May 13, 2008)

rmorgan84 said:


> Some other food for thought, do metallic cars do better than solid colours due to the flake scattering the UV?


In a word - no. UV has to travel through the clearcoat to reach the flake, and if it is reflected back then this is twice as bad.

I tried the PPG website, no luck. Will try DuPont website over lunch.


----------



## Mark M (Nov 29, 2006)

Omg :lol: this is getting past healthy.

It's simple as has been said.

You will need to reapply your lsp say every 3 months if you want the car to look its best, due to all the crap which WILL bond to the car.

For me, wax will always win. As I am a bead whore.

I have Werkstatt, CG and AG sealant, and they just sit on the shelf.

Werkstatt was used quite a bit, now it sits redundant. Not because it is bad, it is far from that. 

A good wax for me is just a satisfying experience, applying a sealant is no different to drying a car for example with LT. Yawn.

It is this small experience, coupled with the finish that Concours or Vintage gives, that blows me away. 

Saying that, I may press the button on this Zanio stuff you are all muttering about, just the finishing kit tho...Then i'll see if its any use


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Perhaps this thread should have a "Science Warning" on the front!! :lol:

I've found this paper: "Predicting the performances of basecoat/clearcoat automotive paint systems by the use of adhesion, scratch and mar
resistance measurements", downloaded and printing off now so I'll have a read at lunchtime, it has some info on UV affects on automotive paints 

It is true: detailing + science makes for a very happy David! :lol::lol: But for anyone reading this who thinks this has gone beyond healthy, step away from the thread and go and enjoy detailing for its fun and enjoyment!


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Perhaps this thread should have a "Science Warning" on the front!! :lol:
> 
> I've found this paper: "Predicting the performances of basecoat/clearcoat automotive paint systems by the use of adhesion, scratch and mar
> resistance measurements", downloaded and printing off now so I'll have a read at lunchtime, it has some info on UV affects on automotive paints
> ...


Any chance of providing a link to that paper?


----------



## Tyrrell (Jan 29, 2007)

I have to say that i agree with you davekg, i personally find sealants easier to use, i currently use AG EGP and i dont think that i'd be tempted to go back to using a wax, when i first used the EGP i was amazed with how easy it was. I don't know about every one else but by the time i get to the LSP stage i'm relly tired so the easier the better. 

I think that technology will always progress and in 10 years from now people will wonder why people even used wax. Its like the analogy that someone used with oil and how synthetic technology has come on leaps and bounds i think the sam will happen with LSP's. Wax will be old hat not long from now especially after the big test opens some eyes aswell. 

Dave


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> Any chance of providing a link to that paper?


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TXS-49S7YGT-1&_user=1026342&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050565&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1026342&md5=aff57fdca7e08943d743ad1459939a77

You may need to be a member to view it though - I am through the uni...


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Is it a membership or will an athens username and password work?


----------



## AndyC (Oct 25, 2005)

I think the scientific approach is what sets DW apart from other detailing related forums - pictures of pretty cars are all well & good but someone pulling LSP's apart in a properly logical manner and reporting their findings makes for interesting reading and debate.

As for the original question/title I'm on the fence at the moment as I've yet to try Zaino properly (this will be rectified shortly) but the brief trial on the 205 gave excellent results - close enough to my preferred wax regime to make me stop and think "hmmm".

I guess it comes down to personal preference - for me at least as I ignore durability on the 205 completely and totally because 1) she doesn't spend enough time out to warrant the need for durability, 2) I rewax on average monthly, whether topping up or stripping and reapplying and 3) I have daily drivers to play around with sealants on; I'm just lucky I guess.

My own research at the moment is revisiting glazes as most of mine have been gathering dust. I've just hit the 205 with 2 coats of #7 and reminded myself what a fantastic product it is :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> Is it a membership or will an athens username and password work?


Try your athens username and password and see... I'm not 100% sure as I get access by virtue of being in the university system...


----------



## Andythescientist (Nov 25, 2005)

Dave KG said:


> What about UVC, glass pass or block that?


For all intense and purpose UVC is irrelevant as it's absorbed by the ozone layer in the atmosphere. That's why the big who har about the ozone layer, if it wasn't there we'd be exposed to the very mutagenic UVC (does much more damage than UVA/B).

Essentially as far as our skin goes...

UVB is around 10,000x more damaging than UVA. It's the UVB that causes sun burn. UVB does not penetrate the skin as well as UVA though, so only the epidermal layer is exposed to UVB.

UVA however although less mutagenic, it penetrates deaper right through to the dermal layers of the skin. It is the UVA that is thought to cause most photoaging in skin (wrinkles etc). UVA also has been shown to cause many of the mutations involved in cancer. So it's not to be ignored (hence why the 5* products are recommended now).

As far as paint goes, in sunscreens you have either reflectors or absorbers, and i'm sure most automotive products are based on absorbers (as you'd see reflectors on the paint). Many paints (and sunscreens) contain titanium dioxide, which is a reflector. One of the problems is that as UV light (both A and B) hits many compounds like titanium dioxide, it causes the release of highly reactive free radicals, and reactive oxygen species. It's these which often does alot of the damage in the skin, and i assume in paint too as it will react with other chemicals in the region it's produced. Not being a chemist, but i'd suspect that's why you get oxidation of red paints for example turning them pink, as well as fading plastic and rubber etc.

As far as carnuba goes... I doubt it's a UV filter, as it's the UV proportion of light which plants use to create energy with photosynthesis. Carnuba is morelikely a water proofing to help prevent evaporation of water from the leaf cells in the plant, due to the high temperatures in brazil.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Andythescientist said:


> For all intense and purpose UVC is irrelevant as it's absorbed by the ozone layer in the atmosphere. That's why the big who har about the ozone layer, if it wasn't there we'd be exposed to the very mutagenic UVC (does much more damage than UVA/B).
> 
> Essentially as far as our skin goes...
> 
> ...


From reading the paper I am reading just now, it would seem that this photooxidisation that you mention does indeed damage the clearcoat - thus UV is responsible for clearcoat damage and an LSP that would help guard against this is therefore hugely relevant for clearcoat paints as well as the old two-pack ones.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Andythescientist said:


> For all intense and purpose UVC is irrelevant as it's absorbed by the ozone layer in the atmosphere. That's why the big who har about the ozone layer, if it wasn't there we'd be exposed to the very mutagenic UVC (does much more damage than UVA/B).
> 
> Essentially as far as our skin goes...
> 
> ...


From reading the paper I am reading just now, it would seem that this photooxidisation that you mention does indeed damage the clearcoat - thus UV is responsible for clearcoat damage and an LSP that would help guard against this is therefore hugely relevant for clearcoat paints as well as the old two-pack ones.

Thus further to your edit, if carnuaba is indeed not UV resilliant then this presents a disadvantage to its use though I'm sure there are additives that are added to waxes to ensure they have a little UV absorption?


----------



## Mark M (Nov 29, 2006)

Some boy Dave :thumb:

Your next PHD assignment lingering now?


----------



## Saqib200 (May 13, 2008)

Funnily enough Glasurit sell a clearcoat that is specially designed for countries with high UV to reduce yellowing. (BASF Glasurit is used by Porsche + Bentley for example)

http://www.glasurit.com/Products/PassengerCars/923-109.html


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Saqib200 said:


> Funnily enough Glasurit sell a clearcoat that is specially designed for countries with high UV to reduce yellowing. (BASF Glasurit is used by Porsche + Bentley for example)
> 
> http://www.glasurit.com/Products/PassengerCars/923-109.html


I wonder if that's what keeps giving Clark nightmares


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Saqib200 said:


> Funnily enough Glasurit sell a clearcoat that is specially designed for countries with high UV to reduce yellowing. (BASF Glasurit is used by Porsche + Bentley for example)
> 
> http://www.glasurit.com/Products/PassengerCars/923-109.html


Now that is interesting because this is further evidence that UV is clearly an issue for clearcoat paints as well...

Its been suggested the UV radiation can cause a loss of gloss to clearcoats, as well as increasing the likely hood of failure by cracking and peeling so it does seem to me to clearly be an issue and thus a highly relevant consideration for LSPs... I think I'll start a new thread on its importance to get a discussion about that for those interested as I think it is a hugely relevant consideration if it does affect the looks...

If I had a gloss meter, an experiment could be conducted to machine a panel to a constant average gloss level, then protect with various LSPs, expose to natural UV light (but protect from contaminants, so use a cover that allows UV to pass through it) and then after a set time, IPA away the LSPs and remeasure the gloss to see if there's a difference.


----------



## Saqib200 (May 13, 2008)

Dave KG said:


> Now that is interesting because this is further evidence that UV is clearly an issue for clearcoat paints as well...
> 
> Its been suggested the UV radiation can cause a loss of gloss to clearcoats, as well as increasing the likely hood of failure by cracking and peeling so it does seem to me to clearly be an issue and thus a highly relevant consideration for LSPs... I think I'll start a new thread on its importance to get a discussion about that for those interested as I think it is a hugely relevant consideration if it does affect the looks...
> 
> If I had a gloss meter, an experiment could be conducted to machine a panel to a constant average gloss level, then protect with various LSPs, expose to natural UV light (but protect from contaminants, so use a cover that allows UV to pass through it) and then after a set time, IPA away the LSPs and remeasure the gloss to see if there's a difference.


Do you have any post-grads working for you by any chance? Lets get 'em beavering away.


----------



## TeZ (Oct 28, 2007)

I say we all stop fighting and just go on what smell's the best. :lol:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Saqib200 said:


> Do you have any post-grads working for you by any chance? Lets get 'em beavering away.


I _am_ a Post-Grad...


----------



## Saqib200 (May 13, 2008)

Dave KG said:


> I _am_ a Post-Grad...


Sorry..
What I should've said is - this could make a good PHD project.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Saqib200 said:


> Sorry..
> What I should've said is - this could make a good PHD project.


It could... or at least a mini project... :thumb:


----------



## Andythescientist (Nov 25, 2005)

Dave KG said:


> Now that is interesting because this is further evidence that UV is clearly an issue for clearcoat paints as well...
> 
> Its been suggested the UV radiation can cause a loss of gloss to clearcoats, as well as increasing the likely hood of failure by cracking and peeling so it does seem to me to clearly be an issue and thus a highly relevant consideration for LSPs... I think I'll start a new thread on its importance to get a discussion about that for those interested as I think it is a hugely relevant consideration if it does affect the looks...
> 
> If I had a gloss meter, an experiment could be conducted to machine a panel to a constant average gloss level, then protect with various LSPs, expose to natural UV light (but protect from contaminants, so use a cover that allows UV to pass through it) and then after a set time, IPA away the LSPs and remeasure the gloss to see if there's a difference.


I know that most of the zaino products claim to have UV filters in them specifically for this reason (eg Z-CS, Z2, Z5 and Z8 etc).


----------



## Deanoecosse (Mar 15, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Perhaps this thread should have a "Science Warning" on the front!! :lol:
> 
> I've found this paper: "Predicting the performances of basecoat/clearcoat automotive paint systems by the use of adhesion, scratch and mar
> resistance measurements", downloaded and printing off now so I'll have a read at lunchtime, it has some info on UV affects on automotive paints
> ...


I can just see you Dave, with your own slot on an early morning Open University channel. Standing there with your dodgy brown striped shirt, big kipper tie & flares. Lecturing the viewers about how the varying frequencies of uv light affect the molecular structure of the carnauba wax atom!:lol:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Deanoecosse said:


> I can just see you Dave, with your own slot on an early morning Open University channel. Standing there with your dodgy brown striped shirt, big kipper tie & flares. Lecturing the viewers about how the varying frequencies of uv light affect the molecular structure of the carnauba wax atom!:lol:


You forgot to mention my hair would be all to pot as well! :lol::lol:


----------



## Will-S (Jun 5, 2007)

It is an interesting point that you have put forward for us to ponder, and one which I myself have had in the back of my mind since I joined this forum. To help you understand my point. I started off many years ago at the age of fifteen using Simoniz Wax (hence the avatar)
I then progressed to Turtle Wax products then on to Autoglym. In recent years I have predominately used TW Gloss Guard and dabbled in various Carnbuba based products, seeking the best of both.
Since joining this forum I have swayed back towards carnuba products but always been sceptical of their longevity. This has curtailed my spending on products to Colinite and more recently Carlack AIO.

I like the aesthetic look of a wax but TBH prefer the low maintenance of a sealant. I still have four bottles of Gloss Guard in my collection and will probably continue to use it. 
What you say is true, the line between wax and sealants is becoming more and more blurred. One thing I have noticed on this forum is that products (be they waxes or sealants) come into vogue, everyone raves about them then everyone writes a review on them.
Interestingly whenever someone new to the forum asks for advice on an LSP the usual suspects are offered up. Why is this if the current favourite is so good??

Just my thoughts as I see it. I do enjoy the reviews and I love the write ups and opinions offered, so I guess this discussion will just run forever.

Thanks for the initial post as it confirmed my own beliefs and made me think about what it is I enjoy about detailing.:thumb:


----------



## lanciamug (May 18, 2008)

Just to put Andythescientist right (I am a chemist) the carnuba is very probably a good UV absorber, Plants do not photosynthesise using UV. Plants are green for a reason, the leaves are taking the red!

'Actually, chlorophyll a has two peaks of best efficiency, one in the blue part of the spectrum (around 430 nm) and one in the red part of the spectrum (680 nm); however, there are "associated pigments" which take advantage of almost every part of the visible spectrum, and most of the energy absorbed is passed along a line of receptors (losing bits along the way, of course) until the energy is equivalent to that absorbed at 700 nm. Photosynthesis is *least* effective in the green-yellow part of the spectrum, around 520-550 nm. '

So back to the relevant point, which LSP does the best job of protecting the paint?


----------



## Arun (Dec 25, 2007)

I'm fascinated by the 1st principles sciences in this thread, but please Dave, it's 'sealAnt' (little things like that really bug me!)


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

lanciamug said:


> Just to put Andythescientist right (I am a chemist) the carnuba is very probably a good UV absorber, Plants do not photosynthesise using UV. Plants are green for a reason, the leaves are taking the red!
> 
> 'Actually, chlorophyll a has two peaks of best efficiency, one in the blue part of the spectrum (around 430 nm) and one in the red part of the spectrum (680 nm); however, there are "associated pigments" which take advantage of almost every part of the visible spectrum, and most of the energy absorbed is passed along a line of receptors (losing bits along the way, of course) until the energy is equivalent to that absorbed at 700 nm. Photosynthesis is *least* effective in the green-yellow part of the spectrum, around 520-550 nm. '
> 
> So back to the relevant point, which LSP does the best job of protecting the paint?


Absolutely... people forget that carnauba is a natural *protectant* against water and UV light for Brazilian palm trees in the rainforests, where both water damage and UV light can be extreme. You can see the beading easily but the anti-UV properties are going to be far less obvious.


----------



## MrBitsy (Nov 24, 2007)

RosswithaOCD said:


> I like using waxes but iam going to be using Zaino Z2 on my machined paint this afternoon


If your car is dark colored, please use Z5 for the first few layers. The Z5 will give the paint a waxed look, then you can increase the shine with one or all of Z2/Z6/Z8/CS


----------



## MrBitsy (Nov 24, 2007)

Steve-z4 said:


> My next step is to try the Zanio Z6, Z8 and as Dave KG as suggested has wax reached a Concord moment.


IMHO, Z6 or Z8 look a whole lot better when applied over a Zaino base - sure you will still be converted once you try them over anything, but the full Zaino system is amazing.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

After using Zaino Iam going to use nothing but Zaino from now on.


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

RosswithaOCD said:


> After using Zaino Iam going to use nothing but Zaino from now on.


Until the next DW 'darling' comes along eh, Ross? :lol:

Not strictly on topic but I have to say I'm finding this current Zaino worship at the moment very interesting. Don't get me wrong, it's clearly a phenomenal product range and I've no doubts that it does everything that everyone says it does. But look back a year on DW and nobody ever mentioned it - why not? it was around back then. 6 months ago every other post was Dodo related but that was totally understandable as it was new to the marketplace, but I can't really see what's been behind this current Zaino explosion?


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

Because it works very well not having a pop at you Pit the way Zaino beads is fantastic and how it looks really is better than anything ive tryed.


----------



## The Detail Doctor (Feb 22, 2008)

RosswithaOCD said:


> After using Zaino Iam going to use nothing but Zaino from now on.


Until the next "wonder product"


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

Pit Viper said:


> But look back a year on DW and nobody ever mentioned it - why not? it was around back then. 6 months ago every other post was Dodo related but that was totally understandable as it was new to the marketplace, but I can't really see what's been behind this current Zaino explosion?


I've been using Zaino for over 2 years now, think you'll find that the reason it become more popular of late is a) Price decrease b) Easier to obtain now there are more stockists. c) It is actually being marketed for the European market by Zaino now

I've never been one for following the crowd, i find products i like and stick with them, like DG another product that i have been using for a while, in fact i think i was the first "Pro" to start using the products over here, and i predict this will also become another "En Vogue" product no w a few of the more established DW members have been playing around with it


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

RosswithaOCD said:


> Because it works very well not having a pop at you Pit the way Zaino beads is fantastic and how it looks really is better than anything ive tryed.


Oh I know, mate!  I also wasn't meaning that _you_ were fickle and jumped on every bandwagon that passed through DW town (which is how it might read - sorry about that ). It was more a comment on all of us who tend to get a bit carried away with certain products at certain times before the next 'big thing' comes out.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

drive 'n' shine said:


> I've been using Zaino for over 2 years now, think you'll find that the reason it become more popular of late is a) Price decrease b) Easier to obtain now there are more stockists. c) It is actually being marketed for the European market by Zaino now
> 
> I've never been one for following the crowd, i find products i like and stick with them, like DG another product that i have been using for a while, in fact i think i was the first "Pro" to start using the products over here, and i predict this will also become another "En Vogue" product no w a few of the more established DW members have been playing around with it


I have to say, Duragloss has been impressing me of late - if it becomes more popular then its simply because its highly capable of good protection and results and is proper value for money


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

Just buffed off my 3rd coat of Z2 and the finish is getting better


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

RosswithaOCD said:


> Just buffed off my 3rd coat of Z2 and the finish is getting better


Have you got good weather, as its dinging it down with rain down here...


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

Is abit overcase but spots of sunshine rare for Shetland


----------



## Slangwerks (May 10, 2006)

RE the Zaino bandwagon, I admit I've jumped on it over the last month, and DW is pretty much entriely to blame. I'm sure it's the same for others too - This is the basic process that I've seen occur:

Someone shows some impressive 'after' pics of a new product/finish - this piques your interest/curiosity

A few more people post similar results, reinforcing the ability of the product. You investigate availabilty and prices for reference.

A heavyweight in the DW pantheon (for example Dave KG) does some testing on the product and gives it the thumbs up - if you've agreed with this person's recommendations/advice previously then you're likely to trust their judgement!

You can't wait any longer, so rush out and buy the stuff and give it a go!

In my opinon there's nothing wrong with this - as long as those respected names reveiwing the products in question remain impartial and objective, then it's clearly a good thing, as the product in question will need to perform well to impress them, and will therefore normally be worthy of a purchase!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

What is more interesting about Zaino is how it's sold as a 'system'. I tried Z2 about 18 months ago and thought it quite good but it wasn't a 'must beat' product when we were launching Dodo... different market back then I suppose but the wow factor was lacking, maybe because I never fully played around with the system and had always tried it in isolation.

If you can get people to use stuff as a system, the results can be much better than using products in isolation and this increases the effect. You need to get willing disciples for this to work as most people have previously picked what they want at different stages, so you act against people's natural apathy. I think this has been why Zaino has recently taken off so well - because people are more inclined to embrace a 'system' than previously.


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> If you can get people to use stuff as a system, the results can be much better than using products in isolation and this increases the effect. You need to get willing disciples for this to work as most people have previously picked what they want at different stages, so you act against people's natural apathy. I think this has been why Zaino has recently taken off so well - because people are more inclined to embrace a 'system' than previously.


Nail on the head there i think :thumb:


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> What is more interesting about Zaino is how it's sold as a 'system'. I tried Z2 about 18 months ago and thought it quite good but it wasn't a 'must beat' product when we were launching Dodo... different market back then I suppose but the wow factor was lacking, maybe because I never fully played around with the system and had always tried it in isolation.
> 
> If you can get people to use stuff as a system, the results can be much better than using products in isolation and this increases the effect. You need to get willing disciples for this to work as most people have previously picked what they want at different stages, so you act against people's natural apathy. I think this has been why Zaino has recently taken off so well - because people are more inclined to embrace a 'system' than previously.





drive 'n' shine said:


> Nail on the head there i think :thumb:


I wonder if this is more the case for a sealant system than with waxes though? I am sure LP/LPL will boost the impact of any quality wax for example, but sealants tend to also come with a reputation of being more 'particular' about the bases you use with them. Its not always true of course, and there are extremes from the likes of Zaino, where the gospel is the complete system approach, through to the likes of Opti Seal (and plenty of others) that seem happy to bond to just about anything, oily or not 

This is all making great discussion and reading for sure :thumb:


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> What is more interesting about Zaino is how it's sold as a 'system'. I tried Z2 about 18 months ago and thought it quite good but it wasn't a 'must beat' product when we were launching Dodo... different market back then I suppose but the wow factor was lacking, maybe because I never fully played around with the system and had always tried it in isolation.
> 
> If you can get people to use stuff as a system, the results can be much better than using products in isolation and this increases the effect. You need to get willing disciples for this to work as most people have previously picked what they want at different stages, so you act against people's natural apathy. I think this has been why Zaino has recently taken off so well - because people are more inclined to embrace a 'system' than previously.


Congrats btw on the small write up in July's GT Purely Porsche magazine :thumb: (Even though they think your names are quote 'wacky' )


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

LOL, cheers. Yeah, we're wacky we are  I really should stop sniffing tar remover prototypes.

The fascinating for me in the sealants vs waxes battle is how people assume there is always a big advantage to have a sealant, when in fact it is drastic from product to product. We are confident even some of our base waxes could beat some sealants for durability, for example, and have had some limited and unofficial feedback to this effect. Whilst sealants have a technical advantage in theory, only a few really make the most of it in practice. And many rely on some kind of 'system' to keep the durability high and ensure the prep is spot on.

If you did a similar 'system' with a range of carnauba products (for example) you would be very surprised at the results, both in terms of shine and durability. It is very difficult to distinguish between product results and application procedure/technique sometimes.

Of course, a good sealant applied within a good system would in theory be the ultimate if durability was your goal, but an average or poor sealant applied outside of a system may impress far less. All I would say is don't *assume* a sealant is far better because it *can* be. That is like assuming a high capacity engine will *always* produce more power.

Always go on results - and have an open mind as to how those results have been achieved.


----------



## The Doctor (Sep 11, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> LOL, cheers. Yeah, we're wacky we are  I really should stop sniffing tar remover prototypes.
> 
> The fascinating for me in the sealants vs waxes battle is how people assume there is always a big advantage to have a sealant, when in fact it is drastic from product to product. We are confident even some of our base waxes could beat some sealants for durability, for example, and have had some limited and unofficial feedback to this effect. Whilst sealants have a technical advantage in theory, only a few really make the most of it in practice. And many rely on some kind of 'system' to keep the durability high and ensure the prep is spot on.
> 
> ...


The thing that confuses me is most of us on here enjoy cleaning our cars and applying a product to the paintwork. I like to wax once a month,sometimes more as i enjoy doing it. If i had a really good sealant on there there would be no need for me to apply it once a month if the manufacturers claims are anything to go by. I also do not like the silvery cold shimmer that sealants give. IMO,nothing rivals the wet,glossy and warm look of a wax. I must also dis-agree with Dave KG when he says a wax adds nothing or very little to the finish. Whilst the majority of the gloss is produced by the prep work,the wax adds the icing on the cake so to speak and magnifys what you have achieved in the prep work if you like.


----------



## Andythescientist (Nov 25, 2005)

Pit Viper said:


> Until the next DW 'darling' comes along eh, Ross? :lol:
> 
> Not strictly on topic but I have to say I'm finding this current Zaino worship at the moment very interesting. Don't get me wrong, it's clearly a phenomenal product range and I've no doubts that it does everything that everyone says it does. But look back a year on DW and nobody ever mentioned it - why not? it was around back then. 6 months ago every other post was Dodo related but that was totally understandable as it was new to the marketplace, but I can't really see what's been behind this current Zaino explosion?


I'm not sure that's strictly true. When i bought my new mini 3 years ago, i was pointed in the direction of zaino by some mini2 users. Around the same time this board was launched (I believe) and there was plenty of zaino talk here. But as has been said it was a pain to get hold of (one supplier) which was hard to find as every goodle search used to lead to 101 zym0l suppliers.

Having used the system for 3 years i loved it, and having just change to a new z4 i've returned to see if much has changed in the detailing world. But all the talk seems to be still of zaino, which suits me as i still have plenty left, and i'm more than happy with it, especially now it's easier to get hold of here.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

The Doctor said:


> The thing that confuses me is most of us on here enjoy cleaning our cars and applying a product to the paintwork. I like to wax once a month,sometimes more as i enjoy doing it. If i had a really good sealant on there there would be no need for me to apply it once a month if the manufacturers claims are anything to go by. I also do not like the silvery cold shimmer that sealants give. IMO,nothing rivals the wet,glossy and warm look of a wax. I must also dis-agree with Dave KG when he says a wax adds nothing or very little to the finish. Whilst the majority of the gloss is produced by the prep work,the wax adds the icing on the cake so to speak and magnifys what you have achieved in the prep work if you like.


Sealent whilst will last say 6 months doesn't stop you adding a bit every month to layer it or topping up with Z8 from the zaino range for example. Vintage is claimed to last up to 6 months but people still apply far more regualrly!

As for your last point i think you will probably find that when analysed the wax adds a lot less than you think and on that note someone like yourself would be a prime candidate to attend the meet in july where the blind LSP testing will happen!


----------



## organgrinder (Jan 20, 2008)

I used Turtle Wax Gloss Guard and then their Extra Gloss for many years. I never had any embedded contaminants (that I could feel) and the car also beaded very well for months on end. I was generally happy with the finish but the shine was a bit too "false". The paint was always silky smooth though.

I then started to explore different waxes but was normally disappointed by the durability. I then went on to try CarLack NSC and their sealer and whilst I thought the finish was good, especially when Polycharged and layered, it didn't bead and give me the feel good factor. I have more recently been applying waxes of various makes, incl Supernatural, over the CarLack and am generally pleased by the way it looks and the beading BUT I have noticed that the count of embedded contaminants has taken a significant increase since using the waxes. I have had to clay a couple of times in the last year and it all seems like loads of effort building up all the layers again (it's also loads of effort finding the time to do it with the wife breathing down my neck).

I half thought about going back to Turtle Wax Extra Gloss, which everyone would no doubt call a backwards step or possibly take an expensive step into the land of Zaino. I am now surrounded by £00's of product and not a clue what direction to take next. 

All I want is maximum shine and durability with minimum time and effort. The holy grail?


----------



## The Detail Doctor (Feb 22, 2008)

I think until further notice I'll stick with my Blue Velvet, albeit now topped up with a little Z8


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Andythescientist said:


> *I'm not sure that's strictly true*. When i bought my new mini 3 years ago, i was pointed in the direction of zaino by some mini2 users. Around the same time this board was launched (I believe) and there was plenty of zaino talk here. But as has been said it was a pain to get hold of (one supplier) which was hard to find as every goodle search used to lead to 101 zym0l suppliers.
> 
> Having used the system for 3 years i loved it, and having just change to a new z4 i've returned to see if much has changed in the detailing world. But all the talk seems to be still of zaino, which suits me as i still have plenty left, and i'm more than happy with it, especially now it's easier to get hold of here.


Trust me, I'm on this site every day and have been for over a year and it's only in the last couple of months or so that the Zaino thing has got into it's stride - prior to that it was all Dodo talk around Christmas time. I'm not knocking or criticising any products, users or posters, just making an observation about the trend cycles that go around. There's already signs that Duragloss is knocking on the door now .


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

The Doctor said:


> The thing that confuses me is most of us on here enjoy cleaning our cars and applying a product to the paintwork. I like to wax once a month,sometimes more as i enjoy doing it. If i had a really good sealant on there there would be no need for me to apply it once a month if the manufacturers claims are anything to go by. I also do not like the silvery cold shimmer that sealants give. IMO,nothing rivals the wet,glossy and warm look of a wax. I must also dis-agree with Dave KG when he says a wax adds nothing or very little to the finish. Whilst the majority of the gloss is produced by the prep work,the wax adds the icing on the cake so to speak and magnifys what you have achieved in the prep work if you like.


I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here as I can honestly say I cannot tell the difference between the vast majority of LSPs on the market, although the silvery shimmer you mention about sealents is something I think I can see (if pushed) in ***** Concours wax... so it really just seems to be down to one's eye rather than any hard and fast rules as many will claim there is a difference, many will claim there isn't (of which I am one). It seems the latter is bourne out more at meets but then that is perhaps just the sample of people attending meets and coincidence.  I simply cannot see LSPs really adding anything tenable to a properly prepped paint finish.

However, I am reserving full judgment until the big wax test at the end of July where I will be able to see just what affects people really are seeing in a blind test of various LSPs, or whether results are just random fluctuations pointing to it all being "in the eye of the beholder".


----------



## The Doctor (Sep 11, 2007)

rmorgan84 said:


> Sealent whilst will last say 6 months doesn't stop you adding a bit every month to layer it or topping up with Z8 from the zaino range for example. Vintage is claimed to last up to 6 months but people still apply far more regualrly!
> 
> As for your last point i think you will probably find that when analysed the wax adds a lot less than you think and on that note someone like yourself would be a prime candidate to attend the meet in july where the blind LSP testing will happen!


Its all opinions mate. I dont see the point in long lasting sealants if your going to apply a product every month or more often unless you like the finish that a sealant gives which i dont. Ok for a customer that demands durability then yes a proven sealant is maybe the way to go but not for my own car that i wax regular.

Im pretty sure many more people will agree with me that waxes give a unique glow to the paintwork that sealants dont seem to be able to achieve.

As i said,its all opinions and personal preferences.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> Sealent whilst will last say 6 months doesn't stop you adding a bit every month to layer it or topping up with Z8 from the zaino range for example. Vintage is claimed to last up to 6 months but people still apply far more regualrly!
> 
> As for your last point i think you will probably find that when analysed the wax adds a lot less than you think and on that note someone like yourself would be a prime candidate to attend the meet in july where the blind LSP testing will happen!


Just what I was thinking, come along and be a part of the test! 

Re: adding layers, just because a product is durable doesn't mean we shouldn't be adding more layers, I still add layers to my own car of Zaino simply because I enjoy it too, much the same as I do for a wax. So it certainly doesn't reduce my enjoyment - but also means that if I cannot apply was regularly to my car for whatever reason (working late, 7 days a week for example) I need not worry as the sealant has the durability.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

The Doctor said:


> Its all opinions mate. I dont see the point in long lasting sealants if your going to apply a product every month or more often unless you like the finish that a sealant gives which i dont. Ok for a customer that demands durability then yes a proven sealant is maybe the way to go but not for my own car that i wax regular.
> *
> Im pretty sure many more people will agree with me that waxes give a unique glow to the paintwork that sealants dont seem to be able to achieve.*
> 
> As i said,its all opinions and personal preferences.


I used to be one of them, and for this reason shyed away from things like Zaino... but having been using it extensively of late, I can happily say that in my eyes at least, they dont seem to be in anyway lacking over a wax and indeed if one was to pick hairs between the looks (and you really would have IMHO to start to see a difference, and its all really running into personal opinion rather than actual hard fact) it would be argued by me that the sealant systems offer a glassy nuance that waxes cannot beat and in no way lack the warmth.

Horses for courses though


----------



## The Doctor (Sep 11, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Just what I was thinking, come along and be a part of the test!
> 
> Re: adding layers, just because a product is durable doesn't mean we shouldn't be adding more layers, I still add layers to my own car of Zaino simply because I enjoy it too, much the same as I do for a wax. So it certainly doesn't reduce my enjoyment - but also means that if I cannot apply was regularly to my car for whatever reason (working late, 7 days a week for example) I need not worry as the sealant has the durability.


What exactly does this test involve?

The reason i ask is its not as cut and dried as applying a wax to one panel and a sealant to another and asking someone to choose which is which. You really need the whole car done and you need to see it in various lights from different angles.

We could argue all day and night about the subject really but the bottom line is some people prefer the look of a wax,others prefer the look of a sealant. I would hazard a guess that if you did a poll asking which people prefer,wax would be the winner by quite some way.


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

I'm with Dave on this one - I DA machine polished one of my cars last Friday and I can, hand on heart, say that it looked no different between the freshly polished surface and after I'd applied the LSP (in this case a trial on Tropi-care TC-3 sealant). The finish straight after polishing was everything I'd want it to be - glossy, deep reflections, great 'pop' to the metallic flake. I'd have happilly left it like that, but of course the paint is 'naked' and prone to attack from the elements, hence the LSP - I wasn't expecting it to add anything to the look, just to protect what I'd done with the polishing stage. 
Of course if you want to scrutinise it to the 'n'th degree you might just, in the right lighting, detect a very slight improvement in looks, but then are you _really_ seeing it, or is it an illusion, or even a part of you trying to convince yourself that the megabucks LSP you've just blown £000s on was actually worth it?


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

The Doctor said:


> What exactly does this test involve?
> 
> The reason i ask is its not as cut and dried as applying a wax to one panel and a sealant to another and asking someone to choose which is which. You really need the whole car done and you need to see it in various lights from different angles.
> 
> We could argue all day and night about the subject really but the bottom line is some people prefer the look of a wax,others prefer the look of a sealant. I would hazard a guess that if you did a poll asking which people prefer,wax would be the winner by quite some way.


http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=74756

6 or 7 identically prepped Astras in black. Each individual car receives its own LSP and the task is to blindly choose the preferred as well as describe what you see in each of the finishes so we can look for consistencies in what people are seeing.

Re: a poll, does this come from opinion based on what is read or perceived, or opinion based on results seen? This is why I'm organising the above test with the great help of others - what _exactly_ are people seeing in these LSPs? Are sealants really cold? Waxes warm and glossy? There will be a car that is just polished with no LSP in there too, wonder how many will pick it as the best one?


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

The test is seven identical vauxhall astras, all brand new, all machine polished using the same polishes to the same standard. Then the cars will have an IPA wipedown then a different LSP applied to each car, with the exception of one that will be left without completely bare as a control.

no one will know what LSP is on which car (apart from dave and maybe a few people who are hlping with the application) or which car is the control, the people at the meet will then be asked a series of questions relating to the difference in appearence (if any) between the cars.

EDIT: Dave beat me to it!


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Has anyone considered smell in this test? Quite a lot of LSPs, (waxes in particular) have a very powerful and distinguishing smell. If the participants are allowed to get up close to the paint surfaces for a visual check, it's likely that they could, depending on their own personal 'database' and experience of many different products, be able to identify which is which, and then might, due to their own personal allegiance to a specific brand, make a judgement on them which wouldn't necessarily be accurate? 

Just something to consider


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Pit Viper said:


> Has anyone considered smell in this test? Quite a lot of LSPs, (waxes in particular) have a very powerful and distinguishing smell. If the participants are allowed to get up close to the paint surfaces for a visual check, it's likely that they could, depending on their own personal 'database' and experience of many different products, be able to identify which is which, and then might, due to their own personal allegiance to a specific brand, make a judgement on them which wouldn't necessarily be accurate?
> 
> Just something to consider


That's a very good point!

The only way i can see to combat it is for everyone to have a curry the night before in order to mask the smell of the waxes:lol:

On a serious note i think that keeping a 6ft-12ft barrier/zone around the cars, that people are not allowed to enter would be sufficent not to be able to identifty the individual smells when all the cars are parked fairly close to each other.


----------



## Andythescientist (Nov 25, 2005)

Pit Viper said:


> Trust me, I'm on this site every day and have been for over a year and it's only in the last couple of months or so that the Zaino thing has got into it's stride - prior to that it was all Dodo talk around Christmas time. I'm not knocking or criticising any products, users or posters, just making an observation about the trend cycles that go around. There's already signs that Duragloss is knocking on the door now .


I've no doubt you're right, things definitely seem to go in cycles. When i first joined in 2005 autoglym SRP was a dirty word. So much so that i still have a 3 yr old bottle sitting in the garage which came in an autoglym kit i was given. Yet now alot of people recommend it on here. I'm sure there will be an obvious explanation for any sudden zaino mania, like a new sponsor, new forum section, new euro rep, free samples etc? There were however many zaino enthusiasts on here and else where at least 3 years ago, or else an amateur like me certainly would not have found it


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> That's a very good point!
> 
> The only way i can see to combat it is for everyone to have a curry the night before in order to mask the smell of the waxes:lol:
> 
> On a serious note i think that keeping a 6ft-12ft barrier/zone around the cars, that people are not allowed to enter would be sufficent not to be able to identifty the individual smells when all the cars are parked fairly close to each other.


The waxes will be applied the day before too, so a lot of the smell will have faded off too


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

rmorgan84 said:


> That's a very good point!
> 
> The only way i can see to combat it is for everyone to have a curry the night before in order to mask the smell of the waxes:lol:
> 
> On a serious note i think that keeping a 6ft-12ft barrier/zone around the cars, that people are not allowed to enter would be sufficent not to be able to identifty the individual smells when all the cars are parked fairly close to each other.


Yes, that ^^^ would do it :thumb: but they still need to get close enough to get a good visual examination of the cars. I think a little experiment by those organising the test beforehand to establish a good distance that allows a proper look, yet doesn't allow the smell to be detected.


----------



## The Doctor (Sep 11, 2007)

Great effort to organise that guys. Will be interesting to see the results.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> The waxes will be applied the day before too, so a lot of the smell will have faded off too


I suppose it depends on the wax! I know for instance that i can smell destiny on a car for a good few days after, but with others as you say the smell is gone by the next day!


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

rmorgan84 said:


> I suppose it depends on the wax! I know for instance that i can smell destiny on a car for a good few days after, but with others as you say the smell is gone by the next day!


When I've applied Natty's Red, I can still smell strawberries for days after when walking past the car, but particularly when the sun's out and the paintwork is hot. So, going on this year's summer so far, you'll be okay


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Pit Viper said:


> When I've applied Natty's Red, I can still smell strawberries for days after when walking past the car, but particularly when the sun's out and the paintwork is hot. So, going on this year's summer so far, you'll be okay


Tell me about it!!

Perhaps I'll wash the cars before the meet with a shampoo like Dodo BTBM which is meant to in no way strip the LSPs and also is meant to add absolutley nothing of its own to the finish - then all the cars would smell of this...

Will check with Dom to ensure this is definitely the case and that it wont interfere with the test in any way


----------



## Andythescientist (Nov 25, 2005)

Just an interesting thread to show not alot changes 

Zaino 2005

We were still debating the need for ZFX back then, and this for one this hasn't moved on much in the last 3 years, i still don't think you always need to use it unless you're layering  Others will still swear ZFX is a must use on different preps.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Tell me about it!!
> 
> Perhaps I'll wash the cars before the meet with a shampoo like Dodo BTBM which is meant to in no way strip the LSPs and also is meant to add absolutley nothing of its own to the finish - then all the cars would smell of this...
> 
> Will check with Dom to ensure this is definitely the case and that it wont interfere with the test in any way


That's a good idea dave!

Also another option is some incense candles:lol:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

rmorgan84 said:


> That's a good idea dave!
> 
> Also another option is some incense candles:lol:


:lol::lol::lol: Could you imagine that?! We'd all get arrested as they suspect we're all part of a cult!


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> :lol::lol::lol: Could you imagine that?! *We'd all get arrested as they suspect we're all part of a cult!*


To be fair that isn't a million miles away from the truth:lol:


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Relax Dave, there'll be nothing to distinguish each LSP 18 hours after application of it.
The wind will see to that, as will the other natural (and unnatural?) smells whilst standing outside.
If you did wash prior to inspection, then you run the risk of tainting the test results, since you've introduced another variable into the mix.
As you've said previously, a light dusting the next morning before being wheeled out will be more than sufficient.


----------



## TeZ (Oct 28, 2007)

Yawn.


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Bet you wish I'd not thrown the 'smell' spanner in the works now? :lol:

In truth I doubt that most taking part would be able to 'smell' the difference unless they were really up close, but I just thought I'd highlight it in case those that _can_ voted with their heart rather than their head, so to speak. It would be quite a bitter pill to swallow if you'd say, just spent £1800 or whatever on Vintage only to see no difference to Megs #16 (and could tell which was which from the smell). I dare say _that_ vote would go to the big Z if only to make them feel better.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

TeZ said:


> Yawn.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

TeZ said:


> Yawn.


Listen to her! time of the month love?


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Okay, who poked TeZ out of his slumber?
Come on, own up!











TeZ said:


> Yawn.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

The LSPs will have lost 99.9% of their smell by the time they have outgassed, so I wouldn't worry unduly. BTBM is wax friendly and doesn't contain gloss enhancers, but I'd think it was an unnecessary step


----------



## Deano (Jul 7, 2006)

i've applied collinite and my car retains the vomit and petrol smell for only a couple of hours thankfully. i think xxx and petes 53 may have too much goodies in them, dont know about you guys but i find it attract flies like mad!

I definitley prefer a wax to a sealant, and i've no idea why. just feels more natural. yeah i know i'm odd.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

PJS said:


> Relax Dave, there'll be nothing to distinguish each LSP 18 hours after application of it.
> The wind will see to that, as will the other natural (and unnatural?) smells whilst standing outside.
> If you did wash prior to inspection, then you run the risk of tainting the test results, since you've introduced another variable into the mix.
> As you've said previously, a light dusting the next morning before being wheeled out will be more than sufficient.


I agree with what this chap says, as does the fellow quoted below! 



Dodo Factory said:


> The LSPs will have lost 99.9% of their smell by the time they have outgassed, so I wouldn't worry unduly. BTBM is wax friendly and doesn't contain gloss enhancers, but I'd think it was an unnecessary step


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

My nose must be good then as I seem to be able to smell the 0.1% of the strawberry smell of Natty's red for days after when the sun's on it :lol:


----------



## Griff (Aug 11, 2007)

Are we not able to run our sweaty fingers on the finish then? surely this is a test that needs to be done?
Tom


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

Pit Viper said:


> Trust me, I'm on this site every day and have been for over a year and it's only in the last couple of months or so that the Zaino thing has got into it's stride - prior to that it was all Dodo talk around Christmas time. I'm not knocking or criticising any products, users or posters, just making an observation about the trend cycles that go around. There's already signs that Duragloss is knocking on the door now .


I know exactly what your talking about theres always going to be trend cycles.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Griff said:


> Are we not able to run our sweaty fingers on the finish then? surely this is a test that needs to be done?
> Tom


I'll have to keep a duster on hand for that!


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

RosswithaOCD said:


> I know exactly what your talking about theres always going to be trend cycles.


How can we get rid of these trend cycles? Intensive polish and a Menz yellow pad? I just need to see what removes Zaino and I'll be laughing.


----------



## Robbieben (Feb 19, 2006)

TBH Dave I think you have lost your way in life, you should have become a Chemist specialising in LSP's, I'm sure you'd come up with a product that would render all else redundant:thumb:

Still prefer the warm look a wax give's personally, however I use sealants extensively for speed and ease of use when I'm in a hurry


----------



## HarryHoudini (Apr 12, 2007)

I agree with dave on this one, although I for one use Swissvax products
Mystery and Autobahn and the rest of them, but I know for a fact
that sealants will take over very soon, it is just a matter of time before the 
perfect product "sealant" comes out. I mean how further can they push this thing?
if there is no perfect sealant out there, it will be made but then they will make some more
for sales purposes and the cycle will go on.


----------



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

Can man-made products as raw ingredients be tuned, developed to go beyond the natural products and then exceed still further... citing Bilt Hamber Autobalm as an example here, and its ability to withstand the salt test and protect unprotected metal. Not exactly a real-world test, but it is evidence of just what serious chemistry R&D can develop.

ASTM B117 salt spray is THE standard test adopted by auto manufacturers when testing paints and coatings it allows an OBJECTIVE assessment of a coating’s ability to protect – it’s no gimmick. Any subjective attempt to assess a wax or sealer for durability is merely speculation - typically based on the visual clue of beading and sheeting, or maybe contact angle. Think about dull tired paint no beading, or sheeting but loads of protection still. 

Take the correct reactive amino-functional silicone it’ll will give massive durability if you're visually assessing beading and sheeting compared to say straight carnauba/oil solvent, but in a salt-spray cabinet it can be proved that it's doing little to protect the entire surface - so corrosion sets in and tears the film apart - same with unmodified straight waxes. If anyone can make a better OBJECTIVE test than salt-spray to test a film’s coherent protection we would love to know. Remember you're applying an LSP to protect your paint across its entire surface so ASTM B117 is spot-on as a test. You'll also find bare-metal sites caused by stone chips that no wax, or silicone will protect for any meaningful length of time. Autobalm was developed to provide real-world protection and that is exactly why that test was used - it's the same test used on every cavity wax in every make of car. I hope that all LSP manufacturers start to develop products that improve this aspect, I like cars and want to do all that we can to make ‘em last.

Natural waxes have a great future - the reactivity they possess provide an ability to be modified - they have an acid value this allows, for example, saponification - so many enhancements can be made to the material. In fact I’ve been looking at carnauba again recently with beading in mind (as some are so obsessed with this attribute that it’s crazy not to be interested) if there’s a test proposed for this aspect then we can provide a detergent proof carnauba material, the enhancements we’ve made to the wax make it pretty much immune to multiple scrubbing with, for example, neat fairy liquid – the best bit about this test though is the soft hands that Al’s left with.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Al?
Soft hands?
Na, pull the other one!

So, in summary, wax still has plenty of scope and future left to be utilised?
What about the UV aspect? I presume AB has plenty of UV inhibitors in it's make-up?


----------



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

PJS said:


> Al?
> Soft hands?
> Na, pull the other one!
> 
> ...


We do use UV absorbers and light stabilizers in AB. Auto coatings are under attack from a different front too - each time a car is washed - some surfactants do a great job a exposing capillary pores in the film, therefore any meaningful test should combine washing and UV exposure.


----------



## Jace (Oct 26, 2005)

Forget Dave KG's test & talk, you should speak to Auto Express, their wax tests show whats the # 1 
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/products/products/66316/car_polish_megatest.html

But Serously, I love the finish from Zaino, but I'm finding it a little boring not being able to purchase new bits & pieces now, its been 6 weeks since I bought a detailing wax/product FFS :doublesho

I've not washed the car for 3 weeks now either, boy does it still bead well even with all the crud on it :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Jace said:


> Forget Dave KG's test & talk, you should speak to Auto Express, their wax tests show whats the # 1
> http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/products/products/66316/car_polish_megatest.html


Maybe I should invite them along for the day...


----------



## cj romeo (Jul 12, 2007)

For a minute I thought Mer had won!


----------



## Chris_R (Feb 3, 2008)

cj romeo said:


> For a minute I thought Mer had won!


I am just as heavily confused by test. It says its a polish test but has a combination of waxes in there too. Then the test itself seems to imply that they used water beading to assess how good the product is???


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Chris_R said:


> I am just as heavily confused by test. It says its a polish test but has a combination of waxes in there too. Then the test itself seems to imply that they used water beading to assess how good the product is???


Errr, yes... AE I'm afraid dont give the impression in my opinion of knowing what they are doing or what they are talking about with regard to detailing products.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

99% of the Joe public think wax is a polish.


----------



## RnRollie (Apr 16, 2008)

While all of this is interesting read... there is one thing thou, and i'm not sure if ya'all be able to handle the truth? 

The truth is that 10 years down the line the whole wax, sealant, glaze discussion will have become a moot point for new (hi-end) cars.

The future brings us nano-technology "paints". And not only on the level of very fine particles on molecular level, resulting in a smooth finish. But things like "self-repair" and "color/reflection-modulation"... thus SMART nanotechnology "paints".

Advancements in this area are bigger and faster then you think. Just like the advance in displays (TV, mobile, etc) which is going through an acceleration
A couple of years back OLED was just SciFi.. now Sony, Panasonic, Samsung are selling OLED Tv sets for the end user.

As for nano-paint, the first (commercial) applications have scratched the surface.. or better put, NOT scratched the surface  in the form of a repellant "clearcoat". If you look at what DuPont, Ceramiclear and Zyvere allready have to offer...

You can be sure that companies like DuPont and 3M and BASF (and others) are lookign at the baseline: how much investment needed?
As soon as those companies can manufacture these *smart* paints cheaper, and sell them cheaper then *standard* paints into the automotive industry while still making a huge profit, then it become a defacto standard.

Of course, cheaper or older cars will still have "normal" paint... but there it comes down to "how much does it cost to respray the whole car with a *smart* paint?"

There you have it, now you can all hate me for taking away your livelyhood in the future.


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

RnRollie said:


> While all of this is interesting read... there is one thing thou, and i'm not sure if ya'all be able to handle the truth?
> 
> The truth is that 10 years down the line the whole wax, sealant, glaze discussion will have become a moot point for new (hi-end) cars.
> 
> ...


That all might be well and good, but it wont stop air bourne contaminents, not to mention these paints will still need cleaning, i'm not going to worry about too much for the foreseeable future, not too mention that lots of people actually enjoying waxing their cars whether they require it or not - DW is a huge testament to that fact


----------



## johnDUB (Nov 27, 2007)

Just looked at the test on the link above. My mum was a Valet for John Jardine Toyota in chesterfield and he was a right funny bugger to say the least as he taught her. The simoniz made me remember this as she used it, and it was good.
I think i took her obsession and now made it my own.

I'd hate to think wax is dead, i'd more like to think some cross over with might be the future. I use a tuned ski wax with teflon and 'other' bits and it's amazing, just a shame we couldn't hot wax our cars, though scraping out might be rough!


----------



## gt5500 (Aug 6, 2008)

So where does this thread stand now following on from the big LSP test? I notice a few of you that were championing sealants have started to wax lyrical again.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

gt5500 said:


> So where does this thread stand now following on from the big LSP test? I notice a few of you that were championing sealants have started to wax lyrical again.


I use both, and appreciate both - I dont really choose product for my own car based on performance anymore, but based on fun of use which is where waxes have an advantage. Though where maintenance is to be kept easy and durability is key, I tend to recommend either Collinite or sealants.

I'll sit down and write a more detailed "current standing" at some point soon to reflect my full current thoughts on this issue.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

The more I read and understand, the more I believe LSPs should not be categorised. Products should be looked at individually. If they are categorised, I think they should just be grouped:

Liquid Synthetic
Liquid Hybrid/Natural

Paste Synthetic
Paste Hybrid/Natural

From a technical perspective, I think that we should be less ready to accept a manufacturer's claim (and remember that I know a lot more about products on the market than I can reveal for legal reasons, and most of you guys don't have an IR spectrometer handy to check for yourself).

If you don't know what is in a product for sure, how can you group it? The labels can't be relied upon at all.

An LSP is an LSP. It either works for you or it doesn't. Although sealants have durability advantages they can have disadvantages (reliance on strong solvents for best performance, potentially slow curing times, fussy application), just as natural waxes have strengths and weaknesses. And just because it's a sealant doesn't necessarily mean it WILL last longer... there are lots of factors.


----------



## tmclssns (Dec 28, 2006)

I can only speak for myself but I mix sealant/wax use on the desired outcome of a detail actually. Most waxes I've used have a max. lifespan of 4-5 months. Some sealants got up to 6-8 months (depending on weather conditions, mileage, etc).

I don't favor the use of one to another allthough I must admit that the first time applying wax by hand was a bit "special" but you get over that really quickly. From the start you can tell what type of customer you have on visit. (according to the mess inside the car, mostly). Some really don't care about their vehicle and just want it done once and only care about protection. In these cases I usually take a sealant. It's easy to maintain and lasts a while (more often just in time for the next protection detail). Whenever a customer want a more "glow" shine I usually choose a wax. I find this gives more depth to the reflections and some give an incredible wet look. At last there are customers that want both and this is where I combine them as well. I put down two layers of sealant first and top it up with two coats of wax.

A sealant I use quite often is Meguiars M21 Synthetic sealant. Easy to work with and lasts long enough (to my experience). For wax it depends. I mix (between detailing sessions) between Meguiars M16 paste wax, M26 Hi-tech yellow paste wax, Swissvax. The M16 over M21 gives an incredible shine and reflections. M26 makes a car look warmer imo and Swissvax is the more durable of the waxes I have but I find it less "bling" compared to Meguiars M16.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> The more I read and understand, the more I believe LSPs should not be categorised. Products should be looked at individually. If they are categorised, I think they should just be grouped:
> 
> Liquid Synthetic
> Liquid Hybrid/Natural
> ...


So what is the new Turtle Plan then?


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Paste Hybrid/Natural


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> The more I read and understand, the more I believe LSPs should not be categorised. Products should be looked at individually. If they are categorised, I think they should just be grouped:
> 
> Liquid Synthetic
> Liquid Hybrid/Natural
> ...


sounds right - I dont have any hang ups on the wax/sealant distinction but just think of stuff in terms of the ease of use and performance (looks, durability, 'cleanability' and beading/sheeting) criteria.

When you smell a lot of 'waxes' its hard to believe you couldnt run your car off a few of them, which hardly makes them a natural wax IMHO :lol: LSP all the way....


----------



## akimel (Oct 25, 2008)

:thumb:

This remains one of my favorite threads I have read here on DW. Great stuff. I thought it deserved a bump, for the benefit of new members who might not have run across it.


----------



## mellowfellow (Jul 11, 2009)

yep i just found it , and sitting here thinking have i just wasted 25 quid on a new box of AG HI def wax ? That zaino Z-8 looks astonishing . If and its a big IF i was to use both which way round is best ?


----------



## mellowfellow (Jul 11, 2009)

Jace said:


> Forget Dave KG's test & talk, you should speak to Auto Express, their wax tests show whats the # 1
> http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/products/products/66316/car_polish_megatest.html
> 
> But Serously, I love the finish from Zaino, but I'm finding it a little boring not being able to purchase new bits & pieces now, its been 6 weeks since I bought a detailing wax/product FFS :doublesho
> ...


which one of the Zaino products did you use Jace ? :wall:


----------



## mellowfellow (Jul 11, 2009)

this kind of sums it up in video, dunno about you but i would..... <eg>
http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=103769


----------



## details (May 13, 2009)

Intresting read this thread!


----------



## Dream Machines (Mar 13, 2006)

*wax vs sealants vs coatings*

Thank you Dave for this thread, I knew that this would be a very long thread with hundreds of posts from members.

All that I talk about comes from personal experience of doing car refinishing (the top echelon of detailing) and lots of R&D testing in radical and sometimes outrageous ways)

here we go

*Wax has not had it's day *- it's best use IMHO is for indoor and outdoor car shows. a beautifully machine polished, glazed and sealed paint finish topped with some natural wax adds some effects to it, especially wetness

*WAX/SEALANT PROTECTING FROM?*

Both types of LSP are protecting from oxidisation, fading, industrial fallout, dirt, sap, tar, sulfuric acid rain and other pollutants
The effectiveness of the protection product will differ from country to country
In Australia, UV rays, intense dry and humid heat, tropical monsoons (NT), and severe dust are the big causes of paint and other surface damage and destruction

Clear coat helps with preventing this but I have seen over the last few years, thousands of washed but unprotected paint finishes of all ages including ones from this decade having clear coat failure and opaqueness (clear coat oxidation)

in the UK, I'd imagine it would be cold, soaking wet, severe road grime, industrial fallout and salt would be the issues and how long a protectant would last and how well it woulld work would be far different from Australia and the USA

In the USA, salt is a huge problem as well as UV rays, heat, tropical storms etc. fallout could possibly be awful in certain states.

A wax will often be good at soaking up the water droplets and leaving the paint looking 80 to 90% washed. however that effect doesnt always last long
durability in the northern territory of austrlaia is almost zero because of the heat day in day out all year and the tropical storms which just wash it straight off.

A sealant that is water based is not as good as one that is solvent based as the water soluble sealant is effected by water. 
durability is poorer and the water based sealant wont absorb rain droplets like wax does.

*PRO APPLICATION OF GTECHNIQ C1/C4 etc*

For those concerned about this being dangerous and difficult to apply, there is nothing to worry about. it's a total no brainer.

If you apply it and it cures to the surface before you've buffed it clear, just put a dab more product onto the applicator, re apply for a few seconds then buff clear.

I'll do a full writeup of my techniques in the Gtechniq and LSP rooms.

*APPEARANCE VS DURABILITY*

yes a sealant or wax should give some slight improvement to the finish but durability is the reason for using them. 
I've noticed a tiny difference in all bar one brand of sealant

The durability of the few sealants I use could go to two years but I allow them to sit for a year then clay, neutralise the paint (extreme dewaxing) and follow with either filling of the defects with silicate ion or remove them with abrasives and reseal

All those who want to keep redoing it every few months, that's fine and you will certainly keep your paint fresh and like new. there is nothing wrong with that
*
SEALANTS PRICE CHEAPER THAN WAX*

These extremely priced waxes are definately not my thing. I'd rather pay for Gtechniq C1 than buy those waxes. 
In general sealants are cheaper or the same price, though my favourite sealant is $200 per litre and not polymer or water based.

I'm one of a few pro detailers who dont care what a product costs if it works extremely well and the results it gives last 
thus why I use coatings 99% of the time as thats the way to go due to the results that no wax, sealant or polish can achieve.

*CLAY DOESNT REMOVE WAXES AND SEALANTS*

From my experience, clay magic red or gloss it extreme would remove waxes and water based sealants but all other blocks will not. many of the vehicles that I've been given the job of doing, have had natural wax on them and no amount of machine or hand claying has removed them. the water is still beading and machine buffing was a total pain with the polish not working for more than a few seconds before turning to little balls (even at 600 rpm)
thus why I am now using my own paint neutralisation wash system, Debeer Silicone remover, PPG Prepsol and 100% IPA and sometimes, GLARE ZERO to make sure the paint surface is totally clean and naked.

*UNLIMITED PROTECTION & MAINTENANCE *

For all those saying that if such a product existed and were wondering what to do on weekends with their pride and joy, there is heaps to do once it is detailed and even if the paint has been coated with C1 or other lacquer coating. 
the coating can be treated just like paint thus you can put any non abrasive polish or glaze on it then start applying wax or sealant. after

I am not a professional who details a car so that in three months time, the whole car gets fully detailed again. The industry is full of these people and I refuse to be one of them. 
my clients would be pissed off and would go elsewhere if I treated their car that way 
example - (using trim dressing instead of Trim Dream and Gtechniq C1)

Instead of that, I refinish vehicles so that they are better than new and never age. I do all the prep work, paint machining, then sealing or coating with the C1 crystal lacquer or other coating system. 
Tyres, wheels, leather, vinyl, rubber, plastic, glass, engine bay, headlights, tail lights etc are all treated with my own products and or GLARE products and Gtechniq C1 and C4 or I1

Once the vehicle is done and, I visit the customer every six weeks or whenever he/she wishes and build on what I've done. 
The C1 is topped with one of these combo's

Prima Amigo and Blackfire GEP - left to sit for an hour then with the residue still on, Driven to Perfection (water insolube) sealant applied straight over the top
then a coat of it on top. 
one coat every time I see the car (up to four coats) then I'll start building on the finish with Aussie Gold Showroom Sealant Glaze (spray and walk away sealant) 
or

Glare Micro Finish (aussie version)
Glare Professional Polish 
Glare Advanced sealant

I'll make more money and have totally loyal customers from one refinish detail and building up maintenance work than detailers who do 3 x typical detail or high quality details and in three to six months time, all the results are faded or gone and it has to be done again. 
3 x their details vs 1 of mine

waxes, sealants and coatings all have their place and are valuble, I feel however that wax is really only beneficial for shows as in some countries, the weather will just destroy them

Along with protecting the paint surface, for me to buy it and use it, a sealant or coating must make the paint harder to scratch or marr. protection and shine are not good enough anymore

Glare Zero topped with micro and advanced deliver this along with Gtechniq C1 and C4


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

i much prefere appyling waxes IMHO...i know it might be not totally natural but it *feels* more natural it me..even if there are negatives to it...and plus i find waxes easier to apply more often in that sealants feel to "clinical"...

although i rate and use some sealants i dont get as much enjoyment from applying them mainly because i personally feel them to be as above to clinical developed in a lab to much (not that waxes are it just feels that way)...

so what that waxes are more expensive...as with everything its personal op.


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

I'm finding myself becoming more and more drawn towards sealants, particularly when you can apply via DA, as they always remove without issue, you don't have any hazing, or gassing or any other related issues.

I think as developments continue, and products like 1000P, Blackfire AFPP and Britemax #5 continue to be so wonderful to use, and are as durable as they are, then the future is bright for sealants. I guess waxes cannot evolve much further now, with becoming 'hybrids'


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

I'm of the thinking that we're in something of a 'golden age' at the moment where there's plethora of choice from either the pure naturally derived waxes, the 'hybrid' waxes and the synthetic sealants. They all have their strengths and weaknesses and and such we have plenty to experiment with and discuss on sites like this.

A part of me thinks that if, in theory, someone came along with a new product that looked better then the top boutique waxes, applied with the ease of the 'wipe on, walk away' sealants and had indefinate durability, then we'd all be amazed, but ultimately a little 'flat'? Having situation like it is now keeps detailing interesting and personally I hope that person never does come along with the 'ultimate' LSP solution


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

Pit Viper said:


> I'm of the thinking that we're in something of a 'golden age' at the moment where there's plethora of choice from either the pure naturally derived waxes, the 'hybrid' waxes and the synthetic sealants. They all have their strengths and weaknesses and and such we have plenty to experiment with and discuss on sites like this.
> 
> A part of me thinks that if, in theory, someone came along with a new product that looked better then the top boutique waxes, applied with the ease of the 'wipe on, walk away' sealants and had indefinate durability, then we'd all be amazed, but ultimately a little 'flat'? Having situation like it is now keeps detailing interesting and personally I hope that person never does come along with the 'ultimate' LSP solution


i agree with the golden age comment...as it would lose the enjoyment factor i find...


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

I think you're right PV, a lot of the sealants on their own do look rather flat, but with the right glaze, you get a lot more depth, so Black Hole for example complements 1000P very well in this respect, as does Britemax #4 with #5, which is probably the 'best looking' glaze/sealant combo I have tried, and looks very close to a nuba 'warm' look.

I think these 'acrylic glazes' should get a bit more focus, as the choice is quite limited at the moment...


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

overall ofc the answer is to do the sealant > wax combo giving the best of both worlds...

i also now take in the comment about some glazes looking flat been proven this wk with some FK1000 on half a bonnet i did then the other 1/2 some meg #7 then the FK the differance was quite noticeable...


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

I agree with the sealant > wax route, which is how the Blackfire kit works, which I am going to be testing this afternoon.

I don't think 1000P will last too well over #7 as its quite oily, but it's a good test to highlight the difference a good glaze can add. If you want something more suited, then Britemax #4, CG EZ Creme or Blackhole will work well.


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

i did look look at the blackhole and have heard good things about it, so maybe in my next order...lol...its done ok with the amount of rain we have had so far...i will be using it in the winter on my red so its just a test on a black car at the mo...does anybody have a piccy of blackhole with some FK over would be nice if on a solid red if poss just to see...


----------



## Mark Collins (Jun 10, 2009)

I use Autoglym egp and i find it good its easy to apply it and leaves a nice shine but i put a layer of wax on afterwards. how do you know when a wax or sealant needs applying again do you go by the beading or what??


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

go by the beading slowing down i.e not forming so often, or no protection at all when the car doesnt keep any water on it acting like a barrier for any further water on it...

although i rarely see this as i enjoy applying wax to often hahaha...


----------



## spurgen (Aug 13, 2008)

Lets be honest. For protection, carnauba wax is a very old and outdated technology. If it weren't for the marketing and hype I believe many of us would not even look at wax compared to synthetic. That said, I do enjoy applying a good quality carnauba, I find it therapeutic. So if it feels go do it. :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

spurgen said:


> Lets be honest. For protection, carnauba wax is a very old and outdated technology. If it weren't for the marketing and hype I believe many of us would not even look at wax compared to synthetic. That said, I do enjoy applying a good quality carnauba, I find it therapeutic. So if it feels go do it. :thumb:


Its interesting that you should say that, as the old school technology of carnauba wax I find superior to well known synthetics for protection against bird lime... My paint being more prone to etching when protected by a sealant than by a wax...


----------



## Hotwheels (Dec 6, 2008)

So what is the perfect sealant as i have megs 21, opti seal, EGP, And Turtle wax gloss guard hope you can help cheers.


----------



## Dream Machines (Mar 13, 2006)

It's possibly protecting from bird lime well because it's absorbing some of it
Some sealants that actually become part of the paint will protect like that if not better


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

i have also found the same as DaveKG...my waxes have protected far better possibly because of there more natural way than the sealants that i have used upto and including FK1000...although i have to say it topped some stupid fing diamondbrite very well and changed the appearance totally...


----------



## chargedvr6 (Apr 7, 2007)

whats the difference between wax and sealent?


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

wax natural made up of carnuaba
sealant- more artificial polymer based

although there is some blurry lines to this in hybrids....


----------



## chargedvr6 (Apr 7, 2007)

Ninja59 said:


> wax natural made up of carnuaba
> sealant- more artificial polymer based
> 
> although there is some blurry lines to this in hybrids....


so sealant is literally just an artificial wax ie they do exactly the same thing?


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

yes technically both LSP's but waxes do not last as long, but give a more warmer appearance overall (all subjective ofc) 
sealants are more durable on the hole than waxes, but some class them as abit clinical and cold...
most say light colours suit sealants darker waxes although its NO hard and fast rule as for example FK1000 (a sealant) worked perfectly for me on a black car with the correct prep work...


----------



## chargedvr6 (Apr 7, 2007)

iv started using fk1000p on my black golf with dodo purple haze on top of that just finished polishing the bonnet and it looks great


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

that sounds like a good combo giving you the best of both worlds...just remember to keep the layers thin....


----------



## Dream Machines (Mar 13, 2006)

to get technical for a moment
sealants I believe are (from what I've been told and had analyised)

Amino Functional Resin (older technology I think)
Natural Silicate (my personal favourite)
Acrylic polymer
either water or solvent based (solvent being better)
PTFE (nasty stuff that can change the paints characteristics and is harder to buff)

a great sealant or coating should become part of the paint, both beneath and on the surface


----------

