# DoDo Supernatural vs Swissvax Best Of Show



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

Has anyone compared DoDo Supernatural vs Swissvax Best Of Show?
I have done some searching but cant find anything.
I have been using Victoria Concours and love it but really fancy purchasing a higher end wax. 
I know there is a difference in price but what about looks and protection?

Any advice would be great. :thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Yup, I have both... for me, and with waxes I emphasise that opinion is very personal, but:

Supernatural is the easier of the two to use and has a price advantage... BoS holds all the other cards. It delivers to me a slightly wet look addition to paintwork which the Supernatural cannot quite match, but moreover the durability of the BoS is miles ahead. Supernatural V2 has seeked to remedy the durability of V1, so it will be interesting to see how great the improvements have been as this was a bit of a let down for me personally from Supernatural to the point where I actually prefer Banana Armour from the Dodo Juice range.


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

did both side by side on my car - split right down the middle, and it was impossible to tell a difference... Car was a light colour and not the best for judging an LSP on looks, but it was honestly impossible to tell them apart 

I used SN v2.01 which was the slightly grainier version, and as a result the BoS was slightly easier to use, but that wont be an issue now with the new version. Hard to ignore SN with the huge price advantage...


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

I have had SNv1, v2 and BOS.

BOS is by far the easiest to use - apply and remove.

Overall, I am happiest with SNv2. You have to consider it is HALF the price of the BOS, and looks easily as good, if not better than BOS, plus the rest of the Dodo range is more affordable and of equal quality.

I'd recommend either of them, but I didn't feel BOS was worth the extra.


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

Thanks Dave! I shall sit on the fence for a while and keep using my Victoria Concours.


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

Consider Dave's comments are regarding SNv1, not v2. V2 is a lot better than the original IMHO and surpasses BOS.


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

Bigpikle said:


> did both side by side on my car - split right down the middle, and it was impossible to tell a difference... Car was a light colour and not the best for judging an LSP on looks, but it was honestly impossible to tell them apart
> 
> I used SN v2.01 which was the slightly grainier version, and as a result the BoS was slightly easier to use, but that wont be an issue now with the new version. Hard to ignore SN with the huge price advantage...





RussZS said:


> I have had SNv1, v2 and BOS.
> 
> BOS is by far the easiest to use - apply and remove.
> 
> ...


Ooo maybe I will give SuperNatural a try, So many opinions , I think I may have to give a panel pot a try and see if I like it. Thanks for taking the time to reply :thumb:


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

I'd suggest you get some LPL too as it compliments SN soooo well.

If you live near to me I will happily let you try some of mine.


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

I have LP and LPL and think they are gr8. Thank you very much for the offer, im quite a way from you, Im in Devon but thanks all the same


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

RussZS said:


> Consider Dave's comments are regarding SNv1, not v2. V2 is a lot better than the original IMHO and surpasses BOS.


Cant say I noticed much difference between the two looks wise when I saw them...

How is the durability of V2? Its not been released long enough to know if it competes with BoS duability (I get 3 months approx from it), but would be interesting to know if it exceeds V1 durability which was under a month for me on my car.


----------



## ahaydock (Jan 4, 2007)

I have found that after 6 weeks SN V2 was still holding up very well and sheeting well on the GF's Fox.

:thumb:


----------



## hartzsky (Dec 23, 2007)

I really don't think you are going to see a huge difference between Vic Concours and either one of these waxes. The only thing high end about high end waxes is the price. My vote: Don't buy either one


----------



## rr dave (May 26, 2008)

I have both side by side on the car and haven't noticed much difference in looks, beading or durability.


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

I applied SN V1 and V2 (crunchy not smooth) to the BM on the 7th August and they are still both beading well!

Even with a weeks dust on them

few pics of application, i'll try to get an up to date pic to also

Crunchy on the left of the pic - V1 on the right

Application





































V1



















Crunchy


































































They are both still on at the mo, two months on V1 beads are slightly looser but there's not much in it

I hope to be getting some BOS shortly for more playing and have only played with a panel or two previously, I'll not vote in the poll due to this

Dave - I have a theory about low durability, I now have the equipment and will be posting that shortly


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

^ Thankyou very much! Have u been able to compare SN and BOS since?


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

I was going towards SuperNatural but the poll results show different?

5 SuperNatural
13 Best Of Show


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Chris424 said:


> ^ Thankyou very much! Have u been able to compare SN and BOS since?


Na it was Concours and BOS on a bonnet and wing each.

I've yet to own a SV wax, but have a couple in mind i fancy


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Chris424 said:


> I was going towards SuperNatural but the poll results show different?
> 
> 5 SuperNatural
> 13 Best Of Show


You need to remember that BOS has been out for years and SNv2 has been out for 2 months (even the original Supernatural has only been out for 6 months). BOS is going to have far more fans simply because more people will have used it. I would be amazed if everyone who voted for BOS has also tried SNv2.


----------



## Mark M (Nov 29, 2006)

SNv2 and BOS are both probably the easiest waxes I have ever used when it comes to buffing off.

Both spread the same for me.

Beads just slightly tighter on BOS.

Price difference is ridiculous really.

TBH, if I was you, SNv2 would be the best purchase.

BOS is excellent, but you wont be let down with a purchase of SNv2 and have coin in your back pocket to buy more Dodo goodies.


----------



## rubbishboy (May 6, 2006)

Chris424 said:


> I have LP and LPL and think they are gr8. Thank you very much for the offer, im quite a way from you, Im in Devon but thanks all the same


You're not far from me though, you're welcome to come try a drop of SN.


----------



## O`Neil (Aug 13, 2007)

I also have SNv2 and BoS side by side on my car and looks wise I just can`t tell which is which.

Perhaps BoS is ever so slightly easier to use, on and off.

They`ve only been on for about 6 weeks so unsure about durabiltiy of SNv2.

It all comes down to how much you`re prepared to spend


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Epoch said:


> I applied SN V1 and V2 (crunchy not smooth) to the BM on the 7th August and they are still both beading well!
> 
> Even with a weeks dust on them
> 
> ...


This is an interesting post as 1) it shows that SNv2 is ahead in performance terms (as we know from a technical perspective) and 2) that SNv1 may not be the 'one month wonder' that it has been unfairly criticised as being.

Now don't get me wrong, Dave KG is a force of good on this forum and takes an absolutely honest approach in his appraisals. But people do hang off his every word and if he declares a product as lasting a certain amount of time, it gets set in stone. There may or may not be factors at play to explain a poor performance from the wax... sometimes humidity affects curing time, for example. But we'd suggest 2-3 months from SNv1 and even though we get reports from individual testers about this kind of durability (or even better, 5 months being one claim which even we think is on the high side), they often don't post or aren't as high profile.

We then have an anomalous result in Iain's wax test, with SNv1 lasting between 1-2 months which would seem to concur with Dave KG. But for one massive glitch. Rubbishboy's Juiced Edition has outlasted it, and that is basically a fractionally dumbed down Supernatural recipe... it is like a standard 911 beating a 911 Turbo. A very strange result.

So we have a couple of subjective reports flying in the face of other subjective reports and even the science of wax manufacture, in one case. It must sound like I'm complaining or something, but I'm not - we have introduced SNv2 which is good news all round. I'm more confused in all honesty and also slightly perturbed about how one subjective test result can quickly pass into absolute fact. I know that Dave always tries to point out it is just as he finds it, but people still take it as gospel. The little fella doesn't know the power he holds... he's like the Simon Cowell of Wax Factor!!!


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> This is an interesting post as 1) it shows that SNv2 is ahead in performance terms (as we know from a technical perspective) and 2) that SNv1 may not be the 'one month wonder' that it has been unfairly criticised as being.
> 
> Now don't get me wrong, Dave KG is a force of good on this forum and takes an absolutely honest approach in his appraisals. But people do hang off his every word and if he declares a product as lasting a certain amount of time, it gets set in stone. There may or may not be factors at play to explain a poor performance from the wax... sometimes humidity affects curing time, for example. But we'd suggest 2-3 months from SNv1 and even though we get reports from individual testers about this kind of durability (or even better, 5 months being one claim which even we think is on the high side), they often don't post or aren't as high profile.
> 
> ...


^^^Stop your whinging, bird boy 

I have a plan using the right hand item in this picture










My view is that humidity affects curing times as you say Dom, however i also think proximity to dew point (or panel temp vs air temp and humidity) can affect bonding.

Different solvents in different waxes work better at different temps and dryness.

- Any waxes with strong old school solvents (colly's etc) will work underwater as they are designed to do, they'll gas off what ever the conditions. 
- Any waxes with silicones in, will bond when it's cold and damp.

These would explain some of the patterns I have personally seen with durability.

Might be a lenghly plan BUT i do think the same wax applied half to a bonnet in my warm dry garage Vs half applied at close proximity to dew point outside may show some big differences in durability.

I've seen it but need for the good of DW to prove it

Where will it go? Could be the newbie post "What wax for a blue car" is replaced with "What wax following a warm summer day, no cloud cover, and late evening when temp is dropping rapidly" 

Watch this space


----------



## Wheelie_Clean (Jun 16, 2007)

^^^
I like your thinking:thumb:

Just to add to the debate - I wonder if there is some kind of wax eating monster (dew point?) in the Scottish air as there have also been reports of Z Concours not lasting very long. 

I prepped the wife's Rav before the Swissvax meet (during the last week of May) three coats of Z Concours applied over two days and is still very much alive and well four and a half months later


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Wheelie_Clean said:


> ^^^
> I like your thinking:thumb:
> 
> Just to add to the debate - I wonder if there is some kind of wax eating monster (dew point?) in the Scottish air as there have also been reports of Z Concours not lasting very long.
> ...


hahahaha

We shall see, but i do think the UK weather affects products far more than people give credit.

Affects me when i working i know that.

I had to turn the heating down in the garage the other night, Damon and I were getting too hot with all that buffing :lol:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Epoch said:


> ^^^Stop your whinging, bird boy
> 
> I have a plan using the right hand item in this picture
> 
> ...


This theory is very good indeed, and goes a long way to explaining why some of the newer waxes have such seriously varying durability reports... The evaporation of the solvent from any thin film layer - be that wax, or polystyrene etc etc - is critical to the hardness of the layer and from this one could quite easily make the small jump that durability is linked to this also.

Additionally, this would go some way to explaining why the same raw ingredients perform so differently from different manufacturers - that is to say I am sure there is no ultimate difference in the durability of carnuaba wax, its the same raw ingredient used across the board. The durability must come from somewhere else. Now Dom has floated the idea of additional polymers and I think this explains at least part of the story, though I also believe that the solvents used also explain the theory very well indeed and backs up varying durability reports. It could also be hypothesised at this stage that any oils on the paint affect not the wax, but the solvent instead and affect the even spreading of the wax which again will result in varying durability.

I see the effects of solvents day in and day out in my own work in sample preparation, where my typical samples are mixed into polystyrene disolved in toluene and then the solvent evaporated off (in this case under a vacuum line for 72 hours) to leave the polystyrene containing the sample... You can see the thin layer harden as the solvent evaporates, and I believe the wax layer on a panel behaves ery similarly, and this is why one cannot simply add more layers of wax to the panel straight away. Furthermore this disproves the spit shining theory, as if we must wait for the solvent to evaporate, then adding more water will only hinder this process and thus spit shining takes you a step back rather than forward, though interesting to note that some have had perceived durability enhancements from this technique.

Knowledge of the solvents you are dealing with John will help you in your quest here so if you can ge that info, it will help with the evaluation of the results of your test though I do think that its a very good thoery and one which I think you will find will yield tenable results to explain varying durability.

However - two points which must be made, the first on a testing note. The evaluation of durability is a difficult one, and the assessment of durability using water behaviour alone is unsatisfactory for reasons I have discussed on many previous occasions - you simply cannot infer conclusive evidence from this measurement alone. Mutliple means which may include water behaviour must be used for the result to hold more value, including the squeak test. Combine the various factors and more valuable results will be yielded.

Secondly, on a practical note. While the assessment of this theory is excellent from a learning perspective and from a scientific point of view as well, it bears little effect on the _performance of the wax._ I explain - _if_ (and I suspect they are) the solvents and ambient conditions are a key playing factor then that a wax is more or less susceptable to this is irrelevant to the end user who will value the wax simply on its performance they see... So if its susceptable to conditions, and gives widely varying durability then although this is explained, it doesn't excuse the wax in any way over one which can perform consistently and rather than putting forward the argument that one wax is for dry, summers days only I'd sooner put forward the argument that it is a sign for the manufacturer of the wax to return to the drawing board and aim for greater performance consistency. A different way, and perhaps a harsher way of analysing the potential results but one which is more tenable to the end user who I presume wont want a wax they can only apply when there thermometers, barometers and hygrometers say they can.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Wheelie_Clean said:


> ^^^
> I like your thinking:thumb:
> 
> Just to add to the debate - I wonder if there is some kind of wax eating monster (dew point?) in the Scottish air as there have also been reports of Z Concours not lasting very long.
> ...


Perhaps although reports of poor durability from Concours vary far and wide, not just from certain locations in Scotland


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

The "bonding" process of a wax, just to add is rather more of a hardening process by evaporation of solvents - quite difference from any polymers which may link up and form like you can get in some sealents... so the wax will rely on evaportion (full) of the solvents in order to be durable. Dew point, or any dampness will invariably slow this process down and affect the durability, though while this has not been conclusively proven, may of us compensate for this anyway by not waxing cars at times of day close to the dew point.

Another point that should also be considered is the tendency of some solvents to form cavities in the layers - regions of high solvent concentration which take a long time to evaporate or will not fully evaporate and this problem is more prevelant in thicker layers, and will also affect durability by not having full evaporatio of the solvent... Perhaps another argument for one to have thin layers of wax on application and flies in the face of "thicker the better".


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> This theory is very good indeed, and goes a long way to explaining why some of the newer waxes have such seriously varying durability reports... The evaporation of the solvent from any thin film layer - be that wax, or polystyrene etc etc - is critical to the hardness of the layer and from this one could quite easily make the small jump that durability is linked to this also.
> 
> Additionally, this would go some way to explaining why the same raw ingredients perform so differently from different manufacturers - that is to say I am sure there is no ultimate difference in the durability of carnuaba wax, its the same raw ingredient used across the board. The durability must come from somewhere else. Now Dom has floated the idea of additional polymers and I think this explains at least part of the story, though I also believe that the solvents used also explain the theory very well indeed and backs up varying durability reports. It could also be hypothesised at this stage that any oils on the paint affect not the wax, but the solvent instead and affect the even spreading of the wax which again will result in varying durability.
> 
> ...


Completely agree with the ingredients and process of manufacture being the reason and not an excuse.

However i would take the view of;

Wax Vs Sealant Vs modern hybrid

can then be debated properly and with the emerging issues surrounding silicones etc in paint potentially affecting the polishing and finish, the merits and trade offs in natural Vs manmade can also be weighed up when suggesting waxes for daily run abouts and garage queens.

It's supposed to be for fun (I have another few of these type of things i intend to look at more concerning the paint its self) and while i'm no expert i'll happily take tips, thoughts and feed back as i go to get it right.

DW, it's where the wax nerds hangout :thumb:


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> The "bonding" process of a wax, just to add is rather more of a hardening process by evaporation of solvents - quite difference from any polymers which may link up and form like you can get in some sealents... so the wax will rely on evaportion (full) of the solvents in order to be durable. Dew point, or any dampness will invariably slow this process down and affect the durability, though while this has not been conclusively proven, may of us compensate for this anyway by not waxing cars at times of day close to the dew point.
> 
> Another point that should also be considered is the tendency of some solvents to form cavities in the layers - regions of high solvent concentration which take a long time to evaporate or will not fully evaporate and this problem is more prevelant in thicker layers, and will also affect durability by not having full evaporatio of the solvent... Perhaps another argument for one to have thin layers of wax on application and flies in the face of "thicker the better".


Yep but due to high humitity (like waxing under a canopy in the rain) can fully stop the hardening process. I've left Vintage on my car for a couple of hours and buffed it off ok on a cloudy day, Damon's bonnet had some on for 15 mins the other night and it went rock hard and sticky (raining outside but garage at 25 degrees C and 65% humdity).

So more over the ability to correctly apply a wax (i.e the prep and conditions) may have more effect than the wax you buy.

Weekend at Epoch's garage next year* Dave :thumb:

*Subject to me finishing the bloody thing


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Epoch said:


> Yep but due to high humitity (like waxing under a canopy in the rain) can fully stop the hardening process. I've left Vintage on my car for a couple of hours and buffed it off ok on a cloudy day, Damon's bonnet had some on for 15 mins the other night and it went rock hard and sticky (raining outside but garage at 25 degrees C and 65% humdity).
> 
> So more over the ability to correctly apply a wax (i.e the prep and conditions) may have more effect than the wax you buy.
> 
> ...


Definitely, I'll bring cakes and cookie dough (to put in the oven for traditional warm straight from the oven American cookies, nice and gooey  )


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Dave KG said:


> Definitely, I'll bring cakes and cookie dough (to put in the oven for traditional warm straight from the oven American cookies, nice and gooey  )


:doublesho

:lol: :thumb:


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

To the OP: Sorry to hijack thread with some waffle


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Epoch said:


> :doublesho
> 
> :lol: :thumb:


:lol::lol::lol: What can I say, I'm loving off of a snack diet of American sweets right now! :thumb:


----------



## Wheelie_Clean (Jun 16, 2007)

Dave KG said:


> Perhaps although reports of poor durability from Concours vary far and wide, not just from certain locations in Scotland


Maybe in the prep too?

I used HD Cleanse on the Rav prior to Concours.

I also tried CG Easy Creme Glaze on the Mondeo bonnet followed by Concours and that managed 8 weeks but then again it's different paint and it lives outside where as the Rav is garaged at night.

I'll have to try HD and Concours on the Mondeo bonnet & see how that goes - if it's around long enough to evaluate (company car) long past the usual replace time:wall:


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Epoch said:


> Completely agree with the ingredients and process of manufacture being the reason and not an excuse.
> 
> However i would take the view of;
> 
> ...


But what I am starting to discover is that a purely natural wax is as much a myth as carnauba content etc.

In reality you only have:

Sealant vs modern wax hybrid (MWH!)

All production waxes with a high performance are going to be MWHs, but some more towards the sealant end of the scale than others.

The solvent issue is also an interesting one from an application consistency point of view - plus we have discovered some ingredients are far more powerful when dissolved in some nasty solvent rather than water. Even if Mr Coatings Ingredients Supplier says that water soluble magic potion A is as good as solvent-soluble magic potion B, the solvent product can often show a distinct improvement. Do you save the world and be nice to the daisies with a VOC safe or water based product and get hung on DW because the product lasts half the time? Or do you say feck it and get jiggy with the toluenes and turpenes. To be honest, to keep on top of the game, we'll have to dip a toe into more synthetic waters. But we'll be careful how we do it; I would rather not sell out a brand that attempts to be as ecological and ethical as it can be. Hence why I'd never rule out a sub brand


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Dodo Factory said:


> But what I am starting to discover is that a purely natural wax is as much a myth as carnauba content etc.
> 
> In reality you only have:
> 
> ...


So going back on topic (ish)

It's not called "Supernatural" just because it sounds cool


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Supernatural was chosen because of the lack of fragrance, colourings and the fact it is substantially natural in terms of its ingredients; leaving the solvent out of it as this always accounts for around half the product and has to be a highly refined and modern product, the rest of the ingredients are generally natural or naturally derived (even carnauba is heavily refined and the beeswax isn't as the bees left it). A couple of the ingredients are used in modern sealants, but we use these in much smaller amounts to give the natural wax an edge and a kick, but retain its fundamental concept. I think it is fair to say that some manufacturers are a little more heavy handed with the bottle


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

my head hurts :lol:

did somebody say meet, cookies and detailing? I'll bring a camera


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Bigpikle said:


> my head hurts :lol:
> 
> did somebody say meet, cookies and detailing? I'll bring a camera


John said the first bit, I said the second and I'm sure detailing can be arranged


----------



## RedCloudMC (Jul 19, 2008)

If I could just go back to durability of SN V1 for a second (as I'm sure there's lots of V1 still in people's garages - don't chuck it out!). SN V1 as a stand alone product was a good one. V2 may be better in some respects but I do feel v1 should not be passed over as a 'development wax' as some other wax companies have referred to it as to me. Durability wise, I can only speak as I find and I've found it to be perfectly acceptable for what it is! On my old Land Rover I had the whole vehicle treated with v1 and two months later it was still beading nicely. The car was used every day in all weathers and washed once a week. I sold it at the end of two months so can't comment how much longer it lasted but the beading was still very good when I waved goodbye to it at the dealers!

I've never tried BOS although have displayed my SN finished GTI at Concours events alongside cars treated with BOS and it was usually my car that received comments about the depth of shine etc...and that's on silver paint!

As ever, prep is king. A good polishing with Menz polishes followed by LP and/or LPL and topped with either SN gives an amazing finish.

Which is best then? A totally personal choice - both appear to be great waxes but as is always repeated here you can spend £20 or £2000 on a pot of wax and if the prep is not done right, you've wasted you dosh. Taken that into account SN offers great value for money against other ridculously priced waxes that appear to have no great performance advantage. As in a previous post a few months ago, in many cases you are paying for packaging and marketing as well as buying into a 'heritage'. Dodo is a young company with a very proactive and approachable owner who make great products to make your car look good and give it some protection...and all at reasonable prices...so no contest in my eyes!

Cheers :thumb:


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

I just came back to this thread... What happened?!!  lol I shall get reading :lol:


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

Thankyou to everyone who posted in this thread. It has really helped me out. im going to buy some SuperNatural. I want to try it and love the rest of the DoDo range. Thanks again to everyone :thumb:


----------



## bidderman1969 (Oct 20, 2006)

RedCloudMC said:


> If I could just go back to durability of SN V1 for a second (as I'm sure there's lots of V1 still in people's garages - *don't chuck it out!). *SN V1 as a stand alone product was a good one. V2 may be better in some respects but I do feel v1 should not be passed over as a 'development wax' as some other wax companies have referred to it as to me. Durability wise, I can only speak as I find and I've found it to be perfectly acceptable for what it is! On my old Land Rover I had the whole vehicle treated with v1 and two months later it was still beading nicely. The car was used every day in all weathers and washed once a week. I sold it at the end of two months so can't comment how much longer it lasted but the beading was still very good when I waved goodbye to it at the dealers!
> 
> I've never tried BOS although have displayed my SN finished GTI at Concours events alongside cars treated with BOS and it was usually my car that received comments about the depth of shine etc...and that's on silver paint!
> 
> ...


blimey, can people afford to do that?


----------



## RedCloudMC (Jul 19, 2008)

ha ha - well I certainly can't! 

No, I just feel that sometimes people lose sight of the fact that v1 was and is a great wax. 

But if anyone does want to chuck it out...then put it in a bag and send to my address please. I'll happily 'dispose' of it for you!


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

The poll results really annoy me - it seems that we have a lot of brand snobs on here - as Dom suggested, I bet very few of the BOS voters have tried both back to back, as there is very little support on posts for BOS over SNv2.

All of the posts where the users have tried both suggest that SNv2 is as good, but much better value.

My comparison and conclusion that SNv2 is better is slightly incorrect potentially as I was assessing LP and SNv2 against SV CF and BOS.

The Dodo combo is the better looking combo IMO and half the price!


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

Going back to SuperNatural. Could I apply 2 Layers of SuperNatural and put a soft wax on top for better looks? Such as Vic Concours or DoDo Orange Crush or is this pointless?


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Essentially pointless. Just layer the SNv2.


----------



## Chris424 (Dec 5, 2007)

Dodo Factory said:


> Essentially pointless. Just layer the SNv2.


Ok, Thankyou :thumb:


----------



## JJ_ (Oct 26, 2005)

I have SnV2 and this is still beading on the roof. I applied on 19-04-2010. I removed it from the other panels to test various other products.

Link to thread here http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=165164

P.S. I just noticed the last post on this thread - sorry !!


----------



## herbie147 (May 30, 2010)

Holy thread resserection!


----------

