# Is it really ALL in the prep?



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

From my findings, no it is not.

As of late I've found there to be a 'bandwagon' of DW Warriors who seem to think that it's ALL in the prep, and that a wax/sealant will add nothing to a cars looks.

I seem to disagree. Yes it may be MAINLY in the prep, but not ALL in the prep.

*Example #1*

Car has been washed, clayed, one coat of Duragloss 105 Sealant has been applied. No 'abrasive' work took place, yet I managed to get a pretty damn good flake pop. No 'prep' there. Washed, clayed then LSP.










*Example #2*

Same scenario as before, but a layer of Dodo's Banana Armour has been applied and removed. A Zaino Z8 wipedown has taken place (probably removing the fresh wax underneath, amateur mistake). Once again no abrasive work taking place, yet a deep shine.


























So, is it really ALL in the prep work? Are micro-abrasives really needed to get a deep gloss, or a glassy reflection?

Alan


----------



## -Kev- (Oct 30, 2007)

if the paints in good condition, then no. but the paint on my fiesta (for exampe) looks grey when the sun hits it due to the last owner having an attraction to the swirl-o-matic, so the shine will be mainly in the prep when i correct it.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

:thumb: 

the punto has 3 patches of clearcoat failure


----------



## -Kev- (Oct 30, 2007)

alan_mcc said:


> :thumb:
> 
> the punto has 3 patches of clearcoat failure


bit like a few of the wheel nut covers on my car then :lol: £80-odd for four


----------



## millns84 (Jul 5, 2009)

I think wax/sealant will add a bit of shine to any finish, but MUCH more improvement can be seen when the surface is prepared properly. I've seen people quote 5% of the finish comes from the LSP and I'd agree with that...


----------



## -Kev- (Oct 30, 2007)

alot of it depends on what LSP your using, the colour of the car and how good your eyesight is imo (rubbish in my case as i wear contacts :lol


----------



## millns84 (Jul 5, 2009)

-Kev- said:


> alot of it depends on what LSP your using, the colour of the car and how good your eyesight is imo (rubbish in my case as i wear contacts :lol


Like they say at Specsavers, it's all in the lense! Jesus, I've got to apologise for that! :lol:


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

alan_mcc said:


> From my findings, no it is not.
> 
> As of late I've found there to be a 'bandwagon' of DW Warriors who seem to think that it's ALL in the prep, and that a wax/sealant will add nothing to a cars looks.
> 
> I seem to disagree. Yes it may be MAINLY in the prep, but not ALL in the prep.


Not so sure that it's a bandwagon of DW warriors! :lol:

Is your pictures above after you have went round your car with the rotary?

If so, then you have already carried out the prep work that the warrior are talking about IMO...

If not, then looks good to me! 

:thumb:


----------



## -Kev- (Oct 30, 2007)

millns84 said:


> Like they say at Specsavers, it's all in the lense! Jesus, I've got to apologise for that! :lol:


:lol:


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

The Cueball said:


> Not so sure that it's a bandwagon of DW warriors! :lol:
> 
> Is your pictures above after you have went round your car with the rotary?
> 
> ...


Yep - left holograms and been swirled up since then (mum: 'i cleaned your car today!!!') :wall:


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

millns84 said:


> I think wax/sealant will add a bit of shine to any finish, but MUCH more improvement can be seen when the surface is prepared properly. I've seen people quote 5% of the finish comes from the LSP and I'd agree with that...


Yes, 95% of the finish may come from prepation but 95% isn't it ALL which is what many people seem to say nowadays.


----------



## little john (Jun 10, 2007)

I have to disagree with you.
I spent today cleaning my Dad's black saphire astra and it and it looked grey and this is one of the cars I take care of, very little had been done to it since september other than washing in the normal manner, very little swirling and a few light RDS from his trips past long branches in bushes. A tardis bath, claying and then megs#83 brought it back, I did try lime prime lite but decided to go with #83 just to try knock back some of the rds. After the car looked awesome, a neighbough comented that it looked like new. I then just applied a coat of zaino Z2 as it was getting late the car looked great before the Z2 did it look any better after probably not.

I just wished I hadn't applied the trim ultra to the plastics as it has rained since application and I don't think it had dried.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Maybe sealants/waxes don't add anything to prepped paintwork, but they do add to un-prepped paintwork. Unless of course the paint is oxidised, or of course that badly swirled it looks grey. 

Nice post though.

Alan


----------



## Orca (Apr 16, 2007)

It's not all in the prep - LSPs provide a number of effects and do so deliberately.

"Prep" is all very well and good so long as you (a) have the tools and (b) have the experience to use them. Often, people want a wipe on wipe off miracle and there are a number of products out there that do that. Furthermore, different LSPs have different looks - colour blind folks can see it plain as day.


----------



## tony2 (Jan 31, 2010)

This Is a can of worms................I hope your Big enough to carry it through..............With 3000+Posts you should be


----------



## slkman (Jun 23, 2009)

In my opinion prep is down to the individual car. If you can get your paint ultra smooth and silky from just a little Auto Glym SRP then you can have the choice of any wax under the sun and have an amazing finish. Its the paintwork thats not been looked after and requires a lot of work with machine correction that I think most say the finish is down to the prep. So your question is open ended. I'm sure most who say the finish is in the prep mostly work in the trade and work on some right states which require more than a wash and wax.


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

Definitely down to the colour and the expectations of the detailer/owner

My car being silver needs machine polishing, yet I can still achieve a very good finish by hand, and can see definite differences between the 12 waxes and sealants I've used in the 5 weeks I've had it.

However, on colour such as black, in most light, no LSP can make this much difference:










However, I do still believe there's a significant difference between different LSP's and DEFINITELY a difference between cheaper waxes and more boutique stuff after 4 weeks or so, also after a couple of days. The 'wax test' was all very well, but most of the cars had only been waxed for a few hours, had they all been driven and washed for a period of say 8 weeks, then I believe the difference would be more significant and apparent.

There's no way everyone will ever agree on this, but I do agree with the OP to a point - too many new people on here are greated with "Doesn't matter what you use, it's all in the prep " That's neither helpful nor constructive, and often condescending, despite being technically true. Not everyone will machine polish their car to perfection though will they, and indeed a few long standing members on here haven't, so it's a little hypocritical at the same time!

Does LSP make a difference? Yes, but it depends on the colour and expectations.


----------



## grant_evans (Mar 2, 2008)

alan_mcc said:


> Maybe sealants/waxes don't add anything to prepped paintwork, but they do add to un-prepped paintwork. Unless of course the paint is oxidised, or of course that badly swirled it looks grey.
> 
> Nice post though.
> 
> Alab


spot on imo


----------



## CliveP (Feb 1, 2009)

It might not all be in the prep, but good prep certainly won't do any harm and on the whole is going to add a lot to the final finish. Good prep certainly can't detract from the quailty of the finish, likely only add to it!

Regards,
Clive.


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

Try a product like Prima Banana Gloss that fills like nothing else and see what you come up with in about 10 minutes. Then tell me it's all in the prep.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for a good machine polishing once in a while. But maybe the author of this thread is right and a little too much emphasis is placed on abrasives.

Cheers to paint preservation!


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

RussZS said:


> There's no way everyone will ever agree on this, but I do agree with the OP to a point - too many new people on here are greated with "Doesn't matter what you use, it's all in the prep " That's neither helpful nor constructive, and often condescending, despite being technically true.


Exactly the point I'm trying to make - frustrates me when I seen this.

Oh and post count means nothing, I normally speak a load of drivel anyway. :thumb:


----------



## TOGWT (Oct 26, 2005)

*The aesthetics-* of a vehicles appearance is often an emotional reaction, which is very subjective to say the least, the only best wax or sealant that really matters is what looks 'best' to you. In the final analysis it all come down to; 85% preparation, 5% product, 7% application methodology and the balance is in the 'guy' of the beholder

*Process over Product *

A wax or sealant can only reflect what is underneath it, so a clean, level well-prepared surface is the most important consideration (85% of a surfaces reflectivity is its preparation) along with applied product clarity. If you apply a product over a surface that is dirty or one that has surface imperfections a wax or sealant will not disguise it, only highlight them.


----------



## Guest (Apr 7, 2010)

I think it depends on the LSP. I'm currently doing extensive tests for a new product range that might be comming out soon and they have slight paint cleaners, fillers and a very durable sealent and can leave an awesome finish. Yet take a standard sealenet like Duragloss 501 and it didnt do anything on my car? Etc.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

TOGWT said:


> *Process over Product *
> 
> A wax or sealant can only reflect what is underneath it, so a clean, level well-prepared surface is the most important consideration (85% of a surfaces reflectivity is its preparation) along with applied product clarity. If you apply a product over a surface that is dirty or one that has surface imperfections a wax or sealant will not disguise it, only highlight them.


Apart from any product with fillers, which do disguise surface imperfections such as holograms and minor swirling.

:thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

A bandwagon of DW warriors? :lol:

I am one who does believe that the final looks will come all from the preparotary stages _if the prep work is carried out to a suitably high standard._ Naturally, one adds a layer to a clearcoat (we're talking circa 20nm thick here) and this can change the optical properties, but away from the science of this (which we can get into quite happily in discussion), can one really make out the differences with the human eye? Bear in mind also the typial wavelengths of visible light and how they compare with the thickness of your typical LSP coating, and the appropriate refractive indexes of the clearcoat itself and the wax/sealant you are applying.

Time and time again, tests are carried out - and time and time again the answers seem to reveal the same: people cannot see the differences between different LSPs. Yes - some of these tests, in fact all tests which both support and challenge the view, have their flaws and limitations. But looking at the statistics of the tests I have been involved in, where there is a group trying to spot differences, there is nothing more than a variation that can be put down to a simple statistical variation, and no tenable swing one way or another. It points to the human eye being unable to spot the differences.

Naturally one cannot disagree that the _vast_ majority of the final look comes from the prep work, and whether not not you beleive the wax adds to this or not (or perhaps detracts from it ) will be down to personal opinion and viewpoint... perhaps the "band of DW warriors" are simply keen to point out that the "looks enhancement" waxes offer is not as high as a lot of the marketing suggests and that far superior results can be had simply from paying closer attention to the prep  ...

When I see convincing and consistent evidence to the contrary, with my own eyes, of tenable differences on well prepped paint of different waxes and sealants then I will happily hold my hands up and say I was wrong, waxes do make a big tenable difference... but right now, all I see is evidence that supports the prep-work arguments and as I personally believe this to be the key, my posts will naturally reflect my beliefs


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

alan_mcc said:


> Maybe sealants/waxes don't add anything to prepped paintwork, but they do add to un-prepped paintwork. Unless of course the paint is oxidised, or of course that badly swirled it looks grey.
> 
> Nice post though.
> 
> Alan


But of course they will - this is because you will get a light filling effect as one simple example... however, if the paintwork is not prepped, then one cannot say that it is not all in the prep based on this.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

What I'm trying to get across is threads with new members saying the likes of 'what wax for my white car'..

and someone will come along and say 'Doesn't matter, it's *all* in the prep.'

Waxes/sealants do add to a un-prepped cars looks in most cases, look at the pictures I posted, no clearcoat has been removed, yes maybe the sealant has filled the paint or maybe it hasn't but I stand by my point that is it *MAINLY* in the prep and not *ALL*.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Dave_KG said:


> perhaps the "band of DW warriors" are simply keen to point out that the "looks enhancement" waxes offer is not as high as a lot of the marketing suggests and that far superior results can be had simply from paying closer attention to the prep ...


Yes far superior results may be given by hand polishing beforehand with a dedicated abrasive, or maybe an AIO product (limeprime, AG SRP etc) but that's not the point - extra looks can be gained from an LSP.

Duragloss 105/Banana Armour -



















If I had polished before applying the LSP's then yes. maybe I'd get a better flake but I'm pretty sure you don't get flake like this from a wash.


----------



## amiller (Jan 1, 2009)

RussZS said:


> Definitely down to the colour and the expectations of the detailer/owner
> 
> My car being silver needs machine polishing, yet I can still achieve a very good finish by hand, and can see definite differences between the 12 waxes and sealants I've used in the 5 weeks I've had it.
> 
> ...


Finally, someone that is on the same wavelength as me. :wave::thumb:


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

alan_mcc said:


> Yes far superior results may be given by hand polishing beforehand with a dedicated abrasive, or maybe an AIO product (limeprime, AG SRP etc) but that's not the point - extra looks can be gained from an LSP.
> 
> Duragloss 105/Banana Armour -
> 
> ...


I may be wrong here, but I was under the impression DG 105 had chemical cleansing abilities which itself would "prep" the paint, certainly more so than the solvents in a wax- making this comparison AIO vs "pure LSP".


----------



## big ben (Aug 25, 2009)

its *ALL* in the prep if you prep

if you dont prep the paint then a wax/sealant/gloss shampoo/QD will add that bit more to the paint


----------



## Guest (Apr 7, 2010)

I think Dave when alan says 'Prep' he means machine polishing. Prep to me is cleansing the paint and correcting it.
As I said before, I think a pure sealent won't change anything, a product like Meg's NXT Tech Wax will as it's full of cleaners and fillers, I use NXT tech wax V1 as a glaze abit like Ez cream glaze, although it's not desgined for that, with poor durability it works well with somethign layered ontop of it 

On the other hand I do think the more upmarket waxes leave a 'freshly detailed' look for longer. Although with QD's do we really need to worry about it?


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

RussZS said:


> However, I do still believe there's a significant difference between different LSP's and DEFINITELY a difference between cheaper waxes and more boutique stuff after 4 weeks or so, also after a couple of days. The 'wax test' was all very well, but most of the cars had only been waxed for a few hours, had they all been driven and washed for a period of say 8 weeks, then I believe the difference would be more significant and apparent.


This is often said - however, what are these differences? Certainly not overall durability - anyone compared 476S to Best of Show after three months? The "cheaper" wax will be the one that outlasts the boutique product.

In terms of looks? Based on my beliefs of the prep being the key and there being no difference at the start, then for a difference to develop at the end would point to a degredation rather than "maintaining" as is often said. The wax test showed, for me anyway, that on application there are no differences - they all looked the same, and for those of use working on the cars, they all looked like they looked after the machining. So over time, the change would point to degredation, and the wax layer detracting from the looks rather than adding or maintaining what has been added.

What also, exactly, is left behind? Carnuaba wax as the protective layer... some oils in some waxes, but how long do they hang around for?

I accept that my opinions on the importance of prep may be a little "strong" - however, when one is passionate about getting the ultimate in looks and wants to share this with others, the fact that I see no tenable improvement in lokos on well prepped paint from a wax makes it very hard for me to recommend different waxes based on big looks differneces. You could apply anything to unprepped paint and see a difference - try some Endurance tyre gel  It beads marvelously too


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

big ben said:


> its *ALL* in the prep if you prep
> 
> if you dont prep the paint then a wax/sealant/gloss shampoo/QD will add that bit more to the paint


This matches my own personal findings


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Bailes said:


> I think Dave when alan says 'Prep' he means machine polishing. Prep to me is cleansing the paint and correcting it.
> As I said before, I think a pure sealent won't change anything, a product like Meg's NXT Tech Wax will as it's full of cleaners and fillers, I use NXT tech wax V1 as a glaze abit like Ez cream glaze, although it's not desgined for that, with poor durability it works well with somethign layered ontop of it
> 
> On the other hand I do think the more upmarket waxes leave a 'freshly detailed' look for longer. Although with QD's do we really need to worry about it?


True - but anything with a cleaning ability, the ability to removed ingrained grime from paintwork, will improve the looks and result in differences between that product and a product without these cleaning abilities... deep cleansing can make big difference to the looks, removing ingrained grime can restore colour to the finish that the grime was masking and you'd definitely see this result.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

I have no idea on the composition of DG105 - if it has cleansers then that's new to me. Being a 'fussy' sealant I always assumed it was just a pure sealant and no more. 

No bailes, when I say 'prep' I mean the use of a paint cleanser, dedicated polish (abrasive w/no fillers), polish with fillers, etc.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Dave KG said:


> This matches my own personal findings


I agree - waxes/sealants may not add anything to a prepped car, but they do to a non prepped car.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

alan_mcc said:


> I have no idea on the composition of DG105 - if it has cleansers then that's new to me. Being a 'fussy' sealant I always assumed it was just a pure sealant and no more.
> 
> No bailes, when I say 'prep' I mean the use of a paint cleanser, dedicated polish (abrasive w/no fillers), polish with fillers, etc.


Perhaps Duragloss can confirm here for us... I did think 105 had cleaning abilities as opposed to 111 which either has far less or none at all, which is why its quite happy (in my experience) to be used ove lots of different products (though I doubt it wold leave much of others behind ).


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

alan_mcc said:


> I agree - waxes/sealants may not add anything to a prepped car, but they do to a non prepped car.


Which is what I have been saying for quite some time  If one take prep out of the equation, then yes, waxes will make a difference... and one can then say that waxes make a difference so its not all in the prep, as waxes can play a part...

But to me, the logic is that if we add prep into the mix, then the prep work solely accounts for the looks and thus when you take prep into consideration, it is "all in the prep"... my feelings on the matter, based on my own experiences. I accept that not everyone will agree but I can only post what I believe


----------



## Guest (Apr 7, 2010)

105 has very slight cleaners, 101 has cleansers and abrasives, 501 has loads of cleansers but very durable and 111 is a pure sealent


----------



## big ben (Aug 25, 2009)

i think in some way we all agree here :lol:


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Aye ben, i think we do :lol:


----------



## Clark @ PB (Mar 1, 2006)

I've always been one of those who think LSP's CAN make a difference to the overall look - and some can look quite different to others, no one else is going to tell me otherwise as I know what my eyes are telling me. It's always going to be down to personal opinion though


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Well there is always talk of sealants producing a 'sharp, glassy' finish and a wax producing a 'deep, warm' finish so they must be.


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

How much of the "talk" is based on myth, however? This is what always makes me wonder...

As Clark says though, it really is all based on personal opinion... I have formed mine based on my experiences and testing, other will have done the same and perhaps not come to the same conclusions which is quite fair enough  ... I'm yet to be conviced of waxes and sealants making a tenable difference when the prep is spot on, as there is no evidence which is _to me_ convincing (though there is plenty of marketing )

We all seek the holy grail of the ultimate finish in different ways - its what makes detailing interesting, else we'd just have one polish and one technique for applying and the job would be a good 'un. I seek the ultimate finish though old-school hard graft in the prep as that is where I believe the difference is made, and I don't believe in wonder-LSPs making a difference. But this is just me personally


----------



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

I agree a lot is in the prep and polishing, however there always seems to be something slightly added after a coat of wax, even after a wash - if I nip round with a quick coat of #16 the car just looks extra crisp, when you look at it side on from a shallow angle etc, its hard to describe!


----------



## twissler (Apr 6, 2009)

Surely the LSP must make some difference, maybe even negative although I like to think not, as you are applying a substance that sits on the surface of the paint. So anything you are seeing is by looking through the LSP. The question is can we actually percieve this difference? 

I think we can but it's only very subtle.


----------



## JJ_ (Oct 26, 2005)

The punto is a nice colour, I think a wax will definitely add something to the paintwork, the polish will increase the clarity and smooths the clear therefore also increasing the depth. 

However, I agree its not all in the prep, your LSP does add something to the paint.


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Don't get me wrong prep does add - I mean look at this, fully corrected bonnet.


----------



## Leodhasach (Sep 15, 2008)

To throw another spanner in the works...how much of it is psychological?

I think my car looks better with its current coat of Zymol Carbon than its previous wax, Valentines Concours...which I thought looked better than Dodo Supernatural, which I thought looked better than Blue Velvet, which I thought looked better than Colly 476.

I'm aware that I sound like a lunatic in the above paragraph, but the key word is 'thought'...I'm not sure if I 'saw' a tenable difference.

Could it be down to the placebo effect?

:speechles


----------



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

I think its cyclical, you could have 10 waxes from cheap ones to £xxx ones and you get bored of using the same one, switch to another one and your amazed for a while, then you get bored of that and move on, until your back to using the original one. I know thats what I do, and its enjoyable to have a change now and again, and revisit old waxes


----------



## ajc347 (Feb 4, 2009)

I've always found that it's a combination of products that makes the most difference for me (on my car anyways).

I can see a difference with a spray sealant (such as Z8 or DG Aquawax), over previous layers of sealant and wax (and can also sometimes see a difference, albeit marginal, between different waxes and sealants - again, mainly on my car which has well maintained paintwork).

I firmly subscribe to the 'preperation' school of thought as well, though, as it clearly does make a massive amount of difference as to whether a car has been polished prior to applying any lsp.

To sum up, for me at least, having a well-prepped car is a necessary condition for producing good results, but a combination of products in addition to this can sometimes (and by no means always), produce results which look better (to me at least), than just prepping alone.


----------



## neil-gsi (Apr 6, 2009)

Clark said:


> I've always been one of those who think LSP's CAN make a difference to the overall look - and some can look quite different to others, no one else is going to tell me otherwise as I know what my eyes are telling me. It's always going to be down to personal opinion though


Thought you might,Project awesome,one of them?:lol:


----------



## blake_jl (Apr 26, 2008)

A wash, and one layer of wax. No pre-wax treatment. Just the wax (Banana Gloss). I would argue that the improvement is > 15%. Actually, if you spin it around and were to take a machine to the finished product below, you would only add a small percentage to the finish.

BEFORE


































AFTER


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

alan_mcc said:


> *Example #1*
> 
> Car has been washed, clayed, one coat of Duragloss 105 Sealant has been applied. No 'abrasive' work took place, yet I managed to get a pretty damn good flake pop. No 'prep' there. Washed, clayed then LSP.


Think you'll find that DG 105 has cleaners in it, not a pure sealant like 111.


----------



## big ben (Aug 25, 2009)

if the car is full of swirls etc as above, a lot of products will hide them and make the car look loads better... just using serious performance show detailer the other day on a mates car, you could see the difference between each panel, much more glassy and looked awesome!

but, if you have a swirl free perfect paint, the difference isnt exactly noticeable imo... any wax/sealant would look good over the top of it


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

Yes...


----------



## big ben (Aug 25, 2009)

Brazo said:


> Yes...


:lol:


----------



## Clark @ PB (Mar 1, 2006)

neil-gsi said:


> Thought you might,Project awesome,one of them?:lol:


You'll find I've been saying the same thing long before PA ever came along or before I even owned any of Polished Bliss


----------



## spitfire (Feb 10, 2007)

Is it all in the prep? Well put it this way. If I machine polish, then when adding LSP I see a very slight but noticable difference to the look. 

If I go straight to an LSP I see a bigger difference to the look but it may not look nearly as good as if I had machined first.

The problem is an LSP on its own won't give me long term results. So if it's not all in the prep(figuratively speaking), why are we all wasting our time doing it

It's correction v. deception, and you know the old saying, you can fool some of the people some of the time ect ect


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

Brazo said:


> Yes...


:thumb:


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Gleammachine, never knew that. :thumb:


----------



## Guest (Apr 8, 2010)

Dave KG said:


> I may be wrong here, but I was under the impression DG 105 had chemical cleansing abilities which itself would "prep" the paint, certainly more so than the solvents in a wax- making this comparison AIO vs "pure LSP".





Bailes said:


> 105 has very slight cleaners, 101 has cleansers and abrasives, 501 has loads of cleansers but very durable and 111 is a pure sealent





Gleammachine said:


> Think you'll find that DG 105 has cleaners in it, not a pure sealant like 111.





alan_mcc said:


> Gleammachine, never knew that. :thumb:


A few of us have said now Al :lol:


----------



## alan_mcc (Oct 28, 2008)

Calm down, I meant from the start :lol:


----------

