How to strip sealant?

Mizzoutiger said:
As AG advertises, CG Citrus Wash is an "Auto wash and paintwork cleanser in one!" Chemical Guys Citrus Wash Red
Click to expand...

They also advertise CGs Sticky Wheel Cleaner as pH neutral - which is 100% not true (pH 10+). It's not AG's fault - they are just passing on the misinformation supplied by the manufacturer - CGs. In fact, one could even say CGs lies to sell more products, that in fact they know these advertised statements are not truths....a lot of people have bought Citrus Red because of how it's advertised as a "stripper". Maybe CGs is just clueless - but I doubt it.

Citrus Red won't remove polymer type sealants or hybrids - regardless of what CGs says. CGs puts a lot of misinformation out there - this is just another example of that. It may decrease the lifespan of non hybrid carnauba waxes - but that is about it.

Sorry if this ruffles anyone's feathers - but with all respect it is the truth. Hopefully, the truth is just the truth.

Citrus Red is pH neutral. It has some very light APC like qualities that are easily diluted away once mixed to any significant degree. I believe Citrus Red is just normal surfactants with some NaOH (going by memory here) If you consider something like Auto Finesse Avalance won't strip wax, which is fairly basic and APC like - Citrus Red doesn't stand a chance.

Unfortunately, beading/sheeting is all we have to go by at home that the LSP is gone. There is no "test" that can tell otherwise. I think beading/sheeting is actually pretty reliable, since:

1. A newly LSP'ed panel will bead the best.

2. An LSP (non coating) will bead less after several months

3. A panel with no LSP/polymers on it will bead the least compared to 1 & 2.

This phenomena is reproducible, and the model fits the theory. So, IMHO you don't need to overthink this:

1. Just wash the car and add another layer of sealant (if using the same product as previous)

2. If using another LSP, use a paint cleaner or polish. No need for IPA/Eraser wipedowns if using conventional LSPs.

3. Wax will actually discolor after months and months of being exposed to UV/environment. So, use *something* that goes on a foam pad to strip it after every so many months. Spraying something on a panel and wiping it off is just not a good way to strip LSPs.

4. If using sealants only, after time period X, the car will need a polish/decon - so re-apply sealant at that time. It's OK to "layer"/renew sealant on top of itself in between.

They are the general "rules" most people who get good results will follow.
 
if you want to strip it completely, then claying followed with a light compound would be the best way. claying isn't difficult and should always be carried out before applying a new sealant, polish or wax. try to make it part of your routine
 
Niblick said:
if you want to strip it completely, then claying followed with a light compound would be the best way. claying isn't difficult and should always be carried out before applying a new sealant, polish or wax. try to make it part of your routine
Click to expand...

With all due respect, I sort of disagree. If your only goal is to remove previous LSP - any light polish or paint cleaner will will work. Compounding (light or otherwise) should be reserved for removing noticeable defects polishing can not remove.

A car that is maintained properly should only need to be compounded once in its life - and that when you buy it. If you buy it with light defects - than that number of times should be zero.

If your paint is stupid soft and mars super easy - polish should be all that is required to correct it. Harder paint will require more aggressive polishes - but will also be more defect resistant. Preserving as much clear coat as possible will keep more of the UV inhibitors in the clear coat and will maintain its thickness for as long as possible.
 
Thanks everyone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
swanicyouth said:
With all due respect, I sort of disagree. If your only goal is to remove previous LSP - any light polish or paint cleaner will will work. Compounding (light or otherwise) should be reserved for removing noticeable defects polishing can not remove.

A car that is maintained properly should only need to be compounded once in its life - and that when you buy it. If you buy it with light defects - than that number of times should be zero.

If your paint is stupid soft and mars super easy - polish should be all that is required to correct it. Harder paint will require more aggressive polishes - but will also be more defect resistant. Preserving as much clear coat as possible will keep more of the UV inhibitors in the clear coat and will maintain its thickness for as long as possible.
Click to expand...

i would consider a polish or paint cleaner that contains abrasive to be a compound tbh, so I think we're probably on the same page :xyxthumbs:
 
Try CG Stripper scent. Turns-out, guys have been using it wrong. They've been spraying it in their cars instead of the paint to strip it! Ha, idiots!!!
 
Late to the party...

A half decent sealant should be pretty tough to remove. Dawn is the old school recommendation but I think that I have convinced a great many thoughtful detailers that it is nonsense - a trick played by clever surfactants which confuses people. APCs can do the same trick and I would suggest that Citrus Red is going to be doing the same thing. IPA should really do very little to a sealant of any quality - IPA will sort out light oils, the sort you find in polishes and similar and which will potentially leave you holograms (and hence where Eraser comes from!). Panel wipes will have more chance to remove a sealant but my view is that the sealant will likely need to be heavily degraded to make this work. If you really must remove the sealant, get a bit of mild polish onto your DA and give it a quick going over. Then, do your IPA wipe and you should be back to paint.
 
allenk4 said:
Maybe it is a UK, USA difference in vocabulary

I tend to go with this:

http://www.autopiaforums.com/Todd-Helme/polish-chart.jpg
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure that's the case. In the UK, polishing is the process, compound is the product (assuming it contains abrasives). In fact if you scroll down to the Scholls section on that chart, you'll see that scholls S30 in the light polish section says nano compound. indeed if you look at any bottle of scholls that contains abrasive it says compound on it. the other notable term is 'rubbing' (as in rubbing compound) which doesn't appear in the UK detailing vocab. I'm pretty sure the word detailing actually came over from the U.S. too, it was simply known as Valeting over here until relatively recently. Many UK business, including my own now have 'valeting and detailing' in the name, even though they mean the same thing over here. So there are one or two differences in terminology. I shall have to try to be more aware of that when posting :xyxthumbs:
Out of interest, where do you guys draw the line between a polish and a compound?
 
Niblick said:
Yes, I'm sure that's the case. In the UK, polishing is the process, compound is the product (assuming it contains abrasives).
Click to expand...

Depends on where you get your terminology! DW has some very strong personalities who don't necessarily match up to the actual manufacturing/chemistry (we are a UK based manufacturer - forever being told how we are wrong because of something written on DW!). From a manufacturers perspective, we do differentiate between polish and compound. The distinction between the two is a bit vague but a compound will generally be something to use by machine and which is unlikely to give ideal results, in isolation. A polish is something much more suitable for manual use and which can very often be used as a one step process.
 
yeah, when you start to break it down theres a fair bit of crossover in terminology really and i should probably have added the phrase 'generally speaking' to that sentence.
Differentiating between hand and machine use is probably as good a place as any. i often think of the difference as being between those designed for professional use or those suited to amateur use, which i suppose is a similar boundary. I also think the word 'polish' sounds more user friendly than 'compound', and so psychologically appeals to a wider audience from a sales point of view. Dodo Juice Need for speed for instance contains a 'polish', and they don't currently manufacture a straight compound per say. But then you look at products like their Lime prime (which is essentially a cleaner/glaze but contains quite a significant abrasive), and the new Lime Prime Plus, which contains an abrasive that can be aggressive enough to require finishing with a different compound or polish. Again, they're classed as suitable for hand use, but i would consider particularly the LPP to be more suited to machine use and should perhaps therefore technically be considered a compound. And then there's products like Scholls S40, which many would consider to be a very fine grade finishing 'polish' and yet Scholl's themselves use the word 'compound' on the bottle. it's certainly something of a grey area, which is why i think classing products that are primarily intending for use as abrasive as 'compounds', is quite a sensible differentiation. That said, the use of the word Compound is perhaps a slightly odd one for the purposes of labelling this type of product, itself meaning simply a combination of two or more elements. its therefore true to say that all polishes, indeed all products, are compounds and so it may be more suitable from a linguistic point of view to remove the word 'Compound' all together and consider all abrasive products to be 'polishes'.

Just to return briefly to the point that i was making originally, i would recommend that the OP use a product that will abrade the sealant if he wishes to ensure its complete removal. theres no guarantee that using chemicals to strip the sealant would be 100% successful, and there is certainly a risk to areas of trim on the vehicle in using products that would be aggressive enough to dissolve such a product.

gotta love those guys on DW, i don't go near the site personally but i guess as a manufacturer you probably have to. Are we allowed to know who you work for?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top