New Wolfgang Ceramics vs DPGS hood test!

Just an FYI: WG CSC made it alive through claying (BF Clay mitt) using Pure Rinseless as the lubricant, and through Mckees Prep Wash. It was hurting, but definitely alive to some degree, I’ll guess 80% dead.

WG SiO2 Sealant was partially alive after all this but I would say 95% dead.

I didn’t take pictures as I didn’t have my phone on me and had my mind on the mission of prepping for polishing.

Not bad. Everything else was completely flat.
 
Dang, WG CSC has some definite staying power after going through all that and still showing some signs of life. Thank you for sharing!
 
acuRAS82 great thread!!!!
I kinda came late to it!!!

after reading it all it made me ask a couple questions:

1. Do you think WGCSC performance on the hood was affected in the lower portion due to the PBL coating underneath, so it performs better by itself like it was on the roof???

2. Do you think WGCSC can survive the year they claim???

3. Do you think there is a benefit stacking WGSiO2PS topping it with WGCSC???

4. I dont find anywhere a claimed durability for WSiO2PS, do you know what it is???

5. I wonder how WGSiO2PS compare to FK-1000P, do you plan doing this comparison???

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Autogeekonline mobile app
 
gorillapr said:
acuRAS82 great thread!!!!
I kinda came late to it!!!

after reading it all it made me ask a couple questions:

1. Do you think WGCSC performance on the hood was affected in the lower portion due to the PBL coating underneath, so it performs better by itself like it was on the roof???

2. Do you think WGCSC can survive the year they claim???

3. Do you think there is a benefit stacking WGSiO2PS topping it with WGCSC???

4. I dont find anywhere a claimed durability for WSiO2PS, do you know what it is???

5. I wonder how WGSiO2PS compare to FK-1000P, do you plan doing this comparison???

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Autogeekonline mobile app
Click to expand...

1) I do think WG CSC could have been impacted by PBL Surface Coating underneath, but even more so, I believe temperature during application and curing period impacted WG CSC and PBL. The products were applied before the weather stayed warm at nights. I have gotten much better up front performance in the below test which was begun in June and cured during warm weather throughout.
https://www.autogeekonline.net/foru...n-test.html?highlight=SiO2+Ceramic+Spray+year

2) I don’t think WG CSC will survive a year unless on a garage queen or some sort of perfect, mild weather area with very little contamination present. I would think 6 mo the is realistic based on my latest test which is at 3 and going strong. And I have been on record saying it’s so easy to apply that you might as well put it on every few months just to keep things fresh, it’s one of the easier spray ceramics to apply. Maybe 15-20 mins for the BMW and although it’s not a fact, I would guess you could apply this as a drying aid if the car was 80% dry and it would still perform well as a topper on itself.

3) I don’t know if there is benefit stacking PS on CSC or vice versus, but I don’t think it would hurt and each bottle has so many applications, I wouldn’t be concerned wasting product to try it. They are both very nice. Arguments can be made for either order of stacking. Same company, WG products tend to be synergetic with each other. I could see some potential there (for instance the sealant helping resist etching while the spray could aid in water behavior and easy application updates).

4) There’s no claim I’ve found for WG SiO2 PS durability, however, general, conservative consensus from us forum members would be that it lasts as long as DGPS with the added benefits of self-cleaning that SiO2 ingredients clearly provide.

5) I compared WG SiO2 PS with FK1000p on my trunk in the below thread. I did not get the same stellar results with 1 coat of FK (first time using it) as others have. It wasn’t a slouch but it didn’t keep up with WG or PNS as far as water behavior. Kind of wish I did two coats for the test. The same thread below can also be found on Autopia forum for further commentary.
https://www.autogeekonline.net/foru...est.html?highlight=Acura+traditional+sealants
 
I think the Wolfgang will last longer than 6 months with ceramic maintenance washes or boosters. Most people on the forums will end up topping it with something even if it's just a wash and wax product.
 
acuRAS82 said:
1) I do think WG CSC could have been impacted by PBL Surface Coating underneath, but even more so, I believe temperature during application and curing period impacted WG CSC and PBL. The products were applied before the weather stayed warm at nights. I have gotten much better up front performance in the below test which was begun in June and cured during warm weather throughout.
https://www.autogeekonline.net/foru...n-test.html?highlight=SiO2+Ceramic+Spray+year

2) I don’t think WG CSC will survive a year unless on a garage queen or some sort of perfect, mild weather area with very little contamination present. I would think 6 mo the is realistic based on my latest test which is at 3 and going strong. And I have been on record saying it’s so easy to apply that you might as well put it on every few months just to keep things fresh, it’s one of the easier spray ceramics to apply. Maybe 15-20 mins for the BMW and although it’s not a fact, I would guess you could apply this as a drying aid if the car was 80% dry and it would still perform well as a topper on itself.

3) I don’t know if there is benefit stacking PS on CSC or vice versus, but I don’t think it would hurt and each bottle has so many applications, I wouldn’t be concerned wasting product to try it. They are both very nice. Arguments can be made for either order of stacking. Same company, WG products tend to be synergetic with each other. I could see some potential there (for instance the sealant helping resist etching while the spray could aid in water behavior and easy application updates).

4) There’s no claim I’ve found for WG SiO2 PS durability, however, general, conservative consensus from us forum members would be that it lasts as long as DGPS with the added benefits of self-cleaning that SiO2 ingredients clearly provide.

5) I compared WG SiO2 PS with FK1000p on my trunk in the below thread. I did not get the same stellar results with 1 coat of FK (first time using it) as others have. It wasn’t a slouch but it didn’t keep up with WG or PNS as far as water behavior. Kind of wish I did two coats for the test. The same thread below can also be found on Autopia forum for further commentary.
https://www.autogeekonline.net/foru...est.html?highlight=Acura+traditional+sealants
Click to expand...
Amazing man!

You answer everything with great detail and it is appreciated.

I think using PS topping it with SC every 2-3 months would be an outstanding combo able to compete with Ceramic Lite like Carpro or Gyeon...


If Im not mistaken, you said the PS looks better than the SC???

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Autogeekonline mobile app
 
gorillapr said:
Amazing man!

You answer everything with great detail and it is appreciated.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome. I’m glad if it helped.

gorillapr said:
If Im not mistaken, you said the PS looks better than the SC???
Click to expand...
I personally liked the WG SiO2 look, it caught my eye as being darker and richer. Both darken the paint as SiO2 products generally do, it was easy to see next to DGPS. But take it for what it is, I have only applied these on sections. Both look stellar, both behave great, but in the head to head the WG SiO2 PS subsection grabbed my eyes first.

Note others who have applied WG SiO2 PS to their whole vehicles have raved about the gloss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top