Clean a section (a couple of panels) of the car with quick detailer.

[Rsurfer]

I don’t think it’s necessarily safer. Reason why is because the roll method has you using 1 line going across the panel for a swipe. That’s 1 line on concentrated dirt by the time it’s done instead of the entire side of the towel working all together to take the brunt of all the dirt.

Plus I found that when doing the roll method I would tend to use more pressure on the towel because I’d have to make sure I was holding it still in order to maintain the fold in place.

Personally, being able to use the entire side of the towel results in less pressure being used while the dirt still floats off the panel thanks to the lsp. Less pressure also results in there being a bit more clean solution on the panel to go over with my drying towel. I’d rather have a little bit more solution to dry than less when drying.

You like your method and I like mine.

 

[Larry A]

Many years ago I worked for a limo company that had antique cars that were rented for weddings. Ever time they went out they were washed ,by spraying the cars with detail spray and washed with a wet mit , and then wiped off with a towel. I say towels because this was before MF towels. These cars didnot have a clear coat, they were painted with Acrylic Lacquer. These cars always looked great . Of course they were always in a garage when not being used.

 

[itsgn]

Heard of Essence Plus, I'm sure you have.

It doesn't do a thing about scratches (regardless of manufacturer's claim). Not even about superficial swirls, that are only visible in direct sunlight, let alone about deeper scratches. And it doesn't last either, so, it's not like it would be a long term solution. And the effort you need to put into its application.... you're already almost at polishing level effort. Which again leads to the conclusion, that trying to maintain the same coating for years is just not an effective solution to preserve the pristine state of the paint, and it makes more sense to re-polish and re-apply a new coating at a regular basis.

I'm more concerned about protecting my paint from UV. I use a waterless wash everyday when its not raining

I'm not sure I'm getting you and how you think a wash would prevent your paint from UV damage. In reality you can't really protect your paint from UV damage. What you can do is put a sacrificial layer over it (that's the ceramic coating), and make that one degrade through the UV radiation, instead of your factory paint (clear coat). However, that's just another reason why you shouldn't plan to keep the same coating on for many, many years, because for one, the coating will degrade through UV impact, too (so even if you could prevent all scratches from occurring, the coating would still degrade unavoidably); and also because once the coating has been degraded, it will not protect your paint (clear coat) underneath it either anymore.

I do have some light swirls (black paint), but too each their own on what method works for them.

As said, I'm not arguing against your personal preference, because that would be pointless. Just saying that the methods you are using are - in my experience and to my knowledge - not the most effective way to reach to your supposed goals.

 

[Rsurfer]

I'm not sure I'm getting you and how you think a wash would prevent your paint from UV damage. In reality you can't really protect your paint from UV damage. What you can do is put a sacrificial layer over it (that's the ceramic coating), and make that one degrade through the UV radiation, instead of your factory paint (clear coat). However, that's just another reason why you shouldn't plan to keep the same coating on for many, many years, because for one, the coating will degrade through UV impact, too (so even if you could prevent all scratches from occurring, the coating would still degrade unavoidably); and also because once the coating has been degraded, it will not protect your paint (clear coat) underneath it either anymore.




I'm using Echo2 with one once of Reload daily. I guess I'm wasting my time and money cause it offers no added protection.

 

[itsgn]

I'm using Echo2 with one once of Reload daily. I guess I'm wasting my time and money cause it offers no added protection.

Just did a quick test for you.

1. Took a piece of transparent polyethylene plastic, thickness comparable to the overall paint thickness of the average car paint. It was 154 microns:

View attachment 65371

2. Measured its light transmittance. UV-transmittance 21.5%

View attachment 65372

3. Coated liberally with Reload on both (!) sides. Measured light transmittance again. UV-transmittance: 18.7%

View attachment 65373

Difference in UV-transmittance with and without two distinct layers of Reload: <3%. Change relative to the original transmittance ratio: 13%.

I leave it up to you to draw a conclusion on how much Reload will help to protect your paint from UV damage, and whether daily use for that purpose is a waste of money or not (especially that it can't be effectively layered and is supposed to have a durability measurable in months).

 

[Rsurfer]

Just did a quick test for you.

1. Took a piece of transparent polyethylene plastic, thickness comparable to the overall paint thickness of the average car paint. It was 154 microns:

View attachment 65371

2. Measured its light transmittance. UV-transmittance 21.5%

View attachment 65372

3. Coated liberally with Reload on both (!) sides. Measured light transmittance again. UV-transmittance: 18.7%

View attachment 65373

Difference in UV-transmittance with and without two distinct layers of Reload: <3%. Change relative to the original transmittance ratio: 13%.

I leave it up to you to draw a conclusion on how much Reload will help to protect your paint from UV damage, and whether daily use for that purpose is a waste of money or not (especially that it can't be effectively layered and is supposed to have a durability measurable in months).

I'm using Reload as a sacrificial barrier for Finest Coating and not the paint itself.

 

[itsgn]

I'm using Reload as a sacrificial barrier for Finest Coating and not the paint itself.

The measurement shows that Reload allows the vast majority of UV light to pass through it unaffected, which it turn means that it can not act as a sacrificial layer and protect whatever is behind it, and the latter material will essentially degrade at the very same rate than it would if there wasn't Reload applied over it. Well, at least in regard to UV radiation and degradation caused by that anyway.

 

[Rsurfer]

The measurement shows that Reload allows the vast majority of UV light to pass through it unaffected, which it turn means that it can not act as a sacrificial layer and protect whatever is behind it, and the latter material will essentially degrade at the very same rate than it would if there wasn't Reload applied over it. Well, at least in regard to UV radiation and degradation caused by that anyway.

3% is better than nothing and can you prove that multiple layers does nothing? My main protection against UV damage is Finest. Please don't tell me that offers no UV protection.

Using Echo2 is mainly used as a waterless wash.

 

[itsgn]

3% is better than nothing

Nobody said otherwise. What I said was is that it's not worth the cost and effort. Meaning: there are cheaper and faster ways to achieve the same or better results.

and can you prove that multiple layers does nothing?

I did not say that "multiple layers do nothing". Multiple coats definitely would do more UV filtering than just one. However, the problem here is that
1. when trying to apply a new layer, you will most likely abrade the existing one, at least partially, just by trying to spread the product, because Reload layers at only sub-micron thickness, which is essentially gone in the moment you touch the paint and swipe something over it
2. Reload will also obviously make it harder to apply any new coats to it, because it will just repel the new spritz of Reload, especially, that it's a water based product; so, after the first layer of Reload any consecutive layers will have more trouble bonding, and leave behind an eve thinner layer, if at all,
3. as with any kind of layering, the structure will only last as long, as the layer at the very the bottom of the "stack" lasts - so, even if you could layer Reload effectively over a period of time, it would degrade as soon as the oldest application layer begins to degrade; so, you'd not get any longevity from it, and your layers would start to break down with the oldest one
4. to apply multiple coats, you'll have to go over the whole car over and over again, which in turn means, that
- 4.a.) with each pass you're increasing the chance of putting new scratches into the paint, as a byproduct of application and wiping, you leaning against the car, etc,
- 4.b.) after a few instances you'll again have put so much effort (time and product) into coating the car with Reload over and over, that under the same time and for the same cost you could have just polished the paint and applied a new coat of a full-blown ceramic coating. Which in turn would layer thicker, would be more pure, and thus also last longer and protect better than even a dozen coats of Reload. Also, it would look indefinitely better, because Reload just will not be able to fill even just superficial swirls, no matter how many times you're applying it. The most it can do in that regard is get rid of holograms.

My main protection against UV damage is Finest. Please don't tell me that offers no UV protection.

You seem to like straw men very much. Or is there any other reason why you keep continually bringing them up? Because I definitely didn't tell you - or even just hint at - that CQuartz Finest "will offer no UV protection" at all, either.

Instead, what I told you was that it's Reload that offers to near non-existent protection. I also told you that it's delusional to think that Finest will not begin to degrade in a year or two (no matter how often you put Reload on it, which might actually speed up the degradation process through the physical impacts and damage that the application of Reload itself does to the paint/coating), and/or to think that it would make more sense from either the effectivity or the results perspective to try to maintain a ceramic coating over 2+ years instead of just re-polishing and re-applying a new ceramic coating in on say a 2-yearly basis. Because they just do not.

Using Echo2 is mainly used as a waterless wash.

In regard of layer thickness, layering and UV protection capabilities (or more the lack of these) Ech2o is at the best the same thing as Reload; but in reality it's even worse (which then again doesn't make much of a difference either). It's primarily just the application method that's different.

 

[Rsurfer]

Nobody said otherwise. What I said was is that it's not worth the cost and effort. Meaning: there are cheaper and faster ways to achieve the same or better results.


I did not say that "multiple layers do nothing". Multiple coats definitely would do more UV filtering than just one. However, the problem here is that
1. when trying to apply a new layer, you will most likely abrade the existing one, at least partially, just by trying to spread the product, because Reload layers at only sub-micron thickness, which is essentially gone in the moment you touch the paint and swipe something over it
2. Reload will also obviously make it harder to apply any new coats to it, because it will just repel the new spritz of Reload, especially, that it's a water based product; so, after the first layer of Reload any consecutive layers will have more trouble bonding, and leave behind an eve thinner layer, if at all,
3. as with any kind of layering, the structure will only last as long, as the layer at the very the bottom of the "stack" lasts - so, even if you could layer Reload effectively over a period of time, it would degrade as soon as the oldest application layer begins to degrade; so, you'd not get any longevity from it, and your layers would start to break down with the oldest one
4. to apply multiple coats, you'll have to go over the whole car over and over again, which in turn means, that
- 4.a.) with each pass you're increasing the chance of putting new scratches into the paint, as a byproduct of application and wiping, you leaning against the car, etc,
- 4.b.) after a few instances you'll again have put so much effort (time and product) into coating the car with Reload over and over, that under the same time and for the same cost you could have just polished the paint and applied a new coat of a full-blown ceramic coating. Which in turn would layer thicker, would be more pure, and thus also last longer and protect better than even a dozen coats of Reload. Also, it would look indefinitely better, because Reload just will not be able to fill even just superficial swirls, no matter how many times you're applying it. The most it can do in that regard is get rid of holograms.


You seem to like straw men very much. Or is there any other reason why you keep continually bringing them up? Because I definitely didn't tell you - or even just hint at - that CQuartz Finest "will offer no UV protection" at all, either.

Instead, what I told you was that it's Reload that offers to near non-existent protection. I also told you that it's delusional to think that Finest will not begin to degrade in a year or two (no matter how often you put Reload on it, which might actually speed up the degradation process through the physical impacts and damage that the application of Reload itself does to the paint/coating), and/or to think that it would make more sense from either the effectivity or the results perspective to try to maintain a ceramic coating over 2+ years instead of just re-polishing and re-applying a new ceramic coating in on say a 2-yearly basis. Because they just do not.


In regard of layer thickness, layering and UV protection capabilities (or more the lack of these) Ech2o is at the best the same thing as Reload; but in reality it's even worse (which then again doesn't make much of a difference either). It's primarily just the application method that's different.

No point in arguing with someone that has a PHd in chemistry and a 10,000 ft lab to do all the testing to back up his claims.

 

[itsgn]

No point in trying to argue with someone if you can't bring forward any logical and factual arguments, only logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks.

 

[ejaf]

Hi all...just to keep this on topic...

I did a waterless this weekend on my daily driver, but my question is this:

Can someone show me where the RTFM (read the ... manual) is for this "Roll method"? I didn't get any hits on Google, and would like to see what it entails.

Thanks in advance...Eric

 

[itsgn]

Can someone show me where the RTFM (read the ... manual) is for this "Roll method"? I didn't get any hits on Google, and would like to see what it entails.

Look at this at 2:56 : YouTube

There's also a better video from Larry, where he does and explains that on a roof of a car.... but I can't find that one right now.

 

[ejaf]

Look at this at 2:56 : YouTube

There's also a better video from Larry, where he does an explains that on a roof of a car.... but I can't find that one right now.

ty!

 

[itsgn]

Here's another video, which shows the two swipe method, which is essentially a simplified/reduced version of the roll method, but explains the rationale behind it: YouTube