Ive had a bottle of C4 on my shelf for about a year now. I recently purchased a Honda element with faded plastics and decided to use it.
A few notes:
1. The C4 bottle was a year old from time of purchase
2. I did not have enough c4 to do the entire car (75%). The Cerakote did the other quarter.
3. I used a TRC puck applicator instead of the little applicators in the package for the C4. I used the wipes as labeled for the Cerakote.
4. It has only been on the car 2 weeks or so.
If you dont know about the Honda element, it has large sections of plastic trim, similar to an FJ cruiser or the Avalanche, where a significant portion of what would be painted body panels are plastic. These fade like any other trim.
I sprayed the panels down with 15:1 Greenstar APC, used a decon soap and washed the car, no special cleaning beyond that.
Summary: I like C4 a lot. It does what it says, leaves a nice finish, and is relatively easy to use. Judged in a vacuum, its great. Judged against its competition I think Cerakote might be a better value, and is a much easier / more accessible formfactor to work with.
The C4 works well, especially paired with a different applicator. The element has a LOT of plastic, so one bottle was not enough. (more on this in a bit)
The finish is noticeably better. It looks restored, rather than a die based appearance. Water beading is good enough. I did not have any issues with high spots, or leveling.
Because the bottle wasn't enough to finish the car, I ran to the local box store and bought some cerakote trim wipes. The parts of the car done with the wipes are nearly indistinguishable from the parts done with c4. At least 2 weeks out. The cerakote was half the price, and I did not need to use an applicator. Immediately after application the C4 definitely looked more level, and less streaky. Now dry, the difference is much harder to tell. Two boxes of cerakote would do the full car with product left over. The left over wipes are also individually sealed, so you do not start a clock by using the first one like you do with a glass bottle product.
Bottom line. Both work, work well, and are easy enough to use. The cerakote is more cost effective and has less barrier to entry. I cant speak to longevity.
A few notes:
1. The C4 bottle was a year old from time of purchase
2. I did not have enough c4 to do the entire car (75%). The Cerakote did the other quarter.
3. I used a TRC puck applicator instead of the little applicators in the package for the C4. I used the wipes as labeled for the Cerakote.
4. It has only been on the car 2 weeks or so.
If you dont know about the Honda element, it has large sections of plastic trim, similar to an FJ cruiser or the Avalanche, where a significant portion of what would be painted body panels are plastic. These fade like any other trim.
I sprayed the panels down with 15:1 Greenstar APC, used a decon soap and washed the car, no special cleaning beyond that.
Summary: I like C4 a lot. It does what it says, leaves a nice finish, and is relatively easy to use. Judged in a vacuum, its great. Judged against its competition I think Cerakote might be a better value, and is a much easier / more accessible formfactor to work with.
The C4 works well, especially paired with a different applicator. The element has a LOT of plastic, so one bottle was not enough. (more on this in a bit)
The finish is noticeably better. It looks restored, rather than a die based appearance. Water beading is good enough. I did not have any issues with high spots, or leveling.
Because the bottle wasn't enough to finish the car, I ran to the local box store and bought some cerakote trim wipes. The parts of the car done with the wipes are nearly indistinguishable from the parts done with c4. At least 2 weeks out. The cerakote was half the price, and I did not need to use an applicator. Immediately after application the C4 definitely looked more level, and less streaky. Now dry, the difference is much harder to tell. Two boxes of cerakote would do the full car with product left over. The left over wipes are also individually sealed, so you do not start a clock by using the first one like you do with a glass bottle product.
Bottom line. Both work, work well, and are easy enough to use. The cerakote is more cost effective and has less barrier to entry. I cant speak to longevity.