New Optimum Coatings (Opti-Lens, Opti-Glass) In Stock!

Will it ever be possible to buy single use packets?

Im going to be getting new headlights soon, would like to coat them, but I dont want to buy the 60 dollar kit when Im going to only use it once.
 
timaishu said:
Will it ever be possible to buy single use packets?

Im going to be getting new headlights soon, would like to coat them, but I dont want to buy the 60 dollar kit when Im going to only use it once.
Click to expand...

Split a tube with me =)
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Oh no...this is one of those can-of-worms statements. So if you can layer it, do you gain anything by layering it, SHOULD you layer it, etc. I think we've been round and round this topic with Opti-Coat 2.0 vs. Opti-Coat Pro, that 2.0 is permanent, you could layer it but why would you want to, then it became clear that the Pro version had a thicker film build and that was desirable, etc.

The Opti-Lens description here at AG says "ensures your vehicle’s headlights retain optimum clarity throughout the lifespan of the vehicle." If that's what you get from one "layer", why would you do more? I really don't ask these questions to argue or nit-pick, I just want to know if I'm applying Opti-Lens whether I need to plan to do a second or third application in order to achieve that "lifetime" protection, or if this is going to wind up like Opti-Coat 2.0 that after a few years you'll have wash swirls, etc. you'll have to polish, and that will remove the coating so you have to reapply.




It sounds like you're talking about Opti-Glass Pro, which lasts up to 3 years, rather than the product AG is selling, Opti-Glass, which lasts up to 1 year. I had a hard enough time understanding how Opti-Glass could protect against impacts, but now even harder if you're saying it's actually thinner than Opti-Coat. It's also been stated that Opti-Glass is not permanent like Opti-Coat and Opti-Lens...hard to imagine a coating that isn't permanent and is thinner but is not affected by abrasion.

Here's to hoping that Dr. G does an hour seminar on all his coatings at Detail Fest and it's on the live feed.
Click to expand...

regarding layering...i think the substrate dictates the need. remember, a coating's job is not just the physical barrier between the substrate and the things that come in contact with the coating on top of it...there are things within that barrier that provide environmental protection from enemies which never physically touch the coated surface. UV is the main one that comes to mind. so while the coating might technically be on there forever, the UV inhibition of one coat might not necessarily be enough for that particular substrate formula. if you have a poly substrate that has an especially weak formulation and zero inherent UV protection, then it would be more appropriate in my opinion to layer in that case, to offer the best chance at UV inhibition and as an ancillary effect, i think it would offer better protection vs. high velocity small debris impact. on a newer car, with all or most of its original poly UV protection intact, one coat would probably suffice. for an older set of headlights that have been corrected many times and their built-in UV protection has been completely exhausted...multiple layers would likely be the best route.

i thought of an analogy for layering purposes the other day - lamin-x is a protective film that people apply to paint and lights. the thicker the film, the better the protection from what's coming at it. it's not to say that the thinner film won't be there forever, because it will...it's just that the thicker film is better suited at all facets of protection, especially in areas that will see the most abuse, such as low mounted fog lights. the thinner is best for paint.

re: pro vs. regular...you are correct. multi-year vs. a year. i should have specified as i have used both but obviously have a preference for the longer lasting formulation.

i figured that would come up re: the question of why would one choose to use the thicker coating on the windows that need the least protection, haha. i could feel it. i know you understand it, but i can see why it is hard for others to grasp.

my understanding is that Opti-Glass is formulated specifically to bond to glass and level itself to create an incredibly smooth surface under microscopic view which in turn is better at allowing debris to glance off of the surface as opposed to catching the microscopic nooks and crannies and causing chips.

it's like trying to skip a rock in rough water vs. a smooth, calm lake. if the water is rough, the rock will likely hit a wave or undulation in the water and crash. in the calm lake, it will simply keep glancing off of the surface, not crashing into it.

my impression is the build is extremely minimal - a "low profile" film. apparently the chemical bond is stronger...and the surface is SO leveled...that it is just better at resisting the abrasion caused by wipers which so notoriously has affected windscreens coated with Opti-Coat. so that is why you'd want to use the application-specific Opti-Glass coating for the windscreen and in areas that don't need that specialty protection but just general physical film built protection, use Opti-Coat.

you guys (as usual) are going to have a blast with Dr. G - he has a way of answering questions with pure science so i expect a lot of these questions to be answered for good.
 
Thanks builthatch, that makes sense about the layering of Opti-Lens, that you would only need a single layer on a "new" headlight but might need multiple layers on a light that's had the factory coating sanded off, and that's just the info I needed. (BTW, is there an Opti-Lens Pro?)

Opti-Glass still has me a bit puzzled, how it can be so much more abrasion resistant but not be permanent. Unless the reason Opti-Coat doesn't work on windshields is not because it isn't abrasion resistant, but because it doesn't bond well to the glass, and simply comes off, vs. wearing away.

I also have a hard time believing the chip resistance. I'm familiar with hard coating and hard platings on softer substrates (for instance, hard chrome plating on a steel shock absorber or strut rod). That works great against sliding wear, but impacts usually are able to penetrate to the soft substrate. Rock chips are so random etc. I don't even see how you could test it unless you did half your windshield and drove the car for 3 years and compared the two halves.

That's not keeping me from buying Opti-Glass however, I'm just not holding out much hope it will do much for rock chips.
 
builthatch said:
Opti-Coat is different that Opti-Glass including the delivery method and viscosity. Opti-Glass is in a small sprayer that is like shrunken Opti-Seal bottle and it is metered freely vs. the control you have with a syringe. it feels much thinner than Opti-Coat but i don't know if that is actually the case.

Dan K is correct in the volume of lights you can do per Opti-Lens syringe as per info Dr. G relayed. when Dr. G says that it depends on how thick it is applied, he means via layering - you can reliably layer Opti-Lens.

Opti-Coat offers a thicker film build than Opti-Glass, so therefore it is a better choice for windows that aren't your windscreen. And you don't need the impact resistance that Opti-Glass provides on the other windows nearly as much as you need it up front. Opti-Coat is much more vulnerable to abrasion vs. Opti-Glass and more likely to cause clarity issues/distortion if applied improperly which is a liability when you are talking about forward windows.




i can't say for sure, but i just did the windscreen of my C 63 with Opti-Glass and used very little; i can't quantify it but it was negligible in terms of how much the level changed in the little bottle. i would imagine you can use it on A LOT of windows.

another thing people need to keep in mind is the function of his coating - it not affected by abrasion like other coatings can be, so it is able to survive several years of road wash, wiper action, etc., which is unheard of for windshield treatments. and...most importantly...it offers impact and scratch resistance. that is a HUGE feature.
Click to expand...

Good info here! I would think for the price though that Opti-Glass would be a better option for the side and back glass.

For instance I am going to use one full syringe of Opti-Coat to do my WRX paint twice and wheels and barrels. I might have enough left over for the side and back windows but if one bottle of Opti-Glass goes so far (And I only have two cars), why try to stretch the Opti-Coat?

Is there any advantage to Opti-Coat over Opti-Glass on the side and back glass? I know you said it has a thicker film build, but on the other hand is more vulnerable to abarasion.

Drew
 
WRXINXS said:
Good info here! I would think for the price though that Opti-Glass would be a better option for the side and back glass.

For instance I am going to use one full syringe of Opti-Coat to do my WRX paint twice and wheels and barrels. I might have enough left over for the side and back windows but if one bottle of Opti-Glass goes so far (And I only have two cars), why try to stretch the Opti-Coat?

Is there any advantage to Opti-Coat over Opti-Glass on the side and back glass? I know you said it has a thicker film build, but on the other hand is more vulnerable to abarasion.

Drew
Click to expand...

that's a lot of 2.0 for one relatively small car! i can't imagine using that much but it's up to you, hehe. :buffing:

using it sparingly and letting it flash off...and only touching it with an MF when absolutely necessary instead of bulldozing it with an MF...i'd say even if you went over the entire car twice as you've mentioned and did the wheels and barrels...you should still have some left...i wouldn't be surprised if you had a few cc left which would allow for touchups down the line if something happens. but whatever, it doesn't matter, i could yammer on forever (as you can see).

my opinion on the minor debate of OC vs. OGC for the side/rear windows:

first of all, you are way ahead of the game if you are using either/or. they are both amazing for side/rear glass. so the debate is for our entertainment because we love minutiae...DETAILS! :flirt:

when you say over, you mean one vs. the other, right? i am assuming that is the case :)

if so...the advantage i see is the film build and permanent nature. would Opti-Glass last a lot longer if it didn't have to deal with wipers and road wash? probably, but it's likely thinner anyway, so one vs. the other without any abrading i feel confident in 2.0 being more durable.

i don't want anything i've said to be conveyed as knocking 2.0's abrasion resistance. it's tough stuff! really tough. as time goes on it gets SUPER hard. there is no doubt about the claim that it continues to harden indefinitely. but, the fact is it builds thick and isn't as well-formulated for glass as Opti-Glass, so if you are going to hit it with wipers...it loses. otherwise i think it wins. my opinion of course!
 
builthatch said:
that's a lot of 2.0 for one relatively small car! i can't imagine using that much but it's up to you, hehe. :buffing:

using it sparingly and letting it flash off...and only touching it with an MF when absolutely necessary instead of bulldozing it with an MF...i'd say even if you went over the entire car twice as you've mentioned and did the wheels and barrels...you should still have some left...i wouldn't be surprised if you had a few cc left which would allow for touchups down the line if something happens. but whatever, it doesn't matter, i could yammer on forever (as you can see).

my opinion on the minor debate of OC vs. OGC for the side/rear windows:

first of all, you are way ahead of the game if you are using either/or. they are both amazing for side/rear glass. so the debate is for our entertainment because we love minutiae...DETAILS! :flirt:

when you say over, you mean one vs. the other, right? i am assuming that is the case :)

if so...the advantage i see is the film build and permanent nature. would Opti-Glass last a lot longer if it didn't have to deal with wipers and road wash? probably, but it's likely thinner anyway, so one vs. the other without any abrading i feel confident in 2.0 being more durable.

i don't want anything i've said to be conveyed as knocking 2.0's abrasion resistance. it's tough stuff! really tough. as time goes on it gets SUPER hard. there is no doubt about the claim that it continues to harden indefinitely. but, the fact is it builds thick and isn't as well-formulated for glass as Opti-Glass, so if you are going to hit it with wipers...it loses. otherwise i think it wins. my opinion of course!
Click to expand...

You are right, we here at AG are into the minutiae! Good points made about using 2.0 on the side/back windows. I will have to see how much I have left and judge accordingly. I think as you said either would do a great job!:xyxthumbs:
 
Has anyone already used the opti lens and can provide real world experience? Hard to believe it protects against yellowing for the life of the vehicle when even majority of the factory uv coating fail.
 
To do a windshield you're going to use not much more than 1cc - 2cc at most. I believe each pump of the sprayer is 0.1cc and you'll only need a dozen or so compressions to do that size area. So $80 isn't too bad if you consider the consumption compared to others.

Regarding the question about stone chip resistance I believe if you research "coefficient of slip" or "coefficient of friction" that is the answer.

This might also be the answer as to why it is more resistant to the wipers than Opti-Coat. Because there is less friction.
 
Kaban said:
Has anyone already used the opti lens and can provide real world experience? Hard to believe it protects against yellowing for the life of the vehicle when even majority of the factory uv coating fail.
Click to expand...

it'd be hard for anyone on here to give you testing info for the term you are concerned about since Opti-Lens has only been out for a little while.

but, i have two ideas regarding your concerns:

1. i think the automakers are run by the bean counters to the very last drop of everything throughout the car. so, they will be using the thinnest possible coating of whatever it is that provides enough protection to at least cover them for the length of the warranty plus a buffer to get them out of the gray "good will" repair area. OEs get their lamps from suppliers, so not only are the OEs looking to save money but the supplier is looking to maximize profits so they are going to provide the minimum necessary to satisfy the OE specs, and the OE is going to spec the minimum necessary to cover their bottoms re: warranty and keep dollars in their pockets. it's a double whammy of penny pinching!

2. Opti-Lens might be a different (more expensive) technology than what the OEs suppliers use for their lamps. it also might have a much thicker film build.

so, with that said, i don't find it hard to believe at all that Opti-Lens solves the problem it says it does.
 
If this has been answered in another thread I apologize. I didn't find it. Has anyone done any layering with this product? I'm wondering if it can be done in an hour, 24 hours, weeks, months??
 
DaveT435 said:
If this has been answered in another thread I apologize. I didn't find it. Has anyone done any layering with this product? I'm wondering if it can be done in an hour, 24 hours, weeks, months??
Click to expand...

which product?
 
DaveT435 said:
If this has been answered in another thread I apologize. I didn't find it. Has anyone done any layering with this product? I'm wondering if it can be done in an hour, 24 hours, weeks, months??
Click to expand...

Although you can layer Opti-Lens, it's not necessary.

Opti-Glass should not be layered.
 
Nick@Autogeek said:
Although you can layer Opti-Lens, it's not necessary.

Opti-Glass should not be layered.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the quick response!! I thought one individual said on polished lenses you might need to. Thanks for clearing that up for me!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top