Sealant Test: PowerLock (+/-) BlackHole, Wolfgang DGPS, & BlackFire WD

Blackthorn One said:
Because the products are in sealed containers, their ability to protect is assured.
Click to expand...

Of course, that is relative. I remember someone complaining about their bottle of something breaking when they dropped it, and someone (Pockets from Poorboy's, Chris@Optimum, or someone) was telling us about the fact that for whatever reason (recyclability, reduced packaging material volume) the bottles are thinner and more permeable today then in the past. That means more solvent etc. diffusion out of the bottle, and more oxygen diffusion in.

I have unopened (with the neck seals intact) bottles of various products that have sucked in, so something is going on (I presume solvent diffusion out of the bottle, reducing the volume, thus creating negative pressure and collapsing the bottle).
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Of course, that is relative. I remember someone complaining about their bottle of something breaking when they dropped it, and someone (Pockets from Poorboy's, Chris@Optimum, or someone) was telling us about the fact that for whatever reason (recyclability, reduced packaging material volume) the bottles are thinner and more permeable today then in the past. That means more solvent etc. diffusion out of the bottle, and more oxygen diffusion in.

I have unopened (with the neck seals intact) bottles of various products that have sucked in, so something is going on (I presume solvent diffusion out of the bottle, reducing the volume, thus creating negative pressure and collapsing the bottle).
Click to expand...

That conjurs up the "process", again, of what we talked about before:

Adding a little bit of the differing-solvents we had lying around in the garage for: Re-introduction.

Oh the good ol' non-VOC days of yore.

:)

Bob
 
FUNX725 said:
Anyway...From post #11:



:)

Bob
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, totally missed the connection. :props:

Well then, I still say TIME is the biggest factor in sealants breakdown. As with all chemical structures, big ones eventually become small ones. It's entropy, and can't be stopped :)
 
ihaveacamaro said:
I still say TIME is the biggest factor in sealants breakdown. As with all chemical structures, big ones eventually become small ones. It's entropy, and can't be stopped :)
Click to expand...

Eh, you're such a pessimist! You'd think we were talking about tooth decay or something...
 
ihaveacamaro said:
Thanks for that, totally missed the connection. :props:

Well then, I still say TIME is the biggest factor in sealants breakdown. As with all chemical structures, big ones eventually become small ones. It's entropy, and can't be stopped :)
Click to expand...
Is the case of sealants...

Is this entropy you speak of:
Part of the sciences of physics, chemistry...Or, perhaps both?

Thanks.

:)

Bob
 
FUNX725 said:
Is the case of sealants...

Is this entropy you speak of:
Part of the sciences of physics, chemistry...Or, perhaps both?

Thanks.

:)

Bob
Click to expand...

I believe it's part of both :) I was just referring to nature's tendency to go from order to disorder. I misspoke earlier, it's not entropy by itself, but rather the concept of the ever increasing entropy in the universe.

Or to go back to sealants, the concept of what I imagine are structured compounds found in sealants responsible for protection, beading etc going to more disordered structures over time.
 
ihaveacamaro said:
I believe it's part of both :) I was just referring to nature's tendency to go from order to disorder. I misspoke earlier, it's not entropy by itself, but rather the concept of the ever increasing entropy in the universe.

Or to go back to sealants, the concept of what I imagine are structured compounds found in sealants responsible for protection, beading etc going to more disordered structures over time.

^^^Good answer/insight!!^^^ :props:
Click to expand...

I'll add:






:)

Bob
 
I want to get a small trunk to do testing like this on. I was expecting to pay about $50. But when I started looking online, they were 200-300 $$$. A little too much. I plan on doing some body shop dumpster diving this weekend to see what I can find.
 
That was a hell of a test with lots of info, thanks!

Sent from my SPH-M930 using AG Online
 
Great thread and great fun, I'm sure. At least I had fun reading it. Nice job!!!


This test just made me realize a few things. I'd like to do some testing of my own to share, but I'm limited on products to a point.

I do however have one large 4x8 glass table top, and the hood off of a Ford Ranger with 10-15 years of barn dirt on it. I need to put both of them to use and do some testing.

One thing Bob brought up is the outgassing and crosslinking. Something like that has to happen to allow the sealant to stick. After-all it has to form a bond somehow or it would simply wash off...and from the looks of this test on glass it's not going to come off easily. Is this because glass is less porous? Don't know. Would more product be needed on paint to fill the voids, if in fact paint is porous, until a point is reached that the surface becomes level with product/sealant? Don't know. Just thinking outloud a little.

One thing that wasn't mentioned, aside from numerous factors that can effect paint on a car that sits outside, is friction. Obviously polishing will remove a sealant or wax, but when I think back to the numerous articles of Mr. Phillips one thing sticks out in my mind that he's stated somewhere and that is: Anytime you're touching the paint, by whatever means, you're effectively wearing down the surface of a wax or sealant at a micro level.
 
swanicyouth said:
I think this is a good point. The test just showed cleaners, but didn't take time in the environment into account. It was just a fun test for me. It wasn't meant to prove any real point.
Click to expand...

Your test is actually better, at least just as important, than testing it on a car that is driven around or parked outside. Sections of a car, even on the same panel, can get more environmental abuse and contamination than others which invalidates many long term durability "road tests" IMHO.
 
Hoytman said:
Great thread and great fun, I'm sure. At least I had fun reading it. Nice job!!!


This test just made me realize a few things. I'd like to do some testing of my own to share, but I'm limited on products to a point.

I do however have one large 4x8 glass table top, and the hood off of a Ford Ranger with 10-15 years of barn dirt on it. I need to put both of them to use and do some testing.

One thing Bob brought up is the outgassing and crosslinking. Something like that has to happen to allow the sealant to stick. After-all it has to form a bond somehow or it would simply wash off...and from the looks of this test on glass it's not going to come off easily. Is this because glass is less porous? Don't know. Would more product be needed on paint to fill the voids, if in fact paint is porous, until a point is reached that the surface becomes level with product/sealant? Don't know. Just thinking outloud a little.

One thing that wasn't mentioned, aside from numerous factors that can effect paint on a car that sits outside, is friction. Obviously polishing will remove a sealant or wax, but when I think back to the numerous articles of Mr. Phillips one thing sticks out in my mind that he's stated somewhere and that is: Anytime you're touching the paint, by whatever means, you're effectively wearing down the surface of a wax or sealant at a micro level.
Click to expand...

A very cool thread, am enjoying it mucho.

I too have thought long and hard about such, the factor of abrasion thrown into the mix, and how synth sealants behave, versus the old school carnaubas?

I've thought about this years ago, and think about it at present was well, with some of these newer products I have tried from AG.

Is there that possibility, that Carnaubas have a "self healing quality"? Where they of course may not have the longevity of a synth sealant, may not be able to be as resistant to acids, alkalies, bird bombs, other chemicals, or to temp extremes.

But what I seem to notice is what I believe to be an ability-tendency to be more easily micro-marred-fine scratched.

Does this sound feasible, and true?

Is it why maybe many of us treat, and top a synth sealant with a wax? To not only gain more impressive final looks, but to also reap the best of both worlds of longevity-wearability?

That the natural product act as the sacrificial coating, that it has a better ability to fend off such common micro-abrasions, caused by things such as a simple washing-drying?
Mark

 
Very interesting test. When pollen is out here, it can zap any wax even collinite if left on the paint very long.
 
LOL That Hot Rims is some strong stuff. Better keep it away from vindictive females.

Have any Four Star UPP in the inventory? I'd love to see how it fares on your torture test.
 
What I see as interesting is, nothing was removing the LSP.
Does this mean when we "strip" wash a car for a polishing, we are not removing any of the old LSP?
The other week I started to polish my negelected paint on my 10 year old truck. On the hood, I wash with CG strip and Dawn mixture. Used a DA to polished the hood.
Long stoy short, Because of time restraints I didn't put on a layer of LSP, and the hood is still beading.
As shown by Swanicyouth's review, these LSP's are bullet proof, in regards to cleaning.
Forgot to add...the last sealent put on my truck was 2009 Rejex.
 
Last edited:
This test has got me thinking. I have white porcelain tile in my master bathroom. 24x24 on the floors and 12x12 in the walls. Believe it or not, it shows every spec or dirt and water mark. I'm going to polish it out with some 845 one day. Or wait till my next order and get a sample of the Wolfgang sealant

Sent from my Galaxy Note II using AG Online
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top