Using a Clay Bar On Paint Coatings?

[RippyD]

This is part of the reason I'm on the fence with coatings. Freeway driving in rain for 6-7 months means a lot of embedded stuff. IronX and Reset help. At some point the sheeting action is gone until I use clay. So either lose most of the benefit of a coating (lotus effect) or clay it. I'll do some testing in Jan or Feb after my coated car has a few months of driving in the rain.

[Patman22]

I feel I'm in the same boat too, I love the idea of the self cleaning features of a coating, but it just seems like ceramics might be a better fit for people that don't do any detailing on their cars whatsover as opposed to people like us that like to tinker a bit more. What I truly think is my ideal thing is finding a WOWA sealant that offers close to the same hydrophobic and self cleaning properties of a coating (as well as protection from the elements of course) but then if I need to clay the finish at some point (or just want to put on a fresh layer of protection) it's an easier process.

[zmcgovern45]

The true benefit of the coating, even after the initial hydrophobic properties may have disappeared, is the added barrier of protection between the elements and your paint. No traditional wax or sealant will provide a measurably thick and durable layer like a coating can. This is what makes coatings particularly useful for daily driven vehicles as the physical barrier is most needed on cars that see a lot of use in all environments.

If you need to clay on top of the coating, go for it. If you need to use toppers to enhance water behavior, go for it. There is no one size fits all approach to caring for your vehicle... just do what works for you.

[RippyD]

Zack, always appreciate your input. Here's what I don't get: a coating that doesn't repel water very well is still providing protection. What protection, and how is it any better than a sealant? Fewer scratches in my paint?

If were to drive my coated car through the swirl-o-matic car wash 10 times, would it only scratch the coating or would it get to the paint as well? Either way I have to polish to remove them, so how would I know? Maybe I'm too skeptical, but at some point this looks like a "trust me, it's there and working" exercise. If I can't see it working, if I can't tell if the scratches are in the paint vs. the coating, how do I know?

I find the lack of hard data and demonstrable science shared by the coating companies frustrating. Not saying they don't work, because they do, but there appears to be some amount of snake oil involved as well.

[zmcgovern45]

Zack, always appreciate your input. Here's what I don't get: a coating that doesn't repel water very well is still providing protection. What protection, and how is it any better than a sealant? Fewer scratches in my paint?
Your clear coat does not repel water, yet we accept the fact that it provides protection against UV and environmental contaminants, correct? Same principle.

Regarding sealants and waxes, the same mystery is involved. We cannot see them. We do not know how long they last, but manufacturers tell us it is only a few weeks or months in most cases, so this is what we have to go on.

Water beading is not an indication of protection, only high surface tension. Scratch protection is not a major benefit of these nano coatings in my opinion.


If were to drive my coated car through the swirl-o-matic car wash 10 times, would the only scratches be in the coating, or would they get to the clear coat?
There is no way to know, but in theory because there is an additional micron or so of material, the scratches have penetrated less of the clear coat. If a scratch is 1.5 microns deep, an uncoated vehicle would lose 1.5 microns of clear to remove said defect, while a coated vehicle may only require you to remove 0.5 microns of clear to remove said defect. While we are talking at a microscopic level, it is still a considerable benefit in my opinion.


Either way I have to polish to remove them, so how would I know? It could just be that I'm overly skeptical, but at some point this start to look like a "trust me, it's there and working" exercise. If I can't see it working, if I can't tell if the scratches are in the paint vs. the coating?
When a coating is properly applied, it is more or less invisible, however many coatings on the market will actually darken the surface of the vehicle they are applied to. I have tested a section of my vehicle by coating only part of a panel, after which there was a distinct visible line between the coated and uncoated areas. This did not fade over the 1.5 year test. In another case, I left a small high spot on a portion of my vehicle for 3 years. It was unchanged throughout that time. That is enough data for me to say that the coatings are in fact in tact and still present despite whatever water behavior that area may exhibit.


There seems to be a lot of faith involved in coating performance. I find the lack of hard data and demonstrable science shared by the coating companies frustrating. Not saying they don't work, because they do, but there appears to be some amount of snake oil involved as well.
I encourage you to take it upon yourself to do your own testing. That is what I do, that is how I learn, that is the only way I felt comfortable making certain claims to my customers. It is a lot of fun :)

[RippyD]

Very much appreciate the reply. Have done some testing, which is why I'm on the fence.


Water beading is not an indication of protection, only high surface tension. Scratch protection is not a major benefit of these nano coatings in my opinion.
To me, water beading/sheeting likely means less dirt - water will tend to carry the dirt off. Coatings that stop sheeting don't tend to stay any cleaner than uncoated areas in my (limited) experience. So if being cleaner isn't a benefit once a coating stops sheeting, and scratch protection isn't a major benefit, what's left in terms of the value?

Don't mean to come across as challenging - I'm trying to get my head around this.

[fightnews]

FWIW I completely agree about chemical decon on a coated car, no doubt about it. Spray it on, let it dwell and rinse away....BAM! I think some people think that because its strong enough to remove the embedded contaminants and turn that red/purple color that its going to hurt the coating and I too used to be in this camp but not anymore!

My issue would be that Iron X would remove iron contamination but there are many other types of contamination that can bond to the car besides iron. Is the iron x going to remove them?

[Klasse Act]

Well based on the name I would have to say no but maybe somebody else can chime in the nose better.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[WillSports3]

Iron X doesn't just dissolve iron particles, it's also a pretty strong decrease as well. I would follow up with tar X as well or maybe just use Trix. I use Trix and aside from tar and iron contaminants, I don't think you'll find really other contaminants on your coating left after you use the two.

[Eldorado2k]

I use Trix and aside from tar and iron contaminants, I don't think you'll find really other contaminants on your coating left after you use the two.

You forgot the occasional paint overspray, water spots, embedded dirt, etc... All of which IronX is anywhere from below average to completely ineffective at removing.

You could apply IronX + TarX all you want, and when you're done you'll still fail the baggie test because the only way to truly remove those embedded above surface contaminants and make your paint surface smooth once again is by using clay or a claymitt.

IronX does next to squat when it comes to removing contaminants from the paint. Especially when you consider the fact that clay will also remove iron particles, which renders an iron removing spray even more obsolete if you really think about it.

[FUNX650]

Iron X doesn't just dissolve iron particles,
it's also a pretty strong decrease as well.

IMO:
One CarPro product having the ability to
dissolve iron particles...plus having a de-
greasing attribute...is more in the realm
of CarPro’s ”IronX Snow Soap”


Bob

[WillSports3]

Iron X has strong decreasing agents in it, it's why if you iron X a waxed car you should rewax after. Water spots is clear coat etching. I'm not sure why would you clay for water spots? If you're talking about just the pure white spots on a car before it etches, I just use a qd to get it off a coating. And claying does not get rid of everything. Try using fall out remover on a freshly clayed white car and watch the red.

I've never had an issue with my car failing the baggie test after a reset wash and spraying it down with iron x. The coating is also approaching two years now.

[RippyD]

For IronX to adequately decontaminate a coated car at least one of the following must be true:

1. Most of the embedded contamination in a coating is iron.
2. IronX is capable of removing non-iron embedded contaminants.

I'm fairly sure #2 isn't correct. Based on experience I doubt #1 is true, but could be. Also not sure why people think it's a strong degreaser. Not in my experience and not based on the SDS sheet. If tar is a problem you likely want to use TarX, TRIX, Snow Soap, or another stronger cleaner and degreaser.

Snowsoap has a much higher concentration of detergent in it than IronX. TRIX has citrus based cleaners in it, which are good at removing grease and may remove tar.

[WillSports3]

Iron X is an example of a fall out remover. I personally use trix like I said earlier and it's a great fallout remover for anything I encounter on my coated car.

[Eldorado2k]

I've never had an issue with my car failing the baggie test after a reset wash and spraying it down with iron x. The coating is also approaching two years now.

2yrs? Your car must live a pampered life, because that's the 1st time I've ever heard anyone say a Coated car is passing a baggie test at 2yrs... As far as IronX, TarX, Trix, or any other X spray helping to remove embedded contaminants and making the surface smooth again, I don't buy it.

Just recently a user by the name of Gaz's Purple [IIRC] posted about trying to use IronX on his truck with a 1yr. old coating and it didn't do a thing to make his paint any smoother and it failed the baggie test very bad.

I've also experienced the same issue many times on customers vehicles and have posted about it. Your cars paint may be smooth thanks to proper maintenance and that's excellent prevention, but IronX does absolutely nothing to help a vehicle that's failing a baggie test. There's no soap or spray that will make that paint smooth again when it's at that point.


For IronX to adequately decontaminate a coated car at least one of the following must be true:

1. Most of the embedded contamination in a coating is iron.
2. IronX is capable of removing non-iron embedded contaminants.

I'm fairly sure #2 isn't correct. Based on experience I doubt #1 is true, but could be. Also not sure why people think it's a strong degreaser. Not in my experience and not based on the SDS sheet.


This.^
Thank you.