Wax and water spots question..

[Sonic Pilot]

I apologize if this has been covered previously, but I am becoming frustrated. Here's my basic question: Does wax (or any other typical LSP) contribute to the appearance of water spots?

Here is why I am asking. I have 2 cars, both black. A dodge Challenger and a Cadillac. The Challenger I detail religiously and obsess over, the Caddy is just a daily driver. The Caddy just gets a periodic wash from time to time, that's it! No waxing, polishing or any other products applied. Whenever it rains, the Cadillac does get some minor water spotting but it washes of pretty easily. Even if the wash doesn't take place for a couple of days later.
The Challenger, the one I polish, wax and completely obsess over, will get water spots that will not come off easily even when washed immediately after a rain. Typically, a light rubbing or polishing is the only way to completely remove them....until the next rain! WTH?!?

Shouldn't a wax or other LSP minimize the impact of water spotting? Or at least ease the removal of them when done in a timely manner?

Thanks for you thoughts!

[Mantilgh]

I apologize if this has been covered previously, but I am becoming frustrated. Here's my basic question: Does wax (or any other typical LSP) contribute to the appearance of water spots?

Shouldn't a wax or other LSP minimize the impact of water spotting? Or at least ease the removal of them when done in a timely manner?

Thanks for you thoughts!

Any LSP that beads water, rather than sheeting it, will contribute to water spots.

It may be just as hard to remove a water spot off of waxed, sealed, or coated paint as it is bare paint.

The car that does not get waxed, gets less spots because the water lays flat on the surface and evaporates quickly.

[camaro2ssblack]

You are coming to terms with the fact that water beading is absolutely pointless and actually counterproductive. Sheeting is the desired result.

[ntwillie1]

In reference to Camaro’s comment - not necessarily. It’s only an issue if you let the car sit wet. For me, I love my water beading. It lets me know my car still has protection on it. I always dry it w a blower when it gets wet. The beads just roll right off w little effort. Just my opinion.

W

[Sonic Pilot]

Thanks for the replies guys...

Now I am really confused. If water "beading" is such a negative thing as far as promoting water spots, why is it that so many LSP manufacturers pride themselves on how well their product beads water? After all...beading is (apparently) bad as it promotes water spots right? Hmmm..

Can you recommend some quality LSP's that provide water "sheeting" as opposed to beading? Perhaps I should try them.

[SWETM]

Thanks for the replies guys...

Now I am really confused. If water "beading" is such a negative thing as far as promoting water spots, why is it that so many LSP manufacturers pride themselves on how well their product beads water? After all...beading is (apparently) bad as it promotes water spots right? Hmmm..

Can you recommend some quality LSP's that provide water "sheeting" as opposed to beading? Perhaps I should try them.

Sonax Polymer Net Shield (PNS) and Brilliant Shine Detailer (BSD) is a LSP with a great sheeting ability. BSD is a QD but has a great amount of protection in it. 6-8 weeks on it's own you get in longevity from it. So if you would try it out you can go with the BSD first. And if you like it you can get the PNS that you get 5-6 months of solid protection. If maintained with BSD you can extend the longevity of it some and hold it's crazy water behavior at top. You still get beading from it so it's not a miracle. But the amount of water that is left is less than a more beading LSP. This is also why coatings is great with it's sheeting ability it has. And the most important to have is a clean car. So the LSP has the ability to work with it's sheeting and beading ability. The cleaner the car is the more effective water behavior it has. Then it's a middle ground so you don't have to wash the car daily. But in the range of 1-2 weeks apart when you are washing the car. And something that comes with a great water behavior is the need of a wash solution that don't degrade it's properties with the wax and or glossenhancers it's leaves behind. That's why I like Carpro Reset so much is it's leaves nothing behind and lets my LSP work as should be.

[camaro2ssblack]

In reference to Camaro’s comment - not necessarily. It’s only an issue if you let the car sit wet. For me, I love my water beading. It lets me know my car still has protection on it. I always dry it w a blower when it gets wet. The beads just roll right off w little effort. Just my opinion.

W

I’m sorry but that’s just not practical. The purpose of protection is so you don’t have to immediately remove water or contaminants. Are you telling me you are going to take your blower with you everywhere you go? On the way to lunch and it rains and then the sun pops out while your inside eating? Go blow off the car in the parking lot?

Sheeting is practical protection.

[ek556]

Thanks for the replies guys...

Now I am really confused. If water "beading" is such a negative thing as far as promoting water spots, why is it that so many LSP manufacturers pride themselves on how well their product beads water? After all...beading is (apparently) bad as it promotes water spots right? Hmmm..

Can you recommend some quality LSP's that provide water "sheeting" as opposed to beading? Perhaps I should try them.

Because from a consumers point of view, and even detailers, the beading LOOKS better. I dont think I've ever heard someone say "wow look at that water sheet!" No, they say "heyyy look at that water bead right up". Its the desired aesthetic. And when you do get water spots, they have a product to take care of that too.

[ek556]

I’m sorry but that’s just not practical. The purpose of protection is so you don’t have to immediately remove water or contaminants. Are you telling me you are going to take your blower with you everywhere you go? On the way to lunch and it rains and then the sun pops out while your inside eating? Go blow off the car in the parking lot?

Sheeting is practical protection.

Yup, and when someone comes up to see what the heck I'm doing, I smile and whip out my business card. lol

[Rsurfer]

Sonax Polymer Net Shield (PNS) and Brilliant Shine Detailer (BSD) is a LSP with a great sheeting ability. BSD is a QD but has a great amount of protection in it. 6-8 weeks on it's own you get in longevity from it. So if you would try it out you can go with the BSD first. And if you like it you can get the PNS that you get 5-6 months of solid protection. If maintained with BSD you can extend the longevity of it some and hold it's crazy water behavior at top. You still get beading from it so it's not a miracle. But the amount of water that is left is less than a more beading LSP. This is also why coatings is great with it's sheeting ability it has. And the most important to have is a clean car. So the LSP has the ability to work with it's sheeting and beading ability. The cleaner the car is the more effective water behavior it has. Then it's a middle ground so you don't have to wash the car daily. But in the range of 1-2 weeks apart when you are washing the car. And something that comes with a great water behavior is the need of a wash solution that don't degrade it's properties with the wax and or glossenhancers it's leaves behind. That's why I like Carpro Reset so much is it's leaves nothing behind and lets my LSP work as should be.
Water Beading from SONAX Polymer Net Shield (https://www.autogeekonline.net/forum/ask-mike-phillips-your-detailing-questions-/120649-water-beading-sonax-polymer-net-shield.html)

Not sheeting very well.

[itsgn]

I think there's a serious misunderstanding here on how beading or sheeting affects water spotting. The misunderstanding is twofold.

For one, some seem to use and understand the term "water spotting" in layman's terms, focusing on the spotting part. However, in reality it is a technical term, which is not really about the "spots" part. but refers to the process of mineral deposits being left back from water (or any other solvent for that matter) on the surface, when it's allowed to dry by air, through evaporation. The other misunderstanding is the consequence of the first, and is about how much of these deposits are left back on the surface during drying, depending on the water behavior.

Let me set these straight here!

Contrary to what some have stated, in regards to water spotting and in this (technical) sense, it doesn't really matter how quickly the water evaporates from the surface, because - as already said - water spots are caused by the minerals originally floating or solved in the water being left back on the surface - and the amount of those obviously does not depend on the speed of evaporation, or how much the water sheets or beads. It only depends how much water was left on the surface in the first place, and what amount of contaminants that water had suspended (or has collected during the drying process, which however should be in most cases negligible compared to what it originally contained, unless it was distilled prior to getting on the surface).

What might be misleading here is, that in regards of visual appearance, there's a definitive difference between water spotting depending on water behavior. if the water is lying on the surface in distinct beads, then the deposits will also form in distinct spots/circles, whereas if the water covers the surface more evenly (ie. is "sheeting"), then the deposits will be also more evenly distributed on the surface, and thus less discernible to the naked eye. However, what's important to note here is, that even in the latter case water will obviously leave back the same amount of mineral residue per volume unit. The only difference will be, that those deposits will be more evenly distributed, and because of that they will more just fog up or haze up the surface (which will be less obvious to the eye), and less prone to form distinct spots on it.

The other important thing you've to realize is, that beading and sheeting are not properties that live on their own, but direct results of water behavior on the surface. If the surface is hydrophilic, water will cling to it and spread on it (ie. it will "sheet"); and if it's hydrophobic, water will try to move away from it, and only leave tiny beads behind, that are not heavy enough to roll off (ie. it will bead). What's important here is, that obviously hydrophobicity and heavy beading allows less water be left back on the surface, which in turn will also mean less minerals to be left back, than with "sheeting".

So, even though if left to dry on its own, beads might leave back more apparent (more distinct) water spots on the surface, all in all they will still leave back less minerals (=contaminants) on the surface, than if the water would spread out (sheet). The former might be preferable in the short term because of the visual impact, but in the long term, the clear coat will fade and haze up far faster when the surface is not hydrophobic, and thus is not beading.

It's also worth nothing, that a hydrophobic (ie. heavily beading) surface it a lot easier to dry with either pressurized air or towels, than a hydrophilic one, because water will roll off a lot easier from it and there will be less water to wipe off in the first place. Because of this, hydrophobicity/beading will also help you generally leave behind even less mineral deposits, because you'll be able to clean the surface faster and more efficiently, allowing less time for those minerals to settle and bind to the surface.

So, no, contrary to what people have said here, hydrophobicity/beading is not only not pointless, but actually very preferable even in regards to avoid mineral deposits from water (aka "water spots") being left back on the paint surface. The only thing is, that if you don't or can't dry the surface properly (because for ex it's left out in the sun after a rain), these deposits will be - even though likely lower in total amount, but - more discernible to the naked eye, than they would be if the water would just spread out more evenly on the paint. In which case the contaminants would be still there, and even in larger amount - you just wouldn't be able to *spot* them, at least in the short term; but in the long term they would still do more and also more visible damage to your clear coat.

[Sonic Pilot]

Thank you "itsgn" for your insight on this frustrating issue. You explanation kinda makes sense to me, I get it.

That being said, shouldn't LSP companies engineer their product to resist water spotting all together? That would really be something that would separate one from the "masses".

I realize this may present some difficult technical challenges, but like any worthwhile advancements in technology, its ok to start small and continue to develop it until the ultimate goal is achieved. That is to say that even if they can only begin to resist water spotting, then continue to advance the technology over time, until they can reliably eliminate them, that would be a great achievement. The industry needs to figure this out! The successful company will reap considerable financial reward for such innovation!

Lastly, I guess my statement in my original post was accurate in that most LSP's will in fact increase the "appearance" of water spots. Water left on a cars surface will almost always leave behind some sort of diminishing quality to the cars finish. However, when an LSP is present, the "appearance" is much more prominent. As previously stated, this should be the next technical hurdle to be overcome!

[acuRAS82]

I just want to say that it’s possible that the Caddy doesn’t spot because it is covered in a film of road grime that “protects” the actual paint from water spots... plus the lack of beads probably prevents those obvious looking small round water spots... but there may be unnoticeable water marks mixed in with road grime.

I’m guessing that a freshly polished paint surface would water spot the same or probably more as the clean, waxed paint surface.

I’ve just noticed that older, unkept cars don’t get the noticeable spots and the above is my hypothesis.

[itsgn]

I realize this may present some difficult technical challenges
Well, it's virtually impossible for a sealant or coating to prevent water spots altogether. You just can't defy physics; if there's nothing (no force, or no chemical process) (re)moving the minerals from the surface, then they will just stay there, as they are too heavy to be lifted by air (and some might even actually bond to the paint/surface). The only thing a sealant or a coating can do in this regard is to reduce the amount of water that's left on the paint to dry in the first place, and to provide some chemical resistance against the mineral residues corroding the paint. But they can't make those minerals, that have been carried as part of the (undistilled) water onto the surface, to magically disappear in thin air. That's just impossible.


Lastly, I guess my statement in my original post was accurate in that most LSP's will in fact increase the "appearance" of water spots.
Well, just as much as does polishing a neglected car. When you first do it, you will suddenly see all kinds of defects (rock chips, small dents in the panel, etc) that you didn't see before. But that's not because those defects weren't there previously - because of course they were there; but because back then the whole car looked like crap, so everything looked the same, and you didn't have much reflection helping you to spot defects either. But now, that you've polished the car, those previously "hidden" defects all of sudden are "jumping" right at you, because now there's a large difference between them and the perfectly polished paint; and because now you can see any and all anomalies in the reflection, that you didn't before.

The same thing happens with water spots when the car has a hydrophobic coating or sealant applied to it. You see the water spots more, because now only a few drops of water get left behind on the paint, and because the paint will be more reflective and more clear in general anyway, than it would be otherwise. So, now there will be a huge difference between those parts where the water has left deposits, and areas, that are free from those residues. But it's not that water would really leave more contaminants back on this coated/sealed surface, than it would on bare paint, or that it would damage the clear coat more. It will be just more obvious that those residues and contaminants are there, than would have been if they were all over the car, not just in distinct spots, which would have a less reflective surface anyway.

[Tempest45]

A surface that sheets the water off before the water evaporates will leave very little mineral residue behind. Contrast this with beading that will concentrate the mineral residue in a small area and maximize the chances for etching.

I've yet to see any single advantage of a product to bead water.