Please post your Meguiar's Ultimate Paste Wax water repellency observations

[Loach]

Those of you who have experience with this wax, I need your thoughts. First, let me tell you what I've been experiencing.

This wax/sealant, regardless of me leaving it on to dry for 5 minutes, for 20 minutes, the beading and sheeting diminishes when I perform my water test. When I first put water on it, it starts off sheeting relatively fast, but as time goes on (5-10 minutes) I notice that the beads become more oblong shaped, and the sheeting starts slowing down. Is this typical?

Prior to this wax I was using Meg's Ultimate Liquid. And what really startled me was the car that I waxed before with the liquid version after about a few days was washed with Meg's Deep Crystal car wash soap using the proper dilution ratio, and the beading and sheeting was very poor and slow. The car was clayed prior to application of the product and an IPA wipe down was performed before as well. I then reapplied it to the hood of the test car, waited a few days, the car was garaged during this time, and I then rinsed it down and washed it using Meguiar's Gold Class soap. Same exact thing happening. Very poor beading, very slow sheeting. This is what led to the decision to try out the Ultimate Paste version and see if I could get some sort of better results but I'm not. The beading and sheeting diminishes very quickly.

So, maybe it has something to do with water touching the wax so quickly after buffing the excess off? I then tested it by applying it and letting it dry for 20 minutes, removed it, let it cure for about 4 hours, came back and did the water test and no difference is noticed in the test. Starts off relatively strong, and then diminishes over a 10 minute period of rinsing (simulates a typical afternoon Florida rain shower). Application outside temperature was 75*, relatively low humidity, out of the sun applied in the shade in the garage.

Give me your thoughts. Have any of you noticed this with this wax? I used a different OTC wax on the other side of the hood for comparison and did not notice this happening at all. Beading and sheeting stayed strong. Am I not supposed to have water touch the wax for a certain amount, upwards of over 4 hours after removing the excess? Any help or thoughts appreciated.

[cleanmycorolla]

Why are you wetting the surface so close after application? Apply and remove and leave it alone got a little. That might help :)

[CowboyTruckn]

I always let it rest for at least a day

[Loach]

Why are you wetting the surface so close after application? Apply and remove and leave it alone got a little. That might help :)

Comparable to Collinite 476s and even some other paste synthetic waxes, I've noticed that wetting the surface immediately after allowing those waxes to dry and then removing the excess doesn't diminish their surface repellency at all, especially after such a short time period during the water test. I did bump the wait period up to 4 hours before wetting and noticed no change. My biggest concern, is as a short amount of time goes by just wetting the surface, I'm noticing a diminished performance in repellency occurring right before my eyes. It's like the wax doesn't like to play with water, which isn't good for climates that are prone to everyday afternoon showers. For a wax that prides itself on increasing surface tension of the paint for beads to roll right off, it sure is leaving much to be desired at this point.


I always let it rest for at least a day

I'm going to put up some test sections around the car and test even longer waiting periods.

Those of you who have tried this wax before, are you at all impressed with the water repellency?

[cleanmycorolla]

Comparable to Collinite 476s and even some other paste synthetic waxes, I've noticed that wetting the surface immediately after allowing those waxes to dry and then removing the excess doesn't diminish their surface repellency at all, especially after such a short time period during the water test. I did bump the wait period up to 4 hours before wetting and noticed no change. My biggest concern, is as a short amount of time goes by just wetting the surface, I'm noticing a diminished performance in repellency occurring right before my eyes. It's like the wax doesn't like to play with water, which isn't good for climates that are prone to everyday afternoon showers. For a wax that prides itself on increasing surface tension of the paint for beads to roll right off, it sure is leaving much to be desired at this point.



I'm going to put up some test sections around the car and test even longer waiting periods.

Those of you who have tried this wax before, are you at all impressed with the water repellency?


okay, but still don't know why you're wetting any wax immediately after application, seems like the wrong way to do it

[RPPM]

Megs Ultimate waxes are sealants, not waxes. For best results, allow them to cure, at least 12 hours, but 24 hours would be even better to allow them to cross link and bond with the paint. Also, I would forgo the IPA wipedown.

I have used Megs Ultimate Paste and Liquid, as well as Collinite 476, 845 and 915 on numerous cars. I have found two coats of either Ultimate wax about 24 hours apart to outlast 2 coats of 845 24 hours apart, and to give 476 and 915 a run for their money. Again, two coats, 24 hours apart.

[FUNX650]

•Meguiar's Ultimate Paste Wax contains, by weight, 10-30% polydimethylsiloxanes...synthetic polymers...
("a rose is a rose is a rose")

•These types of polymer products should not be exposed to any liquids for a certain window-of-time to fully cure.
-If not: their characteristics will be compromised---the "setting-up" process(es) of the polymers will have been bollixed!!

•This proverbial window of total-cure-time is: 12-24 hours.

Bob

[RTexasF]

RPPM is correct. From Meg's website:

• Our most advanced, pure synthetic hydrophobic wax.

That means there is no wax in it. Why are you doing this? It shows/proves absolutely nothing. You might as well drop a meteor on it and say it doesn't protect the paint because there are no beads. The things some folks are concerned about absolutely amazes me sometimes and this is indeed one of those times.:surrender:

[KillaCam]

You aren't letting a synthetic paint sealant cure. Let it sit overnight without being exposed to any water and it should perform like it should.

[beamerstrumpet]

I have never used that , I have used and like 3M performance finish. easy on easy off, beautiful depth. add some good carnauba over it a few days later and its brilliant. the SCG kit is a sealer, and a glaze. like everyone says let it set a few.

[Loach]

Thanks for the replies guys. I have a test spot brewing that I'm going to let sit for a while before wetting.



RPPM is correct. From Meg's website:

• Our most advanced, pure synthetic hydrophobic wax.

That means there is no wax in it. Why are you doing this? It shows/proves absolutely nothing. You might as well drop a meteor on it and say it doesn't protect the paint because there are no beads. The things some folks are concerned about absolutely amazes me sometimes and this is indeed one of those times.:surrender:

It's a comparison test. Think about your customers. You're going to run into some customers that are going to want the product that you put on their paint to have the highest level of repellency. They equate that to protection. You might be able to explain to them that according to so and so, the diminished level of repellency in the protection after (x) amount of days/weeks/months doesn't mean there's not a level of protection still on the paint. But all they care about is seeing the product on the paint do the thing that they want it to do - repel water for the longest amount of time possible. It's in my interest to test the products in my arsenal that will excel in that field. And I want to make sure I do the test right so I don't pass judgement on a product if I'm not giving it it's fair ability to perform the best it can.

[FUNX650]

Thanks for the replies guys. I have a test spot brewing that I'm going to let sit for a while before wetting.


It's a comparison test. Think about your customers. You're going to run into some customers that are going to want the product that you put on their paint to have the highest level of repellency. They equate that to protection. You might be able to explain to them that according to so and so, the diminished level of repellency in the protection after (x) amount of days/weeks/months doesn't mean there's not a level of protection still on the paint. But all they care about is seeing the product on the paint do the thing that they want it to do - repel water for the longest amount of time possible. It's in my interest to test the products in my arsenal that will excel in that field. And I want to make sure I do the test right so I don't pass judgement on a product if I'm not giving it it's fair ability to perform the best it can.
Polymer Science dictates that "polymers"
need a 12-24 cure time.

So...
If you're going to be applying polymer inundated LSP-products to your Customers' vehicles:
You'll need to sell that principle to your Customers.

If not:
Using car-care Waxes that contain only all-natural waxes---no synthetics---is one alternative.

However:
Their expected time for imbuing repellency is quite short-lived, when compared to Hybrid Waxes and Sealants.

Bob

[Loach]

Bit of an update. I tried letting it cure for 18 hours, and I noticed no difference whatsoever of the repellency properties at all compared to 4 hour cure time, and no cure time, which is wetting the surface directly after buffing the dried excess off. I did take a video of what's happening that I'll try to upload and post a link to. It starts off beading and sheeting strong and fast, however, after a period of about 10 minutes of wetting, the repellency does get tired, and I noticed weaker beading and slower sheeting that shows up in the video as well.

I'm not sure what's going on here, it's possible that the mineral content in the water I'm using is reacting to the surface that affects the Meguiar's repellency more than my comparison wax. After performing the water test for about 20 minutes, the surface of the car did not feel as smooth as before after drying the hood of the car and then going back over the paint with a microfiber towel, that's true for both sides with both waxes. I will have to perform a water quality test to see just how bad the water is here, but the comparison synthetic paste sealant did not exhibit a diminished beading or sheeting throughout the test.

[dlc95]

I had it happen where I wasn't applying enough product, and what you're describing happened to one of my test panels. However, on an adjacent panel, I strive for more of an "even" coat, and get small, tight beads every time, even after washing. This is with the liquid version though. On Saturday I applied a coat of Ultimate Liquid Wax on a vehicle. We drove it all day, and at night, she parked next to a sprinkler. Last night I had to remove all of the water spots. Yesterday morning however, the beads were round and tight. Looked great, but because the vehicle got left in the sun, they etched the surface.

[aim4squirrels]

A little OT, but I do prefer the ultimate liquid wax to the paste. Goes on whisper thin with a DA and doesn't stain trim at all. In fact, it actually enhances the trim a bit.