Sealant comparison

[RippyD]

Update from the weekend. Trying for animations rather than movies to see if how it works. Animations are still shots put into an animation. They have better resolution than movies, which tend to blur movement.

Note that both hoods are performing better with drying. Somehow washing with soap appears to mask some of the sheeting properties on weaker sealants. The stronger ones doesn't seem to be impacted, but weaker ones are. Rinsing helps a little, wiping with water and an MF seems to help more, pressure washing helps a little more, but drying after washing seems to help the most. It's got to be a soap residue issue. I'm sure sure why drying seems to work better, but it does.

Going forward my new process will be rinse and dry after washing.

The Sentra hood as bounced back well after using the drying process. The Duragloss rinseless as a QD side is still doing the best, but the others are working as well. Check the water movement relative to the section of the hood with no product (middle top). Animation here.

Rover hood saw improvement as well. Same general trend with some of the previously non-working products having a little life in them.

Left side

Middle

Right side

The Rover animations don't look great. A better camera and a tripod would make a world of difference. This is the way to go for showing water movement if I can figure it out.

[RippyD]

Got no comments on the animations. I'll assume they weren't very helpful. No time indication may be part of the problem. Thinking about a better video solution. For now, back to pictures.

We had a couple of days of off and on rain. The hood had standing water on it, so I rinsed, washed with my usual N-914 at 256:1, and dried. After drying it was clear there is some spotting from water having sat on the hood overnight. It doesn't look permanent - maybe areas where the sealants are reacting to hours of water exposure? I mentioned this because of the water behavior.


There was not sheeting any where. The areas that shed water quickly had large beads left, I believe where the spots were. This seemed to be consistent across all products. Here you can see Dodo Acrylic spritz and Four Star clearing. These remain the two fastest products. In the upper left SFX-4 is clearing as well.

A few seconds later here is SFX-4 and BF Carnuba.


A few seconds after that back to the front we see Dodo Acrylic, Four Star, McKee's Fast Wax, 303 Spray, and SFx-4 have mostly cleared. BF Carnuba is moving.


Concurrently with these Nano Shock and Mystery #4 are clearing.


As is Megs 20.


Here you can see what's moving and what's not from the center of the hood across the left side. At the bottom right Griot's Finishing Sealant isn't doing much, adjacent to the left McKee's Fast Wax, then Four Star and Dodo are clear. In the next row in from the front Groit's Spray wax isn't moving, to the left Mystery #4 and 303 are cleared (spotting). You can see that the entire left side has cleared at this point, and the two products toward the windshield from Mystery Sealant aren't doing much. Prima Hydro is moving some water, but slowly and not completely.


On the right side you can see Megs 20 is cleared, Poorboys EXP, 3M synthetic, and HD Poxy are partially clear. Poorboys has a little less movement than the others.


Here's where these seem to be in terms of performance, roughly from best to worst in terms of time to move water

Clearing
Dodo Acrylic and Four Star
SFX-4, McKee's Fast Wax, 303 Spray
BF Carnuba, Megs 20, Nano Shock, Mystery #4

Doing something:
HD Poxy
3M Synthetic
Poorboys EXP

Doing little to nothing:
Groit's Finishing Sealant
Poorboys Sealant with Carnuba
Griot's Spray Wax
Rupe's P808
Prima Hydro
Prima Slick

[SWETM]

From the previous post only the Sentra hood animation worked looking at for me and none of the Range Rover hood.

Intresting foundings about the drying worked better before the sheeting test.

Could you do a beading test also? Would be intresting to see the difference from them in that part too.

Little surprising about the Rupes 808 sealant. And looking forward to the next update.

Missing Sonax Brilliant Shine Detailer or Polymer Net Shield. Which both often are strong working products. Don't remember if PNS was in your last test.

Thanks for updates!

[Cruzscarwash]

PNS as in the last testing and in the top 4 I believe

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[RippyD]

From the previous post only the Sentra hood animation worked looking at for me and none of the Range Rover hood.

Intresting foundings about the drying worked better before the sheeting test.

Could you do a beading test also? Would be intresting to see the difference from them in that part too.

Little surprising about the Rupes 808 sealant. And looking forward to the next update.

Missing Sonax Brilliant Shine Detailer or Polymer Net Shield. Which both often are strong working products. Don't remember if PNS was in your last test.

Thanks for updates!

Ugh... will get the animations. I try to access them from another PC where I don't have account access and was sure they worked. Will get that fixed this morning.

Some answers: Yeah, PNS was in the last round. It's right near the top and is probably my preferred sealant based on application and longevity. Although the top ~5 or so are all excellent. Will work on a beading test. So far haven't been able to see a difference - not sure what I'm doing wrong. I'll re-test P808 and a couple of others to be sure it's not an application issues. Will try Brilliant Shine.

[RippyD]

Last few animations should be working now.

Rover hood left side May 8

Rover hood middle May 8

Rover hood right side May 8

Sentra hood still hanging on with three QDs applied. The DG rinseless as QD still outperforming the others. I washed with N-914 @ 256:1 then dried before testing. These are all still working, surprisingly. Although the middle one (FC&S + AW) is close enough that I can call it done. Marginally better than nothing at this point.

Sentra hood May 11

[RippyD]

I tried several times to get beading shots - not having any luck and am looking for advice. Here's what I'm seeing:

• Hose or rain: I get large beads with no apparent difference. I can usually make out tape lines, so there's clearly some difference, but nothing obviously between product ares.
• Hand pump sprayer: Can't see any difference in beads. Tape lines show up and tend to disappear between products that aren't sheeting well. Beading sizes may be different between products.
• Pressure sprayer (Kwazar): Gets a very fine mist that I allow to float onto the surface. Similar results to a pump sprayer: I can see tape lines - beading is just slightly larger, and they disappear between products not working well. But no obvious differences on the product areas.

Is there a better way to test this? Hoping I'm missing something obvious.

btw, I read one manufacturer's take on how to measure sealant durability and effectiveness (not linking because it's not a product sold here). The like to use beading and sheeting as a measure. For beading, their opinion is that you need to measure the height, contact angle, and diameter of beads. They acknowledge that paint with no product will also bead water. I may need to get close-up shots and compare side by side. I'd not seeing my difference with my eye.[LIST]

[SWETM]

Like you tested a pump spray on a very fine mist setting. And spray to just before it's starts to sheet and hold the bottle as long as possible away. It's hard to do and it's takes some tries before it's satisfieng. A problem could be when you have such many different test spots and they starts to sheeting differently. Maybe concentrate to one spot at the time. But will be time consuming to do.

[Cruzscarwash]

I tried several times to get beading shots - not having any luck and am looking for advice. Here's what I'm seeing:

• Hose or rain: I get large beads with no apparent difference. I can usually make out tape lines, so there's clearly some difference, but nothing obviously between product ares.
• Hand pump sprayer: Can't see any difference in beads. Tape lines show up and tend to disappear between products that aren't sheeting well. Beading sizes may be different between products.
• Pressure sprayer (Kwazar): Gets a very fine mist that I allow to float onto the surface. Similar results to a pump sprayer: I can see tape lines - beading is just slightly larger, and they disappear between products not working well. But no obvious differences on the product areas.

Is there a better way to test this? Hoping I'm missing something obvious.

btw, I read one manufacturer's take on how to measure sealant durability and effectiveness (not linking because it's not a product sold here). The like to use beading and sheeting as a measure. For beading, their opinion is that you need to measure the height, contact angle, and diameter of beads. They acknowledge that paint with no product will also bead water. I may need to get close-up shots and compare side by side. I'd not seeing my difference with my eye.[LIST]

Contact angle has always been a measure. Which is why it's common to see a 110 contact angle on many coating descriptions.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Cruzscarwash]

I've gotten good shots with a pressure washer, go to a coin op of you don't have one, put walk as far as astue hose will take you and shoot the water up at an angle to the hood and let the very fine mist find its way to the hood.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk