Graphene Detail Spray vs Ceramic Detail Spray: Is Graphene that much better?

[Coatingsarecrack]

Here's a thought. Why do you think none of the big players (CarPro, Gyeon, Gtechiniq, etc) have put out products with Graphene in the formula? Because it's a marketing gimmick with no value.

All these companies out there rushing to take their previous formulas and dump some graphene oxide powder in the bottle and pretend it's a superior product, just to make a new sale.

Keep using what you liked, the SiO2 formulas were game changes, Graphene is not and will eventually pass. That is until they actually have a way to produce a true graphene coating and not just add powder to a ceramic formula hoping it will make it much better.

Yes agreed. While Gtechniq came out with nothing new Carpro’s and Gyeon released new coatings while Graphene is in full hype.

CarPro chose to us Silicon Carbide while Gyeon chose Fluoro Polysilazane. 2 ingredients that do what the want in these new coatings. If Graphene did what the wanted as it would connect better with the masses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BudgetPlan1]

Here's a thought. Why do you think none of the big players (CarPro, Gyeon, Gtechiniq, etc) have put out products with Graphene in the formula? Because it's a marketing gimmick with no value.

All these companies out there rushing to take their previous formulas and dump some graphene oxide powder in the bottle and pretend it's a superior product, just to make a new sale.

Keep using what you liked, the SiO2 formulas were game changes, Graphene is not and will eventually pass. That is until they actually have a way to produce a true graphene coating and not just add powder to a ceramic formula hoping it will make it much better.

This pretty much sums it up for me. When the heavy hitters in the coating space buy in, *that* will say something.

[The Guz]

Here's a thought. Why do you think none of the big players (CarPro, Gyeon, Gtechiniq, etc) have put out products with Graphene in the formula? Because it's a marketing gimmick with no value.

The same thing was said about ceramic coatings and look where we are now. Only time will tell if graphene will stick around. By the way IGL and Kamikaze have adopted graphene into their product line up. They are both pretty big players in the coating market. More so worldwide than the states.

CarPro, Gyeon, Gtechniq Optimum, etc are sticking with what they know and improving their formula. Why not? It works and in the end they will evolve their product to perform well. Stick to what you know is pretty common and perhaps it may come back to bite them in the backside whether its graphene or not. Only time will tell.

All these companies out there rushing to take their previous formulas and dump some graphene oxide powder in the bottle and pretend it's a superior product, just to make a new sale.

As much as I and others like to play chemist I would say that it is much more than just adding graphene powder. That is just the take of a few probably because this is what they were using at the time. Only the chemist knows what it is truly going on.

Keep using what you liked, the SiO2 formulas were game changes, Graphene is not and will eventually pass. That is until they actually have a way to produce a true graphene coating and not just add powder to a ceramic formula hoping it will make it much better.

Again only time will tell if Graphene goes the way of Teflon. For now graphene oxide is as good as it gets. Still a ceramic coating at its core just a different technology. No different than a titanium dioxide (TiO2) silicon carbide (SiC) coatings or whatever other infusions we have seen.

Yes agreed. While Gtechniq came out with nothing new Carpro’s and Gyeon released new coatings while Graphene is in full hype.

CarPro chose to us Silicon Carbide while Gyeon chose Fluoro Polysilazane. 2 ingredients that do what the want in these new coatings. If Graphene did what the wanted as it would connect better with the masses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fluoro Polysilozanes does not make the coating fluorine based so keep that in mind. The Gyeon coatings are "ceramics" as is CarPro SiC. Here is one to think about, how much SiC is in CarPrio SiC to officially call it a silicon carbide coating? Their TiO2 coating was only like 10% of the ceramic formula. I suspect SiC to be the same. It literally feels like the same coating as TIO2.

Only time will tell if Graphene is hype or if it will survive and continue to evolve.

This pretty much sums it up for me. When the heavy hitters in the coating space buy in, *that* will say something.

IGL and Kamikaze have gone all in and they are pretty heavy hitters in the coating world. Will they get burned by the adopting of graphene? Who knows.

Good topic to speak about but in the end time will dictate where it goes.

Thanks for the suggestion. I did see the Detailing Breakdown comparing the two products. He felt like the hydrophobic properties of the original was slightly better than the graphene version. But he did not measure gloss or durability. I am inclined to stick with the original.

It is a spray. Who cares about the durability when you can just use it as often as you like. Get the one you feel gets you the best performance regardless of the cost. If you see more benefit from the graphene one then get that. If not then stick with what you know works.

Gloss like slickness is all based on each persons definition. I could say X product is slicker, glossier and durable than product Y and someone else can see it the other way around. All a different perception.

Good topic in this thread.

[BudgetPlan1]

Good topic in this thread.

As you say, only time will tell if graphene becomes a functionally relevant component of a coating solution. As it stands now, even the initial promises (strength, decreased water spotting, lower surface temps, etc.) remain consistently unproven; and how would they even be relevant in the glass cleaners, tire coatings, wash shampoos, etc. that have arrived with the word 'graphene' on the label?

It seems the initial flurry of graphene has waned a bit in a functional sense, promises of true revolutionary behaviors faded over it's so-far young life in the detailing space.

As you mention, the 'big guys' have stuff that works well for them as it stands...if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But I gotta think that if they can find something that truly works better, they'll evolve into it lest they be left behind should the true benefits be actually proven significantly better...whatever 'better' may turn out to be.

On the other hand, sometimes it takes a small upstart to turn the established norm on its ear; if I recall, IBM sold/licensed Bill Gates MS-DOS for a pittance as they believed their mainframe monopoly would never be challenged and Gates took MS-DOS and eventually spawned Windows...oops!

I don't think anyone currently producing graphene products will necesarily suffer; if it proves worthy they might be a step ahead, if not the products will either continue on as part of their lineup, evolve into the next generation of 'stuff' or merely fade away as subsequent formulations are released.

Should be fun to watch regardless...

[Coatingsarecrack]

Fluoro Polysilozanes does not make the coating fluorine based so keep that in mind. The Gyeon coatings are "ceramics" as is CarPro SiC. Here is one to think about, how much SiC is in CarPrio SiC to officially call it a silicon carbide coating? Their TiO2 coating was only like 10% of the ceramic formula. I suspect SiC to be the same. It literally feels like the same coating as TIO2.

Only time will tell if Graphene is hype or if it will survive and continue to evolve.

Yeah from what i understand SiC has both. I didn’t see any Sio2 in the Msds for Mohs but i trust you if you say it.

I stated this because this is the route they decided to move with coatings. The feel it works. If Graphene were making a difference in the coating woprd they would use it, Gyeon has stated as much.

Graphene as it is being use now doesn’t make a difference. It does not work in the way it does work in a coating. That science is not there. Time will not tell that graphene as used now is making a difference.

Time will allow the science to get stronger and if we see a graphene coating that does change the game it will be a totally different science.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CleanIT]

From what I've read I suspect that graphene isn't providing the customer what they think it is. It's the other components creating the gloss/water behavior etc. Being there is more than one additive system to get you to your end result, I see graphene as just another way to do so. I have to wonder if some companies jumped on it simply because "the others are".

Where is PiPUK?

[glen e]

I don’t buy the graphene is a scam, I think it works, I can tell a difference. And I don’t consider 303 or adams to be shlock companies they would just do something to get a marketing angle. To each his own. The only thing I don’t like about it is that it stains my towels and applicator… So I’ve relegated a few to “graphene only”….

[dgage]

I don’t buy the graphene is a scam, I think it works, I can tell a difference. And I don’t consider 303 or adams to be shlock companies they would just do something to get a marketing angle. To each his own. The only thing I don’t like about it is that it stains my towels and applicator… So I’ve relegated a few to “graphene only”….

Adam’s to me seems like a flashy marketing company. They put their name on a lot of products (polishers, pressure washers, etc), some that are good and some less so. I think that was due to the investment group that purchased them. Will be interesting to see if that changes under Recochem but it has already been 1.5 years and no real difference to me. I have thought of purchasing some of their products such as the Graphene Advanced Sealant Spray and Graphene Tire but inconsistent reviews and the whole graphene in everything hasn’t made me pull the trigger yet.

[BudgetPlan1]

From what I've read I suspect that graphene isn't providing the customer what they think it is. It's the other components creating the gloss/water behavior etc.

Perhaps. From Albert Yow (Art d Shine/SPS)

Water repellent capabilities do not come from the use of rGO and can be seen in our marketing materials and information. A very high polymer (PDMS) content is used to achieve the better water-repellent effects. The polymer has been functionalized to provide much better water repellent capabilities.

So the question remains, what exactly does the graphene bring to the table?

[The Guz]

Perhaps. From Albert Yow (Art d Shine/SPS)



So the question remains, what exactly does the graphene bring to the table?

Would be interesting to hear what Chris from B&B has to say based on their technology as it’s more than likely different that Artdeshine.