Best beading product?

[EddieVDetailing]

I just don’t think UV is a good indicator for northern climates.... never had issues with high spots or it being grabby (CanCoat) but again or environments may very (temp, humidity)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Disagree. Even when cloudy, UV gets through. All paint is exposed to UV. The only instance where what you’re telling me matters is where somebody babies their car, parks in a garage and drives at night in oily and salty roads.

[EddieVDetailing]

This is one guy I would not consider or reference for any detailing advice.



You're right. Most of these products don't do anything for UV. Dimitry's Garage actually has a decent way to measure UV and there is nothing impressive on any product he's tested. He is the only one that I know of that is doing anything like this.

Other than whack APC torture tests and gloss meters.

You misunderstand what I said. Everyone knows coatings are too thin to block UV rays. I would guess that your clearcoat is still getting damaged by UV rays and depending on the coating, the coating may also get damaged as the clear itself changes. All cars are exposed to UV/sun/heat. Just because a coating can withstand salty roads doesn’t mean it is any better… it just gives a very short illusion that it is. If it fails just due to sun exposure, that is a big fail in my book.

[Coatingsarecrack]

Disagree. Even when cloudy, UV gets through. All paint is exposed to UV. The only instance where what you’re telling me matters is where somebody babies their car, parks in a garage and drives at night in oily and salty roads.

Hardly ever see overly oxidized cars in northwest.... you do see rust....

The only instance these video’s you seem to think are gospel matter are if i park my car out in a back yard and never drive it and only dust and uv’s are affecting it.

It’s weird you choose this soap box to stand on. Also people on here who have a been here a while and contribute alot here don’t see it the way you see it.

You make 20 posts touting Megs HPC and how theres nothing like it (tons of polysiloxane products, Kamikaze OverCoat....). and disagree with everyone and don’t get why people don’t agree with you.

There’s been tons of discussions about The testing of YouTube influencers (including your boy Scotty) and what the overall consensus is.

People have already form there grown folks opinions and you poppin on with your opinions aint going to change there.



Again noone has a problem with the Megs paint coating.... you seem to have issues with people not agreeing it is the best ever or that Scott’s tests are Gospel....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Coatingsarecrack]

Lastly you base your finding on CanCoat on one Scott HD video. You have a ton of people who have had real world experience with CanCoat.

Those include The Guz and BudgetPlan1. Both are highly respected in the Detailing community and have gave glowing reviews of CanCoat.

There opinions are going to hold WAY more weight than any video’s, testing or opinions from ScottHD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EddieVDetailing]

Lastly you base your finding on CanCoat on one Scott HD video. You have a ton of people who have had real world experience with CanCoat.

Those include The Guz and BudgetPlan1. Both are highly respected in the Detailing community and have gave glowing reviews of CanCoat.

There opinions are going to hold WAY more weight than any video’s, testing or opinions from ScottHD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Never said it was gospel. I just trust actual documented evidence over opinions based on anecdotal evidence.

detailers have no control over how their customers treat and use their cars. No insight to how it’s driven, how often it’s washed, where it’s driven. To make assumptions as a detailer based on what they see…. It’s all up for interpretation.

[BudgetPlan1]

so I still don’t get how you don’t think Scott’s tests are relevant or representative. You’re saying there are tougher conditions than just a resting hood in the sun. Granted, Scott’s test should be the MINIMUM requirement for a product to last. If Ammo Reflex Pro or Chemical Guys Hydroslick can’t make it past 6 months from just sitting in the sun, then for sure it won’t last on an actual driven car. Scott’s tests for me screen out the bad products. There are no true “5 year coatings” if they can’t even last a year on a panel sitting outside.

I really don’t get why people are so dismissive of the testing.

I dunno, I think my dismissal of the practical value of these tests lies in the presentation and 'marketing' of them as the universal overall judgement of product value based on the singular situation they did or didn't do well in.

Many cite this test (and others) as validation of 'this is a great product' because it did well within the limited scope of a static test in a specific climate (which is not necesarily the same as 'this is better than that', an unfortunate side effect of putting many products next to each other).

Maybe they should come with a disclaimer of "Results of this test may or may not be an indication of actual overall performance". It's not really a flaw in the testing itself but rather the perception of it being a complete and accurate judgement of actual long term results in the real world.

Interesting discussion regardless of differing viewpoints; variety is the spice of life and what this whole ball 'o wax does show is that different users, different situations sometimes leads to different results.

Caveat Emptor.

[Coatingsarecrack]

Never said it was gospel. I just trust actual documented evidence over opinions based on anecdotal evidence.

detailers have no control over how their customers treat and use their cars. No insight to how it’s driven, how often it’s washed, where it’s driven. To make assumptions as a detailer based on what they see…. It’s all up for interpretation.

So the thoughts and recommendations of people who have actually used products for months on real cars that get driven are anecdotal evidence? Been documented on this forum.

Some guy puts it on a hood sittin in his back yard in Texas is documented evidence...... guess well just agree to disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EddieVDetailing]

So the thoughts and recommendations of people who have actually used products for months on real cars that get driven are anecdotal evidence? Been documented on this forum.

Some guy puts it on a hood sittin in his back yard in Texas is documented evidence...... guess well just agree to disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitely anecdotal evidence. Do you know what anecdotal means? What if every single car you put a coating on are garage queens, driven 5 miles a week? You see those car a year later, and they all look just as good as they did day 1? Obviously you know why. Someone who is willing to spend money on a good ceramic coating obviously will baby their car for the most part. At least with Scott’s tests you have multiple data points on a relatively controlled and trackable environment.

Saying you have a bunch of experience with a coating literally means nothing because you aren’t controlling or documenting the major variables that can mess up a coating.

[Coatingsarecrack]

Definitely anecdotal evidence. Do you know what anecdotal means? What if every single car you put a coating on are garage queens, driven 5 miles a week? You see those car a year later, and they all look just as good as they did day 1? Obviously you know why. Someone who is willing to spend money on a good ceramic coating obviously will baby their car for the most part. At least with Scott’s tests you have multiple data points on a relatively controlled and trackable environment.

Saying you have a bunch of experience with a coating literally means nothing because you aren’t controlling or documenting the major variables that can mess up a coating.

You give a bunch of what ifs….. what if Scott doesn’t use the actual product. What if he applies it wrong what if racoons pee on it everynight.

Scott doesn’t get payed from the manufacturer but gets paid from his viewers and YouTube. Would it not benefit for him to find the latest and greatest to keep viewers interested.

So maybe he reapply’s product nightly in order to get diamond in the rough and the new latest and greatest?


We get check ins every couple if months without knowing whats going in with the hood? Sounds “anecdotal” with pictures to me.

The people here give there actual reviews. Most when they do are using the product alot of times post reviews and use on there video’s

I think you are just sad/frustrated because you say this product is so amazing with no actual review or pics. (anecdotal? You didn’t bring Scott into it till you got push back) and got luke warm reception.

Then you bring Scotts video (anecdotal) which probably has less validity then your anecdote on this site.

The thing is as a Scott Fan you believe in his words and trust what he does behind the sceens more than the folks on AG. I and most here do not.

Scott makes money from his video’s and the people here do not. I trust in that. He “outted” Pan…. Why? To get more interest in his “honest testing”. Sounds like a snake oil sales pitch to

. I’m not trying to change your views as I understand that I can’t. So again I’ll leave it at we’ll agree to disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EddieVDetailing]

You give a bunch of what ifs….. what if Scott doesn’t use the actual product. What if he applies it wrong what if racoons pee on it everynight.

Scott doesn’t get payed from the manufacturer but gets paid from his viewers and YouTube. Would it not benefit for him to find the latest and greatest to keep viewers interested.

So maybe he reapply’s product nightly in order to get diamond in the rough and the new latest and greatest?


We get check ins every couple if months without knowing whats going in with the hood? Sounds “anecdotal” with pictures to me.

The people here give there actual reviews. Most when they do are using the product alot of times post reviews and use on there video’s

I think you are just sad/frustrated because you say this product is so amazing with no actual review or pics. (anecdotal? You didn’t bring Scott into it till you got push back) and got luke warm reception.

Then you bring Scotts video (anecdotal) which probably has less validity then your anecdote on this site.

The thing is as a Scott Fan you believe in his words and trust what he does behind the sceens more than the folks on AG. I and most here do not.

Scott makes money from his video’s and the people here do not. I trust in that. He “outted” Pan…. Why? To get more interest in his “honest testing”. Sounds like a snake oil sales pitch to

. I’m not trying to change your views as I understand that I can’t. So again I’ll leave it at we’ll agree to disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

we’ve gone way past the “hybrid paint coating” is a good product discussion and have gone into conspiracy territory. I get it. People have been pushing X product to last X years based on everyone’s “experience” with it. It really sucks to find out the product can’t even last in the sun for a few months, so of course everyone is going to try and discredit a test. Honestly don’t really care about the Meguiar’s product because at the end of the day, people end up reading a label and make up their minds based on if the package says X years and XH hardness.

my opinion is anecdotal as is yours. But I can see many people struggle with the definition of objective vs subjective. To me personally, Scott is doing a good job especially when people go out of their way to discredit what looks to be the most objective side-by-side on YouTube.