Iron Removers?

[tpr1634]

when in doubt, the one that has a proven track record would be iron-x. all the carpro products i've used have been top notch...

I'll second that....................

[Mask]

I had use iron x with excellent result.
I also notice this tacsystem Korea site which look interesting

Regards

[swanicyouth]

I realize IronX is the most potent iron remover on the market, but I loathe cleaning wheels with it because it doesn't foam up or have any "lube" to it when you agitate it.

I much prefer using Dub or ColourTec for wheels.

For paint I prefer AF Iron Out or Iron X.

[HUMP DIESEL]

I may be in a different boat, but I usually clean the wheels with a wheel cleaner or P21S Total Auto Wash first and then go back and use Iron X or Iron Out after to pull any embedded iron particles. Maybe I am different.

HUMP

[tersplat]

DUB works great on paint. This is on a 2003 Mercury Grand Marquis. I'm fairly certain it had never had a fallout remover used on it, and I had this on hand, so I tried it.

[Supergus1]

I appreciate the replies everyone. Let me just clarify that I would be applying the product on my paint. I wasn't necessarily talking about wheels. Thanks again.

[BrightonAD]

I've used all 3, and I think I like carpro ferrex the best. It definitely smells the best out of the 3 and is less expensive as well. They all perform pretty much the same, and all work very well. The dodo juice triggers on their small bottles are a joke though, and all have since broke.

[Supergus1]

I've used all 3, and I think I like carpro ferrex the best. It definitely smells the best out of the 3 and is less expensive as well. They all perform pretty much the same, and all work very well. The dodo juice triggers on their small bottles are a joke though, and all have since broke.

Did you mean to say you like Carpro IronX or Optimum FerreX the best?

[PiPUK]

PiPUK, please may I tap into your chemical knowledge for a second.... is the ingredient that actually 'dissolves' the iron, the same ingredient that makes it change purple/red (or is this another ingredient all together, and if so, does it in any way alter the efficacy of the product).

The same ingredient does the dissolving and the colour change. This active ingredient is colourless when in the form supplied but the purple/red when it combines with the iron. In actual fact, this is a recognised test for the presence of iron in chemical testing.

A product like this SHOULD change colour in the presence of iron (I should note, that it is only specific forms of the iron!), that is simply how the active ingredient works. A lack of colour change should indicate that there is no iron present, that something is blocking the active ingredient getting to the iron, or there is something else in there which is also acting on the iron but has a stronger bond to the iron that the 'smelly' active. The 'blocking' could be some sort of film or something over the surface and the product itself is not sufficient to break this down (this would strike me as strange). The additional components possibility would not surprise me. I know that Sonax, for instance, uses other ingredients which would also dissolve iron. Personally, I think that this is a bit of a questionable approach. Yes, those other additives are going to be massively cheaper (like 10 times, or more) but the limitation on the bleed can end up with users questioning effectiveness. So, in the end, such a product is actually trying to use the bleeding active as a secondary element so you are, indeed, ending up with a product which is, functionally, a NON-bleeding cleaner with a bit of additive in there to try to make it bleed. I am not saying that is the case with any specific product but it strikes me as highly plausible that a product which proves very effective in removing the iron yet which claims to be 'bleeding' and proves to bleed rather little, may well be of this type.

[lawrenceSA]

Thanks for your response - much appreciated