Ceramiclear Paints - Be Careful

[Rix6]

From a painting standpoint,. you cannot blend these either. These are found on high end Mercedes and BMW that I know of for sure. Whats interesting is that many shops that have to do repair on these paints, use a standard clear.

Interestingly enough, one of the approved refinishing paint systems for Infiniti self-healing paint (the softest clear coat known to man?) is...PPG Ceramiclear!

From Dr. Ghodoussi...

After the "cerami"clear top coat is sprayed, the nano particles of Fumed Silica (SiO2), which are synthetically engineered, migrate to the top 0.2 mils of the clear coat as it is curing.

If you remove this potion of the clear layer of paint, the paint under it will be much softer and will not polish out or react the same way the nano particle portion did or would.
You will at some level have compromised the the finish on the car.

Or, maybe after removing the crunchy ceramic/resin composite outer layer you are left with...Infiniti self-healing surprise!

Is this similar to the paint (scratch resistant) that Infiniti used a few years ago? This paint was giving detailers nightmares. They nicknamed it "sticky paint".

Yes, it was supposed to be the next best thing to sliced bread and it turned out to be a horrible mistake. Here's a thread here about it..

Swirls on '08 Infiniti G37s - Self-Healing Paint ?

But opposite phisosophys, no? Ceramiclear, proactive (hard). Self-healing, reactive (soft).

Maybe I'm missing the point here--is the point not to remove the "ceramic" portion of the clear because then you've removed the whole point of putting it on the car? Or is the point that after you've removed it that the remaining clear is horrendously soft? I don't see how the "underneath" part could be any harder to correct than Ceramiclear unless it's "sticky" or horrendously soft like that BMW jet black.

I think it's #1, removing the potential benefit the paint is supposed to offer. However, I imagine as one gets closer and closer to removing the ceramic layer, at some point you're probably going to break through in some areas and not in others and the different properties of the paint will be at odds with each other unless you are able to remove all the ceramic layer...and then you've just removed a minimum of 0.2 mils of clear.

Dr. Ghodoussi said this is an example of over-engineering.

I agree. The paint systems on new cars should not be rocket science for detailers or even car owners to work on. Daily drivers see wear-n-tear and the way wear-n-tear, (swirls, scratches, water spots and oxidation), is addressed is to abrade the surface using some type of compounding and/or polishing process.

What will it take for car manufacturers to adopt the wise teachings of Goldilocks and the Three Bears? This paint is too hard (Mercedes), this paint is too soft (Infiniti), and this paint is just right (an extra thick layer of normal clear).

Personally speaking (not that I know a whole lot what I'm talking about here), I like the sound of an extra thick layer of whatever Corvettes are clear-coated with.


-Rick

[umi000]

I guess it can be a problem when you've dialed in a pad and product combination, but then because you go through the ceramic layer, suddenly your combo is too aggressive and is taking off too much clear, leaving behind substantial marring, or maybe both.

[Setec Astronomy]

I imagine as one gets closer and closer to removing the ceramic layer, at some point you're probably going to break through in some areas and not in others and the different properties of the paint will be at odds with each other unless you are able to remove all the ceramic layer.

I guess it can be a problem when you've dialed in a pad and product combination, but then because you go through the ceramic layer, suddenly your combo is too aggressive and is taking off too much clear, leaving behind substantial marring, or maybe both.

Oh...that sounds right, thanks guys.

[FUNX650]

Re: Ceramiclear Paints - Be Careful

From what I've seen and heard...The above topic regarding "being careful" probably should apply to any 'correction methods' (compounding/polishing, for example) to any of today's BC/CC paint systems.
That is: removal of a small percentage of clear-coat paint will remove a larger percentage of whatever built-in UV protection, hardeners, etc. that lies in the upper strata of the CC paint film.

There is supposed to be UV protection and hardneners throughout the CC paint, but the majority, just as these discussed 'ceramic particles', is supposed to migrate to the top of CC paint. If this is indeed true, then the removal of more than what is known and recommended by the OEM's paint engineers (usually 0.3-.05 mils) might also be considered as cautionary.

Again if this is true...Along with the CC's 'protectors' being compromised, will the underlying/remainder CC paint film also be less dense/softer? Have the paint manufacturers, working in conjunction with the OEM's paint engineers, actually say this is so...

IMO...Each OEM has their proprietary paint systems; and, with the OEM's trying to find ways to make a few more dollars on each vehicle, (especially with the paint processes getting 'thinner and thinner'), removal-processes of any measurable CC paint, for correction purposes, seems to becoming more and more of a burden to perform without supposedly compromising the expected life-cycle of vehicles' BC/CC paint systems.




Bob

[CEE DOG]

Excellent info and article Mike. Thank you!

[Mike Phillips]

IMO...Each OEM has their proprietary paint systems; and, with the OEM's trying to find ways to make a few more dollars on each vehicle, (especially with the paint processes getting 'thinner and thinner'),


Bob

The top coat, that's the part we can work on, is too thin already and the trend is always for thinner top coats, not thicker top coats. This may save the manufacturers money but it makes maintaining a car's finish difficult considering wear-n-tear is normal.

Wear-n-tear = below surface defects

Correction/Maintaining = removing below surface defects

The only rant I personally ever go on is this exact topic, that is factory paint is too thin. As expressed in post 14 of this thread...


http://www.autogeekonline.net/forum/...failure-2.html


All each of us can do is educate ourselves, educate our friends and family members, educate our customers and always use the least aggressive methods when doing an correction work and maintaining automotive finishes.

I do encourage anyone I deal with getting a custom paint job to ask for an extra coat or two of paint and be prepared to pay for it if the car in question is important.

[Impressions]

I believe to date on Maybach, Mercedes, and BMW use the ceramiclear paint. Likely due to the cost, and supposedly only on their high line models. Any other models ??

WOW........just looked at correcting a transporter installed scratch option on a brand new Maybach 62c in black, I think I'm gonna take Mike's advice and RUN

Great information Mike.......keep it coming

[WRAPT C5Z06]

WOW........just looked at correcting a transporter installed scratch option on a brand new Maybach 62c in black, I think I'm gonna take Mike's advice and RUN

Great information Mike.......keep it coming

I'm not sure I want to touch cerimiclear clear coats from now on either!

[Impressions]

I would imagine that polishing would be less invasive to the paint so I'm sure you could get away with that a couple of times.

Just need to try to get cars history.....like thats gonna happen

[RaskyR1]

Re: Ceramiclear Paints - Be Careful

From what I've seen and heard...The above topic regarding "being careful" probably should apply to any 'correction methods' (compounding/polishing, for example) to any of today's BC/CC paint systems.
That is: removal of a small percentage of clear-coat paint will remove a larger percentage of whatever built-in UV protection, hardeners, etc. that lies in the upper strata of the CC paint film.

There is supposed to be UV protection and hardneners throughout the CC paint, but the majority, just as these discussed 'ceramic particles', is supposed to migrate to the top of CC paint. If this is indeed true, then the removal of more than what is known and recommended by the OEM's paint engineers (usually 0.3-.05 mils) might also be considered as cautionary.

Again if this is true...Along with the CC's 'protectors' being compromised, will the underlying/remainder CC paint film also be less dense/softer? Have the paint manufacturers, working in conjunction with the OEM's paint engineers, actually say this is so...

IMO...Each OEM has their proprietary paint systems; and, with the OEM's trying to find ways to make a few more dollars on each vehicle, (especially with the paint processes getting 'thinner and thinner'), removal-processes of any measurable CC paint, for correction purposes, seems to becoming more and more of a burden to perform without supposedly compromising the expected life-cycle of vehicles' BC/CC paint systems.




Bob

Some more about that in this thread...