What’s the deal with layering? When, when not too….

[nan_wpg]

So Ivan from optimum says be careful when layering. Wax will take off wax, sealer takes off sealer. Wax can go over sealer…..sometimes.

jescar power lock can layer on itself after 3 hours. Collinite can on top after 3 hours.

collinite can be topped with itself after 12 hours.

meguiars 21 cannot be topped with anything, even itself.

are there any chemists here that can tell me what determines if a sealant or wax can be topped?

I know you can use beadmaker/meguiars spray wax as a topper for anything. I use these products after a wash as a drying aid and “booster”.

[Loach]

Tough question, I would also greatly assume this is something that can be paint dependent, it just depends on how well your specific paint is able to hold on to the protectants you`re applying. I`m certainly not a chemist but I always like to point out this thread whenever the concept of layering comes up. FinstP was able to perform thickness measurements in various layering style tests using lab grade silicon wafers measured with an ellipsometer. His thread is certainly a good read through, I wish he was still active on the forums to perform follow up tests, especially with resin based coatings:

See post from Detailing World Forum posted below. Link removed.

In his thread illustrates a number of key concepts. The most significant to me of which is this: Just performing follow-up dry buffing is enough to force the total thickness layer of the wax to reach a consistent minimum level. So even though the additional "layers" or reapplications of wax to the surface can possibly increase the total thickness levels (and lower it in some cases), the substrate is only really holding onto a certain amount before the excess is eventually removed likely through washing and/or wiping.

Look further into the results as well where he tests using different prep products to try and remove the fresh wax from the surface, with Acetone being the one product to measure back down to 0 (full removal of the wax), and ethanol and iso-propanol still leaving measurable thickness levels of wax behind (ethanol certainly decreasing the thickness below the 5.6nm threshold, showcasing partial removal).

So now what happens when you try to take one wax, and layer with a different paste wax? Is the solvent in the new wax enough to do some damage to the original bonded layer when you spread it on top, can that original layer even handle the physical application method of applying the new wax on top with the applicator pad? And if anything does survive is it even providing any sort of measurable benefit? These questions are relevant, and the idea of going from something like Power Lock and immediately topping it with Collinite 845, I have to question the survival of Power Lock to whatever extent and this is why I don`t recommend using two products that are designed to be main protectants and applying them right after the other. My goal would be to select the best main protectant, and maintain this over the months with one lighter spray topper to keep the base clean and healthy until your next polishing session.

Now I have seen instances where two applications of the main protectant has strengthened the hydrophobic effect or made it much more consistent across the paint compared to one layer. Even in instances where I can guarantee full coverage on the first layer, there`s some paint that benefits from a multi-application approach. The latest product that I tested where I saw this to a large degree is Gyeon Wax. Collinite I have also noticed this in some tests, and even the latest Ultimate Quik Wax as a spray I have seen a more beneficial result in the short-term with a dual application compared to just a solo application. Which products do this would be difficult to test for sure, and likely paint dependent.

More Results on Wax layers, and how easily they are removed!

To recap, I previously applied layers of Collinite using a damp microfibre cloth to clean silicon wafers and allowed to haze dry before buffing with a clean microfibre cloth.
The wax thickness was estimated from accurate measurements of the refectance over a broad wavelength range (400 to 1100 nm)..
(The refractive index of the dried wax layer was previously estimated by fitting ellipsometry results.)
The rig used ensures that the silicon wafers are replaced in the same position so that subsequent measurements are from the same place on the wafer.
A previous post shows how the thickness varies over the 6 inch wafer surface.
For information, If I repeat the measurement without moving the wafer, then the stability of the equipment is such that I will get the same thickness (+- 0.1 nm) over and over again.
If I remove the wafer from the rig and then replace it, I can get the same thickness again with a variation of no more than +-0.2 nm.
The results shown in these posts are therefore due to real changes in the wax thicknesses.


Well, the idea today was to add a third layer of wax (Collinite no 915) to four silicon wafers that had previously been coated with 2 wax layers (see previous posts).
Before doing this I thought it would be a good idea to remeasure the wafers to see if 24 hours ageing had made any difference to the existing layers.

Here are the results along with yesterday`s results:-

Wafer 1:
Thickness after first application: 22.7 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 18.8 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 15.3 nm


Wafer 2:
Thickness after first application: 20.6 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 23.8 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 22.5 nm

Wafer 3:
Thickness after first application: 15.9 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 25.0 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 24.9 nm

Wafer 4:
Thickness after first application: 16.9 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 27.8 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 26.7 nm

So - a slightly larger variation from wafer 1, but overall around 4% loss.

Now I applied a third layer with the damp microfibre, waited 10 minutes and buffed with a clean, dry microfibre cloth.
To make it easier to compare, I show the results above once more, along with the new thicknesses.

Wafer 1:
Thickness after first application: 22.7 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 18.8 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 15.3 nm
Thickness after 3rd application: 22.1 nm

Wafer 2:
Thickness after first application: 20.6 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 23.8 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 22.5 nm
Thickness after 3rd application: 17.0 nm

Wafer 3:
Thickness after first application: 15.9 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 25.0 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 24.9 nm
Thickness after 3rd application: 20.1 nm

Wafer 4:
Thickness after first application: 16.9 nm
Thickness after 2nd application: 27.8 nm
Remeasured 24 hours later: thickness = 26.7 nm
Thickness after 3rd application: 21.5 nm

The results were a bit surprising; wafer1 gained, but the other three lost thickness!
I think you detailers will like the next bit!
Today I`m sure that I wasn`t quite as constant with the buffing effort that I applied to the wafers as I had been on the previous two days
and it does seem (for this product anyway) that the final thickness depends crucially on how much pressure is applied in buffing.

To test this I tried re-buffing around the measurement area with clean parts of a dry microfibre cloth.
This time I tried to be consistent with the number of rubs and the pressure applied each time (as far as is possible manually)

The realy interesting thing is that each time I rubbed the area, I removed product - down to a fairly stable minimum of around 6 nm!
A typical result (I did this on several diffeent areas) was :-
Initial wax thickness = 20.1 nm
Light re-buff, remaining wax thickness = 14.9 nm
Light re-buff, remaining wax thickness = 7.3 nm
Light re-buff, remaining wax thickness = 5.8 nm
Light re-buff, remaining wax thickness = 5.8 nm
Light re-buff, remaining wax thickness = 5.6 nm. Looking at the clock, it`s getting near to 6:30 pm so -
Heavy re-buff, remaining wax thickness = 5.6 nm!

OK, having seen this interesting result, I thought I may as well look at the effect of wiping over with a solvent laden cloth.Again this might be of interest to people here.
Note that I am using pure, reagent grade, solvents, uncontaminated by impurities, oils etc.

1)Initial wax thickness:- 18.0 nm
Wipe with ethanol, remaining thickness = 4.5 nm
Re-wipe with ethanol, remaining thickness = 4.0 nm

2)Initial thickness:- 24.2 nm
Wipe with iso-propanol, remaining thickness = 7.2 nm
This solvent left a distinct haze over the wiped area, so I stopped here.

3) Initial thickness:- 22.2 nm
Wipe with acetone, remaining thickness = 0.0 nm !
Note, acetone is a constituent of nail varnich remover, but that product also contains oils etc

That`s all for today - some controversial (I`m sure) statements based on this series of measurements tomorrow!

[William_Wallace]

Dope answer above! wax and sealant layering has best shot of working if the wax does not contain harsh solvents or if is a fine natural based wax like p21. I made out best using sealant and water based spray waxes because the did not effect the durability of the sealant I’d like to think.

[wannafbody]

I think it depends on the particular polymer chains and the solvents.

[The Guz]

So Ivan from optimum says be careful when layering. Wax will take off wax, sealer takes off sealer. Wax can go over sealer…..sometimes.

jescar power lock can layer on itself after 3 hours. Collinite can on top after 3 hours.

collinite can be topped with itself after 12 hours.

meguiars 21 cannot be topped with anything, even itself.

are there any chemists here that can tell me what determines if a sealant or wax can be topped?

I know you can use beadmaker/meguiars spray wax as a topper for anything. I use these products after a wash as a drying aid and “booster”.

M21 was often topped with M26 without any issues. It is one of the nicest looking combinations to this day. Meguiar`s had mentioned that the second layer of M21 will be for even coverage rather than longevity. I always found the M21M26 combo to consistently last about 7 months which was pretty good for that technology.

Yvan had also mentioned that opti-seal topped with spray wax would have the wax migrate under opti-seal.

[Accumulator]

I`ve had very few issues with layering, could count on one or two fingers the times it`s bitten me...but I don`t top sealants with waxes either.

As far as "is it worth doing", and leaving aside subjective stuff like appearance...it`s not that hard to do a sufficiently controlled test and prove either yes/no to yourself.

[Lonnie]

Accumulator:
I am laughing only because it seems that YOU have been the advocate/originator of layering Klasse Hi-Gloss Sealant Glaze within this forum.

Loach:
Thank you for the technical info. Objective testing and measurement verification give much more credence and proof of what happens with layering and buffing.
I also point back to your test results of polishes and how more reflective they are after their application and removal than they are after topping them with a wax. i was always under the impression/perception that applying a wax made a polished surface (much) more reflective, but your empirical tests and measurements with a gloss meter proved otherwise, albeit very slightly and probably undetectable to the untrained human eye.

Now the big question or maybe just my curiosity: There has got to some Autopians who prepped their own cars or those of others for a car show or concourse event and put multi-layers of a high-end wax, like Pinnacle Souveran or Wolfgang Fuzion or Zymol Concours, for that ultimate reflective show-car look. I just want to know if that was done by anyone in the past (or now).

[wannafbody]

Some products claim to be able to be layered. Zaino ZAIO and ZFX, Duragloss PBA and 111, Mothers 3 in 1 Ceramic and CMX all come to mind. Those have in system compatibility. Mix and match probably will be more hit and miss.

[noorth]

Tough question, I would also greatly assume this is something that can be paint dependent, it just depends on how well your specific paint is able to hold on to the protectants you`re applying. I`m certainly not a chemist but I always like to point out this thread whenever the concept of layering comes up. FinstP was able to perform thickness measurements in various layering style tests using lab grade silicon wafers measured with an ellipsometer. His thread is certainly a good read through, I wish he was still active on the forums to perform follow up tests, especially with resin based coatings:

See post from Detailing World Forum posted below. Link removed.

In his thread illustrates a number of key concepts. The most significant to me of which is this: Just performing follow-up dry buffing is enough to force the total thickness layer of the wax to reach a consistent minimum level. So even though the additional "layers" or reapplications of wax to the surface can possibly increase the total thickness levels (and lower it in some cases), the substrate is only really holding onto a certain amount before the excess is eventually removed likely through washing and/or wiping.

Look further into the results as well where he tests using different prep products to try and remove the fresh wax from the surface, with Acetone being the one product to measure back down to 0 (full removal of the wax), and ethanol and iso-propanol still leaving measurable thickness levels of wax behind (ethanol certainly decreasing the thickness below the 5.6nm threshold, showcasing partial removal).

So now what happens when you try to take one wax, and layer with a different paste wax? Is the solvent in the new wax enough to do some damage to the original bonded layer when you spread it on top, can that original layer even handle the physical application method of applying the new wax on top with the applicator pad? And if anything does survive is it even providing any sort of measurable benefit? These questions are relevant, and the idea of going from something like Power Lock and immediately topping it with Collinite 845, I have to question the survival of Power Lock to whatever extent and this is why I don`t recommend using two products that are designed to be main protectants and applying them right after the other. My goal would be to select the best main protectant, and maintain this over the months with one lighter spray topper to keep the base clean and healthy until your next polishing session.

Now I have seen instances where two applications of the main protectant has strengthened the hydrophobic effect or made it much more consistent across the paint compared to one layer. Even in instances where I can guarantee full coverage on the first layer, there`s some paint that benefits from a multi-application approach. The latest product that I tested where I saw this to a large degree is Gyeon Wax. Collinite I have also noticed this in some tests, and even the latest Ultimate Quik Wax as a spray I have seen a more beneficial result in the short-term with a dual application compared to just a solo application. Which products do this would be difficult to test for sure, and likely paint dependent.

The master. Great stuff.

[William_Wallace]

Thumbs up to the klasse comment was a devout follower AIO + HSGS + p21 it was a very enjoyable product and experience.

[Accumulator]

Accumulator:
I am laughing only because it seems that YOU have been the advocate/originator of layering Klasse Hi-Gloss Sealant Glaze within this forum...

Heh heh, maybe Yours Truly was the only guy nutty enough to bother trying all those layers! I just kept going until I got results I was OK with, kept wongering "why do people think this [crap] is durable?!?" and eventually got enough on there that it was. And I`m *still* layering it on the exterior plastics of a few of our vehicles; hey, it`s an Accumulator-proof way of protecting the somewhat fragile surfaces that shouldn`t be abraded any more.

I still utterly hate how it looks on *paint* though TBH, I`m not thrilled with how it looks on those platics either, but eh...OK, good enough since they`re >20YO Dailies.

[William_Wallace]

@accumulator do you still break out the klasse every once in awhile?

[nan_wpg]

M21 was often topped with M26 without any issues. It is one of the nicest looking combinations to this day. Meguiar`s had mentioned that the second layer of M21 will be for even coverage rather than longevity. I always found the M21M26 combo to consistently last about 7 months which was pretty good for that technology.

Yvan had also mentioned that opti-seal topped with spray wax would have the wax migrate under opti-seal.

meguiars told me not to latyer 21. 2nd coat of,21 would remove 1st.

collinite told me none of their lsp products contain abrasives and will “top” without removing.

[The Guz]

meguiars told me not to latyer 21. 2nd coat of,21 would remove 1st.

collinite told me none of their lsp products contain abrasives and will “top” without removing.

Check on their forum. They cover many topics on it.

I don’t visit there too often anymore since I’ve moved away from sealants and waxes.

But yes M21 was often topped with M26. M21 contains no abrasives. It doesn’t need any additional layers anyway.

M20 on the other hand has a chemical cleaner to it.