What do YOU think your LSP is providing?

[bodidly22]

Hey gang,

Hope you and your beautiful families are well. Query for you:

Recently had the experience of what little my LSP`s have been doing to my front hood in terms of what I assumed was at least `decent` UV protection.

Had a repair done 18 months ago on a Race Red Focus ST.. repairer did the `oh look solid colour` let`s just give the 2k treatment instead of the factory Clear over Base.

Noticed obviously as soon as I started to polish... repairers in Aus now offer `Lifetime Warranty` on the work done, so instead of pulling them up straight away.. gave it some time to test products on 2k paint before calling in the Warranty.

Used Cquartz `original`... lasted about 6 months. Then used a variety of sealants.. Megs FF.. UCW.. Polish Angel Master Sealant.. then recently the hype train of TW S&S.. & Megs HCW.

Fast forward to now... at inspection to have it repaired back to Clear over Base. Painter made mention of how much the colour has faded.

I feel in someway duped into what I thought LSPs were/are providing. Clearly it is not enough UV protection to actually stop or dramatically slow oxidation.

Are we throwing away good money on bogus claims??... am I asking too much from modern day LSP`s??

Why even bother if it`s oxidising regardless???

Is there a way to test actual UV protection on a surface???

I still feel let down by the industry I have put a lot of blood sweat tears and maybe to some more importantly hard earned MONEY.

Look forward to your thoughts...

[Ron Ketcham]

Basic chemistry--for UV blockers to be retained they must be included in the paint`s actual resin system (film former/binder) which locks them in place. Use of UV blockers in products such sealants and waxes, etc "may" work for a short time period, as the products are all prone to evaporation over any time period (IE, as the product evaporates so does the UV ingrediants). Majority of UV protection advertised is due more to a gloss factor of the product, which reflects the damaging UV rays away from the paint surface rather than be absorbed where they attack and cause the pigment to "fade", etc.

[acuRAS82]

I’m wondering if the paint fade issue is more to do with the paint job than protection. I only say this because my cars that I have kept protected never seem to rust, oxidize or fade in color, even after 11 years for the Acura, the first 6 or 7 it was even poorly protected twice a year with NuFinish.

Granted, I live in the Northeast where snow rain and pollen are bigger offenders to the paint than super hot, sunny days.

[Ron Ketcham]

Could possibly be due to one or more items. 1. Insufficient clear film build by painter, 2. Low grade clear used, 3. Shop had numerous dust nibs in clear, sanded and buffed, removing excessive clear.

[bodidly22]

Basic chemistry--for UV blockers to be retained they must be included in the paint`s actual resin system (film former/binder) which locks them in place. Use of UV blockers in products such sealants and waxes, etc "may" work for a short time period, as the products are all prone to evaporation over any time period (IE, as the product evaporates so does the UV ingrediants). Majority of UV protection advertised is due more to a gloss factor of the product, which reflects the damaging UV rays away from the paint surface rather than be absorbed where they attack and cause the pigment to "fade", etc.

Appreciate the response Ron... so it sounds like it`s all down to the quality of `ingredients` within resin system utilised. No surprise considering the cheek of using 2K vs Base/Clear

[Dan]

Think about this, how thick (and reflective) is glass compared to a coating or sealant. Clear glass only blocks 75% and things still fade greatly behind even tinted glass. Its a hopeless battle.

[Joel_MD]

I never thought a wax or paint sealant was doing anything to block UV radiation. Am I in the minority here?

[acuRAS82]

I never thought a wax or paint sealant was doing anything to block UV radiation. Am I in the minority here?

I’ve always assumed there is UV blocking in some way (even, as mentioned by Ron K. if it’s only due to reflection of light). I see too many cars with clear coat failure and fading (assuming due to sun as much as anything else) that coincidentally look like they haven’t been cared for. Meanwhile I don’t see clear coat failure and fading on the roofs of cars that are always shiny and taken care of.

One specific example: my buddy in CT has a 2005 Honda Civic with failure all over the roof and fading in many places. I don’t think he’s waxed it since 2008 when I met him.
My 2004 Acura that lived in CT during the same time period, until 2012 when it moved to PA (similar environments) has no fading or failure even before I ever did a real polish in 2017. The car was only waxed twice a year from 2004-2016.

[Joel_MD]

I’ve always assumed there is UV blocking in some way (even, as mentioned by Ron K. if it’s only due to reflection of light). I see too many cars with clear coat failure and fading (assuming due to sun as much as anything else) that coincidentally look like they haven’t been cared for. Meanwhile I don’t see clear coat failure and fading on the roofs of cars that are always shiny and taken care of.

One specific example: my buddy in CT has a 2005 Honda Civic with failure all over the roof and fading in many places. I don’t think he’s waxed it since 2008 when I met him.
My 2004 Acura that lived in CT during the same time period, until 2012 when it moved to PA (similar environments) has no fading or failure even before I ever did a real polish in 2017. The car was only waxed twice a year from 2004-2016.

It`s true that the cars I encounter with clear coat failure tend to look like they`re been totally neglected. Whether the damage comes from UV or something else, it appears that occasional washing and waxing is enough to prevent it even on cars that are outside all the time.

[Lonnie]

Judging by the vast quantity of clear-coat failures I observe on older Wisconsin vehicles, I can conclude they are from three factors:
1) Water-based clear from OEMs do not last forever. With "newer" vehicles now having thinner clears applied to them, this will only exacerbate this "problem".
Why not, they only need to last the life of the new vehicle warranty (like your OEM battery).
2) Vehicles that sit outside 24/7 will be more prone to this than one that is garaged.
3) Most vehicles that have clear-coat failures look like they have not been appearance-maintained to begin with (wash or waxed on a "regular" basis).

Most vehicles are treated as an expendable personal transportation appliance. Some individuals question the need and expense for the exterior care of a leased new-vehicle. They find out when it is turned in and incur added fees.

Last Step Products (LSPs), whether they are coatings, waxes, or sealants provide the vehicle exterior with:
1) Reflective gloss
2) Surface protection from natural and man-made environmental contaminates (UV rays, insect splatter, bird droppings, tree sap, acid rain, hard water spotting, ambient ocean-air salt, iron dust, de-icing chemicals or road traffic film (RTF), road tar or striping paint, vandal eggings or graffiti)
3) Hydroscopic water beading or sheeting runoff

How well an LSP will do this is subjective to the type of LSP a vehicle owner/leasee uses and how often it is applied. Given the neglect of time and expense of such care by most vehicle owners/leasees , is it any wonder why we see so many vehicles in the physical exterior appearance that we all observe. I think it is the main reason why many of you professional detailers now recommend using coatings as THE LSP on vehicles: less need for re-application with longevity of the LSP characteristics listed above, even with its higher initial cost.

On a side note, my introduction to detailing was out of necessity as I viewed car-care as a way to protect and prolong my initial investment in purchasing a new or slightly used vehicle. While personal vehicle appearance can be interpreted by some as being vain or prideful or even flaunting arrogance or prestige, my cars were daily drivers, even if they were nicer sports cars in my younger days. I still view my car cleaning and detailing as being more protecting and maintaining my vehicle investment, even though it had evolved into an enjoyable hobby that I take pride in. I find it gratifying and rewarding to take a very dirty and neglected daily driver and have the owner/leasee be wowed by the end result. But that is me and most individuals see car-care as a waste of time and money OR they wonder why I put so much time and effort into some thing as mundane as "car cleaning". It is, indeed, a fine line between skilled dedication and insanity obsession. That said, the best never comes cheaply or without effort and disciplined commitment.

[BudgetPlan1]

It is, indeed, a fine line between skilled dedication and insanity obsession. That said, the best never comes cheaply or without effort and disciplined commitment.

Yes, it certainly is, sometimes leading me to ask myself the question "Do I own the car, or does the car own me?" Someday I may have an answer to that...

[Desertnate]

I am also of the same opinion there is some protection going on, even if it is minute. This is why it must be maintained over the long run. Even if there is no real defense again UV rays in the product, hopefully it`s taking the beating from the enviroment and releaving some of the stress from the clear coat.

The best example I saw of this was while I lived in Hawaii where the sun and salt air are butal on paint. There was an obvious difference between cars people took care of and added some sort of LSP and those who simply bought a car and never touched it. It was not uncommon to see a car only a couple years old already starting to show signs of oxidation and clear coat failure parked next to a car 10 years old in perfect condition. The difference seemed to be the care taken by the owner as I saw similar patters all the time regardless of age or geographic origin of the car.

[Accumulator]

bodidly22- I can`t for the life of me remember where I learned it, but Optimum Car Wax ("OCW") supposedly contains UV-blockers that were tested and found effective. You could always try that as a topper. Though I too always assume it`s basically about the paint itself rather than what we put on it.

Ron Ketcham- Any UV-blockers in FK1000P?

I ask because I`m using it on the utterly trashed-condition `93 Audi. Overthinned clear on all but two panels, lots of exposed pearl layer and even basecoat, plastics that had been oxidized to chalky pure-white for years before I got it, etc. etc. It was so bad that when I got it the service records had described it as "gray" instead of dark blue for many years. The car oughta be a posterchild for sensitivity to UV exposure. But NO. No oxidation despite years of use with no care other than washes and occasional, never more than annual, rewaxing with the FK1000P. The exposed basecoat on the roof still looks *exactly* like it did when I polished it many years ago, zero sign of degradation (and I`ve *REALLY* inspected it).

(Well, let me walk that back just a bit; I`m using OCW on the lenses as it`s supposedly good at blocking UV (sounds like "I want to believe", huh? ). But we`re primarily talking PAINT here...)

[acuRAS82]

Judging by the vast quantity of clear-coat failures I observe on older Wisconsin vehicles, I can conclude they are from three factors:
1) Water-based clear from OEMs do not last forever. With "newer" vehicles now having thinner clears applied to them, this will only exacerbate this "problem".
Why not, they only need to last the life of the new vehicle warranty (like your OEM battery).
2) Car that sit outside 24/7 will be more prone to this than on that is garaged.
3) Most vehicles that have clear-coat failures look like they have not been appearance-maintained to begin with (wash or waxed on a "regular" basis).

Most vehicles are treated as an expendable personal transportation appliance. Some individuals question the need and expense for the exterior care of a leased new-vehicle. They find out when it is turned in and incur added fees.

Last Step Products (LSPs), whether they are coatings, waxes, or sealants provide the vehicle exterior with:
1) Reflective gloss
2) Surface protection from environmental contaminates (UV rays, insect splatter, bird droppings, tree sap, acid rain, hard water spotting, iron dust, road tar or striping paint, vandal eggings or graffiti)
3) Hydroscopic water beading

How well an LSP will do this is subjective to the type of LSP a vehicle owner/leasee uses and how often it is applied. Given the neglect of time and expense of such care by most vehicle owners/leasees , is it any wonder why we see so many vehicles in the physical exterior appearance that we all observe. I think it is the main reason why many of you professional detailers now recommend using coatings as THE LSP on vehicles: less need for re-application with longevity of the LSP characteristics listed above, even with its higher initial cost.

On a side note, my introduction to detailing was out of necessity as I viewed car-care as a way to protect and prolong my initial investment in purchasing a new or slightly used vehicle. While personal vehicle appearance can be interpreted by some as being vain or prideful or even flaunting arrogance or prestige, my cars were daily drivers, even if they were nicer sports cars in my younger days. I still view my car cleaning and detailing as being more protecting and maintaining my vehicle investment, even though it had evolved into an enjoyable hobby that I take pride in. I find it gratifying and rewarding to take a very dirty and neglected daily driver and have the owner/leasee be wowed by the end result. But that is me and most individuals see car-care as a waste of time and money OR they wonder why I put so much time and effort into some thing as mundane as "car cleaning". It is, indeed, a fine line between skilled dedication and insanity obsession. That said, the best never comes cheaply or without effort and disciplined commitment.

Fantastic post! Well said on all fronts

[Accumulator]

Some individuals question the need and expense for the exterior care of a leased new-vehicle. They find out when it is turned in and incur added fees.

I`m always surprised to hear that. As I keep posting, many of the people I know who lease *REALLY* abuse/neglect `em, often never washing them at all ("the dealer does it when it`s in for service") or even vacuuming out the interiors. They genuinely look like something out of a junkyard by the time they`re turned in, but nobody I know has ever been dinged for that. Never even gets mentioned.