Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 79
  1. #1
    Loach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Hey guys, this will be a pretty comprehensive thread for my gloss-based testing. I`ll give a rather lengthy introduction to the concept of gloss measuring as it relates to detailing, give a breakdown of some of the tools and products that I`m working with, and then I`ll continue to post updates for my results of testing individual abrasives, paint prep products, and waxes/sealants/coatings. Feel free to leave your feedback at any time, ask me any questions, or leave requests for products that you would like for me to get results for!

    I`ve worked with my main glossmeter for around 4 years now, but understand that the results of my tests may be unique to my meters, my calibration tiles, my paint, my environment, technique, towels, etc. These results should not necessarily be taken as fact, use them as a guide for one individual`s experience and quest.




    Introduction

    Gloss measuring as it relates to detailing can be a very tricky topic to navigate through. Although one may assume that the glossmeter would be one of the most valuable types of tools for an industry that is significantly centered around gloss enhancement, the results of measurements can be easily misconstrued. It truly requires a lecture to understand the reason for why the numbers are coming out the way that they are when we`re measuring paint. All of the features of the paint that we collectively regard to as "gloss", the majority of glossmeters out there only capture one of those features, which is purely how shiny the paint is at that given point in time. It won`t necessarily capture paint depth, wetness, warmth. It`s not going to tell us how good the paint looks to our eyes. This concept becomes more important to note as your paint approaches the maximum amount of gloss achieved through abrasive polishing, in many cases the waxes/sealants/coatings applied on top after this point will reduce gloss with immediate post-application measurements, for reasons which I will explain further along below. For now, I`ll jump into the components of the meter and its basic function.

    How the Glossmeter Works

    The glossmeter shines a fixed amount of light from its lamp onto the surface at a specific angle, the light is reflected off the surface into a receptor lens, and a detector then captures how much light was reflected into it. Rhopoint has very good articles explaining the concept of how their meters work with great visuals that I will leave as a reference for those more interested in the topic, I definitely recommend it:
    https://www.rhopointinstruments.com/...loss-measured/

    This is their picture that covers the components, the light is sourced from the lamp, sent off at a set angle, bounces off the surface that we`re measuring into the receptor lens and it`s funneled into the detector. The measurement is calculated in gloss units (GU):



    Here`s the underbody of my meter that shows the base, the two lamps on the left half and the two receptor lenses on the right:




    Measurement Angles

    My main Rhopoint Novo-Gloss Trio unit can measure by beaming the light source at three different angles: 20, 60, and 85. The 60 angle is the universal measurement angle, the majority of meters out there measure only at 60 but this is still a fine measurement angle for low and high gloss surfaces. Anything over 70GU when measured at the 60 angle is technically more suited to be measured at the 20 angle for better resolution. Anything under 10GU at the 60 angle is more suited to be measured at the 85 angle. With my specific meter, I measure at the 60 angle because it`s more consistent when moving from section to section on the paint compared to the 20 angle. My meter is also less impacted by tilt/pressure bias when measuring at 60, which is very important when I`m working on uneven painted surfaces. More gloss = more GU`s. My clearcoat on the main test panel will be around the 90-98GU range. My bathroom mirror is around 2000GU as a reference.


    Standardized Calibration Tile



    The gloss unit (GU) is based around a standardized scale. The meters that I`m working with are consistently tested against a calibration tile, this was certified from the factory to give off a specific GU measurement when measured at a specific angle from the meter. Measuring at the 20/60/85 angles will give you different GU results, so it`s important that the viewer understands the angle that the meter is measuring from. The calibration tile is also certified with the meter, recertification to meet ASTM spec is recommended I believe on a yearly basis, and they verify or replace the calibration tile and make sure that the meter is recalibrated and certified to that tile. My meter was last certified in 2007, it`s an expensive process for individual testers when you don`t have the budget of a manufacturing plant to consistently certify your testing equipment to abide by ASTM standards.

    Thus the results of my testing are relative to whatever the condition of my calibration tile is. I routinely clean the tile, lenses of the lamps and receptors with isopropyl alcohol. Even though the tile is set to 93.7GU as certified from the factory, it`s very possible it`s no longer actually producing that amount of gloss. However, the glossmeters themselves still need to be routinely calibrated and checked against the calibration tile on a very regular basis, and this is done by the user. I check the meter`s calibration against the tile every single time I turn it on, and before and after each new product is applied to the paint. If I`m reading at 93.6-93.8, this is an acceptable range of the tile to continue measuring against the paint. If I`m at 93.5 or below, or 93.9 and above on the calibration tile, I`ll likely recalibrate the meter and rerun an application of the polish that I`m testing. Largely, the actual gloss reading of my tile is irrelevant, because all products are tested relative against each other, and relative against a calibrated meter to that specific tile. It just means someone else out there with the same Rhopoint model and different calibration tile could come to measure my test panel and receive different total gloss readings, but our overall results relative to each other should net the same comprehensive results.

    The calibration tiles are not painted, they are either glass or acrylic I believe, translucent except for the sides and bottom which are blackened, so the tile does not oxidize like paint would and I believe it`s able to obtain a much more consistent gloss reading as a result over the years.




    The Problems

    One main problem I face when measuring the paint is our vehicle panels are not perfectly flat. This creates a vast fluctuation of measurement angles and this means I`m very likely to have a large difference in gloss measurements just moving away to another area on the paint. Any angle concave to the surface of the base of the glossmeter will present much lower readings, the lamp is positioned further away from the paint compared to a flat or convex surface, and you also have the potential for ambient lighting to creep through that can also skew your results. I`ve mapped out my measurement area on my test panel in a way to really reduce the inconsistency of measurement results. Any slight pressure bias in the glossmeter when hitting the read button can also introduce different angles that can lead to inconsistent results.

    Product Wipeability Has a Major Impact in Gloss Results

    Another main problem has to do with the wipeability of the products we`re working with. Compounds, polishes, waxes, sealants, coatings - we apply these to the paint and we buff them off with a microfiber towel. These all contain carriers that can prevent you from achieving a super clean wipeoff. Any of those carriers or "residuals" that are left behind can easily skew measurement results, leading to lower than expected readings. Even if it looks like you`re getting a clean wipeoff, the residuals can still be left behind which will diffuse the light from the meter, any diffusion of the light source reduces how much it`s reflected off of the surface. A consistent panel wipe product is imperative when working with compounds and polishes in order to more accurately determine the amount of true gloss enhancement.

    This poses a significant problem when working with waxes/sealants/coatings. How much gloss your meter is able to read can be entirely based on just how good of a wipeoff you achieved when buffing the paint with your microfibers. Some microfibers may be more absorbent than others, or maybe you wiped off a certain area much more than a different area. The post-application gloss measurements for last step protectants (LSP) can be a highly irrelevant statistic in terms of the product`s actual gloss rating. In most cases where a product is perhaps poor in its wipeability, a single post-application wash and rinse can immediately jump gloss measurements up to match other products that perhaps gave a cleaner wipeoff and thus higher post-application readings. At what point in the test is it appropriate to record the gloss rating of an LSP?

    Ever heard of guys talking about the warmth and depth of a carnauba wax, which one might find leaves behind a better looking finish? It`s very possible that the diffusion of the light created by those oils and residuals in the wax, that are not captured by the microfiber during wipeoff, can create that warmth or deep looking finish, while at the same time reducing the actual gloss readings. We`re in a situation here where the glossmeter isn`t necessarily correlating a higher GU reading as determining a better finish. It would be inappropriate for me as a tester, in my opinion, to create a scale where the highest GU of an LSP on the post-application phase of measuring is the be-all end-all of statistics. More variables are at play when it comes to the overall look of the paint rather than just how reflective the paint is.

    Not being able to maintain a consistent measurement environment can lead to a drastic difference in results. I cannot measure the test panel outside of the garage with any degree of consistency. Whether it`s temperature, or an influx of ambient lighting, the meter does not like it when I reposition the paint or panel to other areas beyond its main testing location that`s in a much more controllable environment. The meter also has a metal base, if you try sliding this around on your paint you`re going to seriously scratch it, and it`s likely I`m making slight marks as I`m picking it up and putting it down on the surface. I`d be seriously careful when using a glossmeter on your paint after polishing.

    And finally, I`m hovering around a low to high range of 93.0-97.4 on the main test panel factoring in LSP`s and polishes. Maybe some outliers with regards to products with even worse wipeability, but the high and low range of about 4GU. My eyes aren`t going to notice 4GU`s of GU mining out in the wild. These meters are extremely accurate, and I can really knock down differences in actual gloss measurements between different products in many cases. One of the things to attempt to answer is just at what point can our eyes really notice a difference, and whether or not spending the time GU mining or trying to jewel out the finish is even worth it if our LSP on top is just going to negate any potential jeweling benefit.


    Test Equipment

    Glossmeters





    My main Rhopoint is the Novo-Gloss Trio, it`s incredibly consistent when I`ve mapped the test surface out properly, and it has one of the highest rates of reproducibility and repeatability for any glossmeter. It has a nice backlight on the unit, only holds about 200 results before I have to delete them which is a nuisance but I`m loving it. The Elcometer 406L is a Rhopoint model branded to Elcometer, almost identical to the Rhopoint Novo-Gloss Lite, but the 406L measures in 20 and 60 so I use this to confirm accuracy and the results of the Novo-Gloss Trio. The Lite only measures in the 60 angle. The others are some older models that I`m working on bringing back to life. Back in 2007 I believe the Trio, 406L, and Lite were around $1700-$2800 per unit, insanely expensive but Rhopoint definitely had some of the best consistency, accuracy, and statistical based software, and Rhopoint is still at the top of the game with today`s meters.




    Polishes/Compounds



    This is the bulk of what I`m currently working with. With the polishes and compounds, since their designed performance is not dictated by their residuals, these will perhaps give us the most relevant form of gloss results. The difficult part is perhaps narrowing down and pairing them with the best pads, polishers, running speed, arm speed, # of passes, etc. This is where I would love feedback from you guys working with a particular type of process that you use that perhaps gives you the best results when working with that particular type of abrasive. However, much of this could also be substrate dependent, different clearcoats used in the manufacturing process, hardness/softness, etc. Best measured gloss can potentially only be relevant to this Nissan hood.

    Temperature Gauge, PTG, Lights



    Panel Wipes/Paint Preps



    Prep-All is my main post-polishing panel wipe, but I`ll be running tests using the others as well and this will be documented which one is used when I post results. The N-914 I actually have this in a waterless wash style dilution as a substitute to a CarPro Reset wash. Sometimes if I`m doing short term based testing where I`m running LSP`s without a curing session, I like to grab N-914 out and run a quick spray and wipedown to capture the improvement in gloss measurements from doing this. I like doing this to get my head around how a product applies and removes in the short term using a few different methods, but I can capture gloss as well while doing this.

    Pads



    Pads will be mainly a mix of Rupes and Buff and Shine foam pads, the ones above are from the last batch of tests. I`ve got Meguiar`s DMC pads, few different types of wool pads but likely I`ll fetch a different test panel for compound related tests in the future to try and conserve clearcoat as much as possible on this test panel.

    Polishers







    With the polishers I can attempt to capture any advantage with a particular type for gloss enhancement. A lot of guys say nothing beats a rotary for jeweling, others say the long-throws are the best. Let me just tell you guys that I`ve done an EXCESSIVE amount of finishing polishing on this test panel in the process of removing and reapplying different LSP`s. Has to be 100s of individual polishing sessions. I`ve been maxed between 96-98GU after polishing for a very long time now, using my range of polishers with all sorts of different pads and polishes. But I`ll focus down and we`ll see if we can pinpoint a consistent jeweling advantage with a particular system.

    Test Panel



    Nissan hood, factory paint.

    Conclusions

    That`s going to be it for the intro, at this point I`ll jump on releasing updates on a regular basis in subsequent posts for some of the abrasives and LSP`s that I`m working with. The glossmeter has been a fun tool to work with, much more fun now that I believe I have a pretty firm grasp of how to decipher its results compared to when I just picked them up. The jump in gloss on a vehicle that hasn`t been polished is massive after you perform that multi-step polishing session, and this highlights perhaps the largest benefit in a real world situation for the glossmeter as a tool that you can present to a client. My hunt right now is to try and find any unicorn products that are giving an unusually large increase in readings on heavily polished paint, and to be honest I haven`t found this yet on this paint. I have found polishes that are consistently giving me marginally higher readings so I`ll post those results. Eventually I`ll get to sanding on another panel and I will really dive into aggressive compound testing and GU mining, but also test the impact of just how much the products can enhance the gloss when the paint is not already close to its maximum gloss limit.

    Also, here`s a video I did that dives into the topic. This gives you a visual reference to some important gloss-based topics that I referenced above, so check it out let me know what you guys think, I appreciate your feedback:



    Hopefully this will be a way that I can contribute to the board with a fun topic, I`ve always appreciated the knowledge I`ve soaked up from you guys over the many years I`ve been lurking. Stay tuned for the results that I`ll be posting as I get around to organizing it!
    WaxMode - Product Testing & Reviews
    Likes mt32, The Guz, quebert, Tc99m, tom p. and 11 others liked this post
    Thanks The Guz, Coatings=crack, Tc99m, JRW67, JustJesus and 4 others thanked for this post

  2. #2
    William_Wallace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Thanks for info it will be interesting. I bounce back in forth when purchasing products. Im either purchasing the glossiest product or looking for the most hydrophobic product and Ill also purchase a product that is different either it applies different or has something unique. Looking forward to the info.
    Likes Loach liked this post

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    1,853
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Loach:
    If I could, I would bestow a Doctorate`s Degree (PhD) in Gloss Meter Science and Technology upon you from the University of Autopia. (So Captain Obvious is now Professor Obvious from UofA (THE "Gloss" U). VERY detailed (no pun intended!) and well written and organized thread subject (AKA, technical white paper.)

    One question: You mention the 100`s of polishing and measuring sessions on this Nissan test hood. Wouldn`t that thin the clear alot?? You`ve got the Paint Thickness Gauge (PTG) to verify that.

    One comment I will make is you need to watermark you photos to denote your trademark/copyright and ownership of this information. Yes, it is THAT good and I fear that indiscriminate "experts/know-it-all-wanna-be`s" will copy-and-paste (AKA, pirate/usurp/plagiarize) this info and attempt to pass it off as their own.

    OR you can let Gloss Meter manufacturers use this info in exchange for a (some) gloss meter(s) and appropriate equipment to test and experiment with(Like a Gloss Meter Grant)!
    GB detailer
    Likes tom p., JustJesus, JRW67, Loach liked this post
    Thanks Loach thanked for this post

  4. #4
    tom p.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    suburban Boston
    Posts
    6,282
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Cool stuff!
    Likes Loach liked this post

  5. #5
    JustJesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    2,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    WOW

    First of all, you had me at "Comprehensive." After reading through all that, I can see you weren`t kidding.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loach View Post
    Largely, the actual gloss reading of my tile is irrelevant, because all products are tested relative against each other, and relative against a calibrated meter to that specific tile.
    Thank you for recognizing that, and mentioning it here.


    Quote Originally Posted by Lonnie View Post
    If I could, I would bestow a Doctorate`s Degree (PhD) in Gloss Meter Science and Technology upon you from the University of Autopia. (So Captain Obvious is now Professor Obvious from UofA
    Thanks for the laugh, Captain!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lonnie View Post
    One question: You mention the 100`s of polishing and measuring sessions on this Nissan test hood. Wouldn`t that thin the clear alot?? You`ve got the Paint Thickness Gauge (PTG) to verify that.
    Thank you for asking the same question I would have
    Likes Loach liked this post

  6. #6
    acuRAS82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    802
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Loach for President.
    Likes Loach, tom p., Stokdgs liked this post

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    62
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Loach... the science guy. Thanks for this project.
    The first project was very interesting and I`m
    sure this will as well. You have a lot of hard work
    to come. Thank you.

    Jim
    Likes Loach liked this post

  8. #8
    Loach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Thanks for the feedback guys!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lonnie View Post
    Loach:
    If I could, I would bestow a Doctorate`s Degree (PhD) in Gloss Meter Science and Technology upon you from the University of Autopia. (So Captain Obvious is now Professor Obvious from UofA (THE "Gloss" U). VERY detailed (no pun intended!) and well written and organized thread subject (AKA, technical white paper.)

    One question: You mention the 100`s of polishing and measuring sessions on this Nissan test hood. Wouldn`t that thin the clear alot?? You`ve got the Paint Thickness Gauge (PTG) to verify that.

    One comment I will make is you need to watermark you photos to denote your trademark/copyright and ownership of this information. Yes, it is THAT good and I fear that indiscriminate "experts/know-it-all-wanna-be`s" will copy-and-paste (AKA, pirate/usurp/plagiarize) this info and attempt to pass it off as their own.

    OR you can let Gloss Meter manufacturers use this info in exchange for a (some) gloss meter(s) and appropriate equipment to test and experiment with(Like a Gloss Meter Grant)!
    Haha thanks Lonnie!

    With regards to paint thickness, the PTG is another massive head scratcher of a tool to dissect. The accuracy and consistency of the Rhopoint with regards to gloss measuring is leagues above what my DT-156 PTG can achieve. I can map an entire 2x2` section with the PTG, come back 10 minutes later and I`ve now got a 10-15 micron level difference in the results, some of which aren`t necessarily relative to the results I received beforehand. And then I can go back 10 minutes later and I`m getting similar results to the first readings. It`s a total mess. And I think my gauge is pretty much on par with the majority of the Chinese based clones out there, I`m sure the pricier Elcometer and DeFelsko units would do a much better job. It`s actually pretty accurate when paired against the zero reference tile and plastic shims, but once I start measuring on paint there`s no way I would be comfortable doing any sort of before/after with polishes to any degree of accuracy.

    Based on the readings of the areas where I`ve struck through the clear on some of the lower edges where the hood was dented inwards, I`ll start striking through clear around the 70-80 microns level. I still measure some areas that are as high as 120-130 microns in the main section where I polish the most. Some areas in the low 100s level as I flow down towards the nose of the hood. I saw a lot of readings in between 115-130 microns when I just picked the hood up. I would estimate that I`ve shaved off about 5-20 microns total since I got my hands on it in-between 2-3 years ago. But in the process I`ve tackled through some really deep white scratches, the most of which you can still see the imprint if you look closely, but they`ve been rounded off so much that you only notice the white slightly on just a few of them now.

    Here`s a before shot when I just picked the hood up:


    And right now:


    I`ve rarely used compounds on this hood, but I can`t even begin to try and figure out just how many total polishing applications I`ve put the hood through with various mid-fine polishes. Jason at Chicago Auto Pros had a great video where it took them 66 total applications, 5 passes each time with FG400 on the Rupes with a microfiber cutting pad before they started to strike through the clear. This paint I would say is more on the medium side of the hardness scale.

    Should have the first batch of results posted up later tonight!
    WaxMode - Product Testing & Reviews
    Likes Stokdgs, Tc99m liked this post

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    229
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Very nice job Loach, looking forward to your results. Your thread like many here helps me more than you know. Thanks for the very detailed write up.
    Likes Loach liked this post

  10. #10
    Sizzle Chest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SW Florida
    Posts
    2,094
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Holy information gloss maniacs! Loach, thanks for taking the time to post all of this and the pictures. I will be reading thru it again! Thanks for posting!
    Scott Harle
    www.autodermatology.com
    Autodermatology
    Serving Naples and SW Florida
    Instagram: www.instagram.com/autodermatology
    Facebook: www.facebook.com/autodermatology
    Likes Loach liked this post

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    I can`t read that much at one time but look forward to the pictures.
    How/why have you acquired so many gloss meters? Aren`t those things pretty expensive? Who are you Loach Rockerfeller??
    Likes Loach liked this post

  12. #12
    Loach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing




    This first batch of results will be a consecutive style of test. Each product will be used on the same exact area on the paint, one right after another in a 2ft x 2ft section. For measurements, I read from a 1ft x 1ft section inside of the polished area, and I`m going to list the low to high GU range of measurements for each product. For this specific test, I had IGL F4 Renew on the paint to start, so I`ll post the baseline gloss measurements, then I`ll follow up with the abrasives. CarPro Eraser was selected as the panel wipe for this test, my Prep-All bottle and sprayer decided to throw a fit and leak all over the place.

    The main gloss measurement for the abrasives will be after the panel wipe has been applied. You`re going to notice a pre-panel wipe gloss measurement in the test listed at the bottom. This pre-panel wipe measurement is dependent on my towels and how aggressive I am, I`m going to wipe the paint until I feel it`s a clean wipedown without being overly aggressive.

    For any of the protectants being tested, the main gloss measurement is directly after the initial application, once again it`s dependent on my aggressiveness and my discretion. I`m not going to be overly aggressive wiping off any protectants, but I will aim for a clean wipedown if possible. I may decide to perform a wipedown with a waterless wash dilution of McKee`s 37 N-914 Rinseless Wash if I don`t plan on running the product through an overnight cure. Then I will measure the gloss after that wipedown and this will be listed at the bottom of the results.

    I`ll definitely run other more focused tests in the future where I take one polish, run this through a variety of different polishers, pads, speeds, passes, and panel wipes to see if an advantage can be narrowed down and post those results. So I`ll switch things up from time to time.

    Meter: Rhopoint Novo-Gloss Trio / Calibrated to 93.7GU / 60 Measurement Angle

    IGL F4 Renew
    GU: 95.7 - 96.1
    Temperature (F): 76.4
    Hand Application / Wiped with N-914


    Griot`s Correcting Cream
    GU: 96.0 - 96.4

    Temperature (F): 76.2
    Panel Wipe: CarPro Eraser
    Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
    Pad: Rupes Yellow
    Polisher Speed: 4
    Overlapping Passes: 4
    Pre-Panel Wipe GU: 95.7 - 96.1 @ 81.6F


    Griot`s Perfecting Cream
    GU: 96.2 - 96.6

    Temperature (F): 77.7
    Panel Wipe: CarPro Eraser
    Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
    Pad: Rupes White
    Polisher Speed: 4
    Overlapping Passes: 4
    Pre-Panel Wipe GU: 95.2 - 96.0 @ 79.8F


    Griot`s Perfecting Cream (2nd Application)
    GU: 96.1 - 96.6

    Temperature (F): 77.9
    Panel Wipe: CarPro Eraser
    Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
    Pad: Rupes White
    Polisher Speed: 4
    Overlapping Passes: 4
    Pre-Panel Wipe GU: 95.3 - 96.0 @ 80.4F


    Griot`s Finishing Sealant
    GU: 94.8 - 95.3

    Temperature (F): 80.2
    Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
    Pad: Buff and Shine Black Foam Finishing (Flat)
    Polisher Speed: 3.5
    Overlapping Passes: 4
    Post N-914 Waterless Wash Wipe GU: 95.7 - 96.2 @ 78.0F


    Griot`s Finishing Sealant (2nd Application)
    GU: 94.9 - 95.5

    Temperature (F): 79.1
    Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
    Pad: Buff and Shine Black Foam Finishing (Flat)
    Polisher Speed: 3.5
    Overlapping Passes: 3
    Post N-914 Waterless Wash Wipe GU: 95.9 - 96.4 @ 77.3F


    3M Perfect-It EX Ultrafine Machine Polish
    GU: 96.4 - 96.8

    Temperature (F): 77.9
    Panel Wipe: CarPro Eraser
    Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
    Pad: Rupes White
    Polisher Speed: 3.5
    Overlapping Passes: 4
    Pre-Panel Wipe GU: 96.0 - 96.4 @ 80.0F


    3M Perfect-It EX Ultrafine Machine Polish (2nd Application)
    GU: 96.7 - 97.0

    Temperature (F): 77.3
    Panel Wipe: CarPro Eraser
    Polisher: Rupes LHR15 MK III
    Pad: Rupes White
    Polisher Speed: 3.5
    Overlapping Passes: 4
    Pre-Panel Wipe GU: 96.3 - 96.7 @ 80.0F


    IGL F4 Renew
    GU: 92.7 - 94.1
    Temperature (F): 76.4
    Hand Application


    Overall thoughts for this batch of tests, Griot`s has the best smelling abrasives on the market by far in my opinion. Minimal difference measured in gloss between Correcting and Perfecting Cream on this panel, I can see Correcting Cream paired nicely with Fast Correcting Cream for a two-step approach. Perfecting Cream does take a bit more of a wipeoff to get it super clean, zero dusting, good polishes.

    The Griot`s Finishing Sealant I measured a notable drop in immediate gloss measurements which is not alarming. Again, once we switch from abrasives to any all-in-one`s (AIO`s) or last step protectants (LSP`s), we need to switch our expectations for the gloss measurements. The N-914 wipedown jumped the numbers up a bit, so Finishing Sealant definitely has some residuals that can potentially increase paint depth. I felt the wipeoff was good, expect additional testing of this in the future where I will grab potential curing results.

    3M Perfect-It EX Ultrafine is a great performing polish, low dust, bit of better wipeoff compared to Perfecting Cream and this shows with its higher pre-panel wipe gloss readings. Also edges the Perfecting Cream in total gloss, although you`re still talking about half a GU at the top end here. I consistently see Perfect-It performing well.

    IGL F4 Renew is just a placeholder, I`m running water behavior tests with this currently. I think it definitely works better by machine in terms of application, I get higher gloss results compared to a hand application. With a machine application I had IGL F4 at 95.4 - 96.2GU with a red Buff and Shine pad, 96.0 - 96.6 post CarPro Reset wash.

    If I`m missing any data points that you would like for me to record, feel free to make requests. I need to get a humidity gauge in the garage so I can capture that, that will be extremely relevant as it begins to heat up here in Florida. Next up will be McKee`s 37 Jeweling Wax and Sonax Perfect Finish.
    WaxMode - Product Testing & Reviews
    Likes Tc99m liked this post

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    1,853
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    One question on some detailing hobbyist`s and professional`s minds are where would you ever NEED a gloss meter? To some shiny is shiny. I will state that this is comparable to trying to "guess/estimate" the thickness of a thin piece of sheet metal to tell what is gauge. Unless you deal with sheet metal on a very regular basis, 14 gauge sheet metal looks very close to 16 gauge sheet metal. The ONLY way to verify this is with an accurate digital /vernier micrometer or calipers measuring tool. Even the slight difference in metric to SAE (inch) screw diameters can be difficult to "eye-ball" (IE; is it a 10-0.8MM or a 1/4-20NC thread?)

    The point is that a gloss meter can gauge or measure how shiny is shiny and give a credible, verifiable, and accurate objective (IE, measured) value to that question, thus taking the subjective evaluation (IE, the person who is eye-balling a shiny surface and giving their observed estimate of one shiny surface over another, like comparing the gloss of one wax or coating over another).
    Loach`s systematic and scientific approach (IE a repeatable methodology) to giving us Autopians a" gloss value" achieved by different polishes on ONE donor hood (IE, the same test sample) as measured through the same gloss meter takes all the guess work and subjectivity out of answering that question, "Who makes the shiniest polish?".

    That said, the ONLY place I have seen a gloss meter used was in the infomercial with actor Dennis Weaver from the late 1980`s TV series "McCloud" selling the benefits of Coral Blue`s Auto Fombulin "A" sealant. (Good stuff in its day. I still have some in my ancient car-care collection). The "pitch" was to buy a used car at an auction, measure the initial gloss of paint, apply Fombulin A to it, and re-measure how much "better" it was. They then ran the car through the auction again to re-sell it, and of course, it brought a higher auction value because if its "enhanced" appearance. Do not ask me what manufacturer/model of meter they were using, I could not tell, but I do faintly remember the housing was a blue plastic with an LED readout.
    GB detailer
    Likes Loach liked this post

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    85,908
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Loach- I really appreciate this testing you`re doing, even though for *me* it`s basically just intellectual curiosity.

    But echoing what Lonnie asked, I`m wondering what *in your opinion* is the "IRL discernible difference" threshold.

    Using my experiences as an example, let`s take a relatively discerning Autopian, who for instance thinks M205 finishes out so-so even on hard paints and can see an improvement when it`s followed by certain other products. At what point could such a person notice the differences that you`re measuring? Like... does it take a full integer`s worth of difference (in the meter readings) to see the difference with the naked eye? More/less? Very subjective I know, but what`s *your* take on this?

    E.g., I remember how somebody here had noticed that following Menzerna PO85rd with KAIO resulted in a drop in gloss that he could readily see. Most people would say that "KAIO leaves things nice and glossy", but he could see otherwise.
    Likes Loach liked this post

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    62
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comprehensive Gloss Measurement Thread - WaxMode Testing

    Loach, you may want to look into a sling psychrometer
    for a cost effective way to go. However, you will need a
    chart to compare between the wet and dry bulb for the
    relative humidity.

    Is the Prep-All your using the water based one?

    Jim
    Thanks Loach thanked for this post

 

 
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sio2 (hydro2 type) testing thread
    By MattPersman in forum Car Detailing
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-16-2017, 12:16 PM
  2. Adam`s H2O Guard and Gloss Durability Thread
    By SYMAWD in forum Detailing Product Reviews
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-09-2015, 04:55 PM
  3. 3 Machines, same pads, same compounds, gloss testing.
    By JohnKleven in forum Machine Polishing & Sanding
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 11-30-2010, 09:01 AM
  4. Comprehensive Leather Care Thread
    By imported_Megafast13 in forum Interior Car Care
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-20-2010, 01:21 PM
  5. Medical Question (cholesterol measurement)
    By Dave N in forum Hot Tub
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-18-2005, 04:21 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •