How does anyone coat a car with only 10cc of product?!?!?!?

[allenk4]

I think the two real questions to ask are:


Can a manufacturer claim BOTH 10cc to coat a vehicle and 1 - 2 microns of coating thickness?

Can the claimed thickness be achieved with "a few drops per panel"

[Nth Degree]

I think the two real questions to ask are:


Can a manufacturer claim BOTH 10cc to coat a vehicle and 1 - 2 microns of coating thickness?

Can the claimed thickness be achieved with "a few drops per panel"

Assuming the average hood of a car is roughly 5’ x 4’ or roughly 122 cm x 152 cm.

Volume = length * width * height

In order to achieve a thickness of 2 microns:

V = 122 * 152 * .0002

V = 3.7088cc

That does not take into account the amount of product that evaporates or is wasted through absorption in the applicator. If a coating is 50% solids and 50% solvent then the volume necessary to achieve 2 microns of protection would actually require roughly 8cc to coat just the hood.

Assuming the average car has roughly seven times the surface area of the hood it would require roughly 26cc (or 52cc based upon the 50% evaporation).

So, to answer the original question:


10 = 7 * 122 * 152 * h

10 = 129808 * h

10/129808 = h

h = .00007703685 or .77 microns (.385 microns after 50% evaporation)

*surface area and evaporation are rough estimates

[52split]

Think there is only one way to test this: someone polish a panel. Wipe clean with alcohol then take paint thickness measurement multiple times in same spot to get average reading. Coat panel and let it cure. Retake measurements in the same spot.

We can speculate/hate all we want but the truth will be in the results. Plain and simple. And I ask for all the popular coatings to be put to this test for all the fanboys and haters alike.

[Stokdgs]

Think there is only one way to test this: someone polish a panel. Wipe clean with alcohol then take paint thickness measurement multiple times in same spot to get average reading. Coat panel and let it cure. Retake measurements in the same spot.

We can speculate/hate all we want but the truth will be in the results. Plain and simple. And I ask for all the popular coatings to be put to this test for all the fanboys and haters alike.

+1 with this -

Ideally, it would have to be applied by a Robot as vehicles are primed and painted today to ever get it perfectly even (as long as the robot is programmed correctly), and who is going to offer that up..

And then, you need to have the most accurate DeFelsko or another measuring tool to get the most accurate if possible measurements to see the change..

The closest it will ever be to this will be what Anthony Orosco, Ron Harris, and the Team are doing in San Antonio, Texas...
I know of no one else who has experience in spraying coatings like they do..

There may be others that have been spraying coatings but I have never heard or read about them yet..
Dan F

[RaskyR1]

Think there is only one way to test this: someone polish a panel. Wipe clean with alcohol then take paint thickness measurement multiple times in same spot to get average reading. Coat panel and let it cure. Retake measurements in the same spot.

We can speculate/hate all we want but the truth will be in the results. Plain and simple. And I ask for all the popular coatings to be put to this test for all the fanboys and haters alike.

I tried it on a bare piece of metal (calibration shim) and didn`t register anything after one coat of a popular coating. Then again I didn`t drop $2400 on a gauge that may or may not be able to pick it up. Me thinks much more sophisticated measuring equipment is going to be required to determine if in fact coatings leave behind their claimed thickness. I choose not to push those marketing claims to potential clients.

[Nth Degree]

Think there is only one way to test this: someone polish a panel. Wipe clean with alcohol then take paint thickness measurement multiple times in same spot to get average reading. Coat panel and let it cure. Retake measurements in the same spot.

We can speculate/hate all we want but the truth will be in the results. Plain and simple. And I ask for all the popular coatings to be put to this test for all the fanboys and haters alike.

I tried it on a bare piece of metal (calibration shim) and didn`t register anything after one coat of a popular coating. Then again I didn`t drop $2400 on a gauge that may or may not be able to pick it up. Me thinks much more sophisticated measuring equipment is going to be required to determine if in fact coatings leave behind their claimed thickness. I choose not to push those marketing claims to potential clients.

Chad is right. Our PTGs are not accurate enough to measure fractions of a micron.

A test could be done buy using a small dish, such as a petri dish, measure the thickness when empty (average over surface area), place 1ml. or 2ml. into the dish, allow to cure for a couple weeks, then take measurments. By knowing the surface area of the dish you can determine how thick the solution was when first placed. The difference between that and the average cured thickness will indicate the amount of product that evaporated. Then you can calculate the percentage of loss and estimate the actual thickness of the cured coating on a car through the math.

[RaskyR1]

Chad is right. Our PTGs are not accurate enough to measure fractions of a micron.

A test could be done buy using a small dish, such as a petri dish, measure the thickness when empty (average over surface area), place 1ml. or 2ml. into the dish, allow to cure for a couple weeks, then take measurments. By knowing the surface area of the dish you can determine how thick the solution was when first placed. The difference between that and the average cured thickness will indicate the amount of product that evaporated. Then you can calculate the percentage of loss and estimate the actual thickness of the cured coating on a car through the math.

I figured since the calibration shim has no coating, reading zero when the PTG is placed on it, surely it would pick up the claimed thickness once a coating was applied to it. I`ll have to try it again with a spray application and see if that makes a difference.

At the end of the day I really don`t care. As long as the coatings do their job it`s just more marketing BS to me.

[Ronkh]

At the end of the day I really don`t care. As long as the coatings do their job it`s just more marketing BS to me.

Perfect

[jw3571]

I`ve done two cars now and used 5cc for each. Am I not putting enough on?

[Ronkh]

I`ve done two cars now and used 5cc for each. Am I not putting enough on?

Time will tell.

[David Fermani]

I can easily get to average sized cars out of 1 syringe of Opti-Coat Pro. I use the included foam applicator as it holds the liquid very well.

[JSFM35X]

I used every bit of the 10 cc of gloss coat on the 2 coats I applied to the Subaru Legacy.

I was upset I did not have enough for the wheels but so far the coating is working out very well.

I am not sure if I over applied or others are applying too thin? I need to make sure that if I am going to invest 6-12 hours on an intense wash, decon chemical and physical, tar removal , 2 step polish, and a coating that it will not fail prematurely because I stretched the product too far. To me the 60 bucks on the coating is well worth it if I can get 24 months, anything over that is a bonus. Under that and I am starting to feel a little ripped off.

Optimum products have always lived up to what they are suppose to be and claim. The 2.0 old version did not bead as well as the new gloss coat and it seems to be as protective.

My son is not a car guy and its holding up well to the abuse. Perfect match for the product.

[RaysWay]

I used every bit of the 10 cc of gloss coat on the 2 coats I applied to the Subaru Legacy.

I was upset I did not have enough for the wheels but so far the coating is working out very well.

I am not sure if I over applied or others are applying too thin? I need to make sure that if I am going to invest 6-12 hours on an intense wash, decon chemical and physical, tar removal , 2 step polish, and a coating that it will not fail prematurely because I stretched the product too far. To me the 60 bucks on the coating is well worth it if I can get 24 months, anything over that is a bonus. Under that and I am starting to feel a little ripped off.

Optimum products have always lived up to what they are suppose to be and claim. The 2.0 old version did not bead as well as the new gloss coat and it seems to be as protective.

My son is not a car guy and its holding up well to the abuse. Perfect match for the product.

I`m right there with you. Dropping ~$60 on a single vehicle for 2 years of protection is well worth the investment.

[Detail Impressions]

Troy, I agree with you. Way back to Opti coat 2.0 and the old Pro version the cost was increased and the volume decreased.
10 CC IMO is not enough yes we all can do it with 10 cc, but most of us have to purchase larger volume of product for a very high cost. (RonkH) Correct!
For a everyday driver an coating is the way to go. While its not a cure all. Its the best we have available at this time. IMO

[David Fermani]

In the 6+ years of installing OCP, I`ve yet to apply more than 1 coat. I just make sure to apply it in a cross hatch pattern for adequate coverage. The current Pro version comes with about 17ccs and it`s plenty to coat 2 cars. Can`t comment on 2.0 or GC, but I can`t imagine it would be all that different? Especially with needing to apply additional layers. I know other coating companies precribe multiple coats, but I`ve never seen anything from OPT doing the same.