Clay bar not recommended for use by Ford, GM etc..

F

fordf150

New member
I not sure if this is true as I don't have access to factory service manuals. This was posted on another forum in their detailing section.



Also, clay bar is not a recommended procedure/product by Ford, GM, Chrysler for removal of any paint contaminent (as stated in the factory service manuals) nor by PPG, GE or Sherwin Williams (the 3 most prominent auto paint mfg's in the US). While there are specific (and very limited) uses for claybar, i would not recommend using any "name brand retailer's" off the shelf product. The question to ask yourself is this, "would I wet sand my paint to solve this imperfection?" Thats what claybar does- Meguiar's for example has a grit rating of 3500 (approx)- and is considered to be very coarse by industry standards (as compared to professional spec products such as Prowax whose clay bar is rated at 5000 grit).
Click to expand...



I must say I have used the Megs smooth clay bar kit on my 09 Ford F150 with great results so I am a little miffed about this bold statement.



Over time could this somehow damage the clear coat? Or is this all hog wash:nixweiss
 
fordf150 said:
I not sure if this is true as I don't have access to factory service manuals. This was posted on another forum in their detailing section.







I must say I have used the Megs smooth clay bar kit on my 09 Ford F150 with great results so I am a little miffed about this bold statement.



Over time could this somehow damage the clear coat? Or is this all hog wash:nixweiss
Click to expand...





And 2 out of those 3 brands have gone under so what does that tell you??? :faint:



More then likely they are just covering their butts cause they know someone will mess up there paint and somehow blame it back on them..... you never know.



Clay can be abrasive yes, but not like sandpaper the way they describe, at least not in my experiences.



Josh
 
Another tid bit...



Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:38 pm Post subject: Bulletin: Toyota does not approve of Paintless Dent Repair



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



TITLE: PAINTLESS DENT REPAIR

SECTION: REFINISH BULLETIN #60

MODELS: ALL



Toyota’s Technical and Body Training Development has completed its evaluation of “paintless dent repair” procedures marketed to the collision repair industry. In general, the damage is “door ding” type where an obvious point of impact exists.



Toyota does not approve of this repair procedure based upon the following analysis:

1. The vehicle is not returned to a “pre-accident” condition in these areas:



*The paint film no longer has its original strength due to microcracking, the immediate appearance may not look acceptable, over time however, ultimately refinishing may be required. Microcracking of the paint film can range from fine cracking visible only by magnification to the very obvious (easily seen with the naked eye), depending upon the initial damaging impact.



*Potential exposure of the metal substrate to condensation accelerates rust penetration. The base coat may also be degraded by ultraviolet (UV) light penetration through the clear coat.



2. Mechanical manipulation disrupts the factory applied rust and corrosion protective coating, and in some cases removes it completely from the back of the panel. Repair technicians experience difficulty replacing this important component of longevity, potentially reducing the long-term value of the vehicle.



3. In some cases, gaining access to the backside of a door panel is accomplished by unacceptable procedures:



*Using blocks as a wedge between the window molding and the glass for a tool access damages the window rubber/molding and relieves the factory designed pressure on the window glass.



*Drilling holes in the end of a panel allows corrosion to begin at the site or a path to the back of the panel.



In the interest of customer satisfaction and safety, Toyota doe not approve of these methods. As new tools and technology come to market, Toyota will evaluate the process for appropriate application.
 
I know VW says to do clay bar via 3m clay bar when car is delivered and rail dust is seen and not be removed or finish is rough.
 
It's all a money game.



Don't use clay cause it only costs the consumer $20 bucks and 2 hours of their own time. Rather pay the dealer $1000 to acid wash it and use their "special" paint sealant.... same with the PDR story.



What a crock of crap.



Josh
 
I have been claying at almost every wash for the past two years on four different cars, and haven't seen any negative side effects.



I am not too worried about it. One of the cars is ten years old, has been outside those past five. It looks great (99 White LHS).



I have to see some proof that claying is bad. If the paint job is of a good quality, it shouldn't be a problem.
 
...Also, clay bar is not a recommended procedure/product by Ford, GM, Chrysler for removal of any paint contaminent (as stated in the factory service manuals)...
Click to expand...

That's a rather odd statement considering that Clay Magic's website sites specific examples of Ford, GM and Chrysler publications that call out using clay.



The Chrysler "Paint Deck" manual I have calls out clay at the top of their reconditioning flow chart.



I seem to recall having a copy of a Ford TSB that called out using clay. I'll have to look around for that.





pc.
 
:wow: This just looks like more paranoid misinformation about clay bar. I have used it on several American cars (GM and Ford) with no ill effects.
 
Is this just another self-proclaimed anonymous internet expert spouting off or can he product a link to back up that post? I suspect he cannot.
 
I think manufactures try subscribing to the least evasive method for this application. There's not too much risk to the vehicle if you give a porter some ABC and have him go to town to remove some rust specs off light color paint. Try giving that same inexperienced person some semi-aggressive clay and they could reap some permanent havoc on some paint. I tend to subscribe to AutoInt's view of "While clay products are useful for overspray, they cannot deep clean the surface and pores of the paint. This can only be accomplished through a thorough chemical cleaning." Seems like clay for these applications is mostly just a band-aid to pacify the visual aspect of the final outcome. Most times microscopic rust particle fragments still remain on the surface after claying and almost immediately start the rusting effect.
 
Why would some of you blindly and automatically assume that it's bullshit?



The dealer and the general public can barely justify the cost of a $300 detail, much less know how to use detailing products. They are most likely expressing these feeling about to clay to the general publics that would probably just use the clay bar dry on the paint of a dirty car and scratch the hell out of it.



We all know that when properly used, a clay bar will cause controlled damage that is later easily repaired. So honestly, who cares what they say?
 
the other pc said:
That's a rather odd statement considering that Clay Magic's website sites specific examples of Ford, GM and Chrysler publications that call out using clay.
Click to expand...



Nice link.



Here's my take and it mirrors what some of you have already mentioned. There may indeed be something in the service manuals that state this (I don't know), but I can only suspect it is would be to discourage Joe blow with no experience from improperly using clay and potentially damaging his paint.
 
GTFreddy said:
Why would some of you blindly and automatically assume that it's bullshit?



The dealer and the general public can barely justify the cost of a $300 detail, much less know how to use detailing products. They are most likely expressing these feeling about to clay to the general publics that would probably just use the clay bar dry on the paint of a dirty car and scratch the hell out of it.



We all know that when properly used, a clay bar will cause controlled damage that is later easily repaired. So honestly, who cares what they say?
Click to expand...



HUH? I'd counter by asking why anyone would blindly and automatically believe an unsupported anonymous claim posted on the internet? Where is the supporting links to facts that backup this claim?



I have used clay for at least 10-12 years on literally hundreds of cars and I don't agree that a properly used clay bar "causes controlled damage that needs to be repaired later". In fact I'd say that in every case in my memory, the paint was improved by the removal of contaminants and overspray. I'd also say that removing the contamination has added to the long term longevity of the paint.



If the claim is true it should be a fairly easy task to link to a source, No?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top