Layering (again)

thanks for starting this thread and all the interesting discussions.



I have one further question regarding spit-shining. It was mentioned that spit-shining only applied to paste waxes but not liquid waxes. Why is that? Also, if I wanted to apply several layers of a liquid wax, can I do it immediately or do I have to wait for 12-24 hours before applying the second layer?
 
Thanks Accumulator!





Martin,



- Wax is spit shined because you can build more, "heavier" layers immediately. The solvents may compromise the underlying layers, therefore you have to neutralize them as much as possible. With the chilled distilled water, you basically freeze the wax onto the surface (example for better general understanding). This effect allows you to build heavier layers, because the solvent are not able to re-liquify/remove the existing wax structure on the surface.



- Sealants need to cure, not waxes. Carnauba/synthetic blend waxes also cure, but their curing is less *important* than those of the sealants. Immediate contact with moisture harms the wax layers far less than curing sealant layers.



- The carrier solvents keep the active ingredients dissolved and they keep also the carnauba soft and spreadable. There are three types of carrier system:

1.) Water-free polishes, where the active ingredients are dissolved in a compatible carrier such as a hydrocarbon solvent.

2.) Emulsion polishes, which are combining two incompatible phases (hydrocarbon solvent + water) by incorporating a surfactant to form a bridge between the two phases.

3.) Solvent-free polishes, which are using pre-emulsified materials with a water carrier. Keep in mind that the word "polish" refers to sealants too (as per standard industry vocabulary).



Solvents have an impact on the overall formulation performance. The purpose of the solvent in a sealant/polish is to carry the active ingredients; to "wet" the surface so that a uniform film can be produced; and to clean the surface to a certain degree. Surface wettability is an important factor, which enables a more direct contact between the active ingredients (also the abrasive powders, when present) and paintwork. After the active film has been deposited/built up, the solvents evaporate. The method we use is over-application, when you apply intentionally too much material onto the surface, let it dry (haze), and wipe off the residue. After the drying time, the solvents have already evaporated. It is important to optimise the solvent choice to provide appropriate drying time for the specific application and actives in the formulation. Too little or too much drying time may lead to streaking or a discontinuous film finish.

The higher the solvent level of a given product, the harder to layer it. You can layer even the most aggressive, watery sealant/wax, (yes, even 1Z Glanz), but the gain side is negligible. You just have to atomize the liquid to an extremely fine mist and the mist hazes instantly on the surface. The solvent flashes off (evaporates very quickly) when traveling in the air. The result is a slicker surface but here, we can not speak of true layering.

So, we differentiate drying time and curing time. Drying time is when the sealant/wax hazed (dries) on the surface. Curing is when the active ingredients anchor to the substrate (crosslinking). The structure of a wax is substantially different from a sealant. The sealant layers are rather *in* the surface, while waxes are rather *on* the surface (common language).
 
xinkid said:
I have one further question regarding spit-shining. It was mentioned that spit-shining only applied to paste waxes but not liquid waxes. Why is that? Also, if I wanted to apply several layers of a liquid wax, can I do it immediately or do I have to wait for 12-24 hours before applying the second layer?
Click to expand...



With a liquid, the solvents/carriers are such an integral part of the product that (IMO) there's not much you can do about them. Adding water/QD/whatever will dilute them a bit, but will also be diluting the product with regard to the "wax content"; the "spit" mixes with the product making for a more diluted product so you might help in one regard but you hurt in another. With pastes, it's more a case of the "spit" providing a buffer between the previous application and the one you're in the process of applying. The "spit" doesn't really mix with the product being applied the way it would if you tried it with a liquid. Sometimes you can clearly see the "spit" as little beads of liquid, clearly *not* just diluting/mixing in with the product.



Note that the above is based primarily upon experiments with Malm's liquid wax and might not be applicable to other products :nixweiss



Whenever I tried to apply numerous coats of a liquid in quick succession, it seemed to give the previously mentioned "concours waxing" effect. A\I.e., a temporary boost in appearance that was pretty much gone after a day or so. It never seemed to result in the type of increased durability and longer-term appearance benefits that i got when I waited a few days before applying the additional wax.
 
Accumulator:



A long time ago I was a criminal that committed "concours" waxing, as I once thought that I was accomplishing a lot when putting multiple "layers" of wax on top of each other in one setting. What I ultimately found out was that the "frosting from the layer cake", or sheen, would wash off in the rain just as quickly as one coating of a carnauba. It was during this time that I also found out that one layer of a wax, that's allowed to cure without interruption from the elements or soap, can last substantially longer than 4-6 "layers" applied all at once, with some isolated incidents with the one layer having a nicer appearance. It is better IMO to wax sparingly than to waste product by piling it on in multiple turns at one time.
 
lbls1- Yeah, and I'm not surprised by your findings. But then again...if I were gonna show something who knows what I might do ;) Heh heh, ah the stuff we used to do before we knew better :o
 
Yup, that's why fall shows tend to be my favorite. Fall is the time when I feel that my car has accumulated enough armour to be at its peak appearance level (although that's highly debatable, since my favorite wax also exhibits perhaps its most violent color reaction at the low layering stages, when its freshly applied to a just polished surface).



Bence also had it right that some cleaner wax products will layer as well. Alas, the good ol' days when we didn't know what we know now. Experience (and good information) can be a great teacher!
 
lbls1 said:
Bence also had it right that some cleaner wax products will layer as well.
Click to expand...



Yeah, even Autoglym's SRP will do it, and that stuff has abrasives and cleaners. People say it won't, but those people must not've actually tried it ;)
 
Exactly. R71 cleaner/sealant was the first product where I observed this phenomenon back in 1992. Then in 1994, I bought my first bottle of SRP in Austria; same experience.
 
It is interseting to note that the term 'cure' in this context (as the process of cross linking polymer chains) conflicts somewhat with the *general* understanding of concrete "curing", whereby we can spray the concrete with water in order to harden it (like with the wax process, which *isn't* curing). Especially seeing as the sealants (which are actually curing) do NOT get on well with this process (unlike the waxs). Anyway, I am not dissagreeing with you, as it is obvioulsy correct (technically) when you think about it…. But I found it interesting for a few seconds so thought I would mention it :)



I was very suprised to see 'polish' used as the generic term for sealant/wax. I see a polish as an abbrasive, and that would encompass products that manufacturers currently label as "compounds", "polishes" and "glazes" (although glazes less so).

I would classify a sealant/wax as "LSP" or maybe just simply "sealant" or "wax", but never a polish. To be honest, I thought things had moved on, but I guess not?



With the spit shine, I find it weird that the process most people use is to aplpy the water over the 'unbuffed' wax layer (ie with residue still in place). After all, we are trying to get the wax to sit on top of the wax, not on top of the residue. Wouldn't it be better to buff of residue, then apply the water, then apply the next layer of wax, and then buff?



Bence/Accumulator, once again thanks for the detailed answers, much appreciated as always.



Martin
 
You spritz water before, during and after application. If you use the correct amounts of wax, there will be no residue (continuous wiping).



As for the wording; yes, it is surprising for me too that companies use the word "polish" in such a generalized manner. I have a supplier formulation bulletin which says "A polish may also be described (as)...durable films, which remain after numerous detergent washes or months (these were formerly called ‘polymer sealants’)...".
 
molydood said:
With the spit shine, I find it weird that the process most people use is to aplpy the water over the 'unbuffed' wax layer (ie with residue still in place). After all, we are trying to get the wax to sit on top of the wax, not on top of the residue. Wouldn't it be better to buff of residue, then apply the water, then apply the next layer of wax, and then buff?
Click to expand...



Bence said:
You spritz water before, during and after application. If you use the correct amounts of wax, there will be no residue (continuous wiping).
Click to expand...



To expand on Bence's reply (heh heh, I don't get to do *that* very often ;) ), the spit-shining is very different from "normal" waxing. When you stop doing it, pause, and think "OK, I'll do it some more..." there won't be any residue on the finish that needs buffed off, it'll look as if you'd already gone through all the steps of a conventional wax job. During the spit-shine process, the new wax gets worked into the finish/existing wax and any excess (shouldn't be much, this is where that "correct amount of wax" comes in) will be on the cloth you're using to do the spit-shining.



Heh heh, I get the feeling people don't get their shoes spit-shined much these days (and/or haven't been in the service). Most of what I know about spit-shining I learned at the shoe shine parlor, watching the guys do their thing :D
 
Of course I have had my shoes polished Accumulator. That's what tipped me onto spit shining!!



Perfection is right!
 
I found a detailed process, on-line, written by somebody from the armed forces, here it is:



"Put a small amount of polish on the cloth at your fingertips and begin lightly coating in little circles, working a section at a time. Do not press hard, you only need to have a slight pressure on the pad of your finger.

The first thing you will notice is that while polishing, it feels "rough" and is almost putting pressure back onto the cloth. This is because you need to lubricate the polish being applied. This is where your small amount of water comes in. Put just enough on the cloth to allow the rubbing to feel smooth. Start applying the polish again in a circular motion.



When you are applying the polish (in a circular motion), you will see polish "swirls". Swirls are good, they show that you are doing it right. As you keep polishing, the swirls will start to go away - that indicates it is time for the next layer.



At first you will think a shine will never appear, but keep doing those little circles on the section you are working on. Eventually you will see a mirror shine begin to appear through the haze of polish. Do not brush. Just keep rubbing. How long? Depending on the prep work, an hour or so per boot. The good news is that once you've achieved a real black glass shine, it only takes a coat or two to refresh it after a drill.



This process takes a bit of practice. In time you will develop the technique that works best for you. You will also find by experimenting that variations on the little circles, such as back and forth buffing with the damp cloth, work better on certain areas of the particular boot you are shining. Turn the cloth to get a clean surface occasionally.



Use polish sparingly - the layers must be thin, or else the polish you just applied will strip off ruining the shine you have so far. Keep the cloth damp using your spray bottle or whatever. The purpose of the water is to make the polish stick to the leather not to the cloth. It is the thin layers of polish that gradually fill the tiny holes and bumps in the leather, producing a smoother and smoother shell that shines like a mirror.



As you build up the shell, use less and less polish - keep going until you are only using a very small spot of polish."
 
btw ibis, thanks for the info on concourse waxing earlier, added a bit more meat to the bone of understanding :)



actually, referencing back to the army spit shine above, and the bit about melting the polish with a hairdryer; I wonder if it's the heat that helps get a superior finish by machine, and not just the sheer work being done. I guess it would only be relevant to application of LSP in that respect...
 
Hmmm without knowing all of it, I'd say the heat helps melt the compound and makes it spread easier. But polishes and lsps are different animals, I'd wager that there would be more to that definition than the hairdrying method.



Cool...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top