UV Protection from Carnauba Waxes?

C

CharlesW

The Rainmaker
While browsing another forum, I found several references to Carnauba waxes not having UV protection. As I understood what was being said, you have to use a sealant for UV protection.

When I did some checking at various wax sites, I found many references to the UV protection afforded by Carnauba waxes.

Obviously, these are quite different opinions.

So.....
1. Are all those "experts" misinformed?
2. Are all those manufacturers lying?
3. Do I have a problem with reading comprehension?
:dunno:
Anyone here have any opinions that can be backed up with a reliable link?
Preferably from some source other than a vendor or manufacturer just making a vague claim.
 
Great post Charles...

From what I could find is that every manufacturer lays claim that their wax offers UV protection. As a matter of fact Smartwax says they offer the highest with their Carnauba wax with 40 UV protection...

I couldn't find anything from a non-manufacturer, but at least the information below from Meguiars seems reasonable.

From Meguiars...

Some waxes do contain UV-protection agents, but the amount of protection that a microscopically thin layer of wax can provide is limited

The primary goal of a wax is to protect the top layers of paint that contain UV-protection agents from the paint manufacture. If you wash and wax your car regularly, your paint will be protected and you should suffer no major UV damage over the normal course of the life of the car.

Don't be fooled by some companies that lead you to believe that it is the UV protection in a wax that protects your car's finish from fading and failure, this is dishonest and simply not true. Taking care of the paint you presently have will go further to protect your finish than relying on protection supplied by a liquid you pour out of a bottle, or a wax you scoop out of a can. UV protection in a car wax formula is only an extra-dose of preventative maintenance, not the end-all, cure-all that some companies would lead you to believe.

UV protection for paint is much different from UV blocking ingredients for human skin. The two formulas are nothing alike and work in drastically different ways. There is no correlation between the ratings applied to the different levels of sun blocking protection for products intended for use on human skin and the ingredients available for use in an automotive wax formula. Sad to say, much of what you see advertised about the protective qualities of most car care products on the market today is simply over-exaggerated hype used to separate you from your hard earned dollars.


I am thinking if there is protection it may be limited and is most likely an additive to the wax...personally I think if you take care of your car regularly like we all do, then the paint should be fine...

I liked #3 that was funny...:D
 
I agree with Meguiar's assessment:bigups whether it's a wax or sealant, a microscopic layer of either will do very little, but what they both do is become a sacrificial layer between the environment and the finish that can be removed and refreshed as often as needed. You also can't place a SPF # on auto products as that scale is only for skin protection.:notme:
 
Poorboy said:
You also can't place a SPF # on auto products as that scale is only for skin protection.:notme:
Click to expand...

I figured you couldn't put a number on it, but according to smartwax you can...

I think I may start adding some sun blockers meant for skin on my paint next time...see if it helps...
 
Quick! Someone hit speed dial # one on the Sal-phone! That should straighten this out!

Well, I know where Charles does some of his reading at least. :D
 
CharlesW said:
While browsing another forum, I found several references to Carnauba waxes not having UV protection. As I understood what was being said, you have to use a sealant for UV protection.

When I did some checking at various wax sites, I found many references to the UV protection afforded by Carnauba waxes.

Obviously, these are quite different opinions.

So.....
1. Are all those "experts" misinformed?
2. Are all those manufacturers lying?
3. Do I have a problem with reading comprehension?
:dunno:
Anyone here have any opinions that can be backed up with a reliable link?
Preferably from some source other than a vendor or manufacturer just making a vague claim.
Click to expand...

Wax, as it's clear, does not contain any UV protection, It must be added. If a wax claims UV protection it's most likely in the form of a sunscreen but an SPF factor has no effect on paint.

Also the UV absorbers in paint have a half life of 5 years which means that after 5 years half of the system has broken down. In 10 years only 25% would be present and so on. So just washing alone and keeping your car waxed is not enough if you wish to keep your UV system in top shape.

So UV absorbers (benzotriazole UV blockers) must be added to a wax or even a sealant, they are not there naturally. One product has a patent on this technology.

Anthony
 
This is a copy of what is on Autogeek site.

Poorboy’s, in their usual tradition, has made life easy by combining a great deep-cleaning polish with protective, pure carnauba wax and additional UV protection in one sleek step! Sun block for your car!
 
Anthony O. said:
Wax, as it's clear, does not contain any UV protection,
Click to expand...
Sounds logical, but I really don't have any idea.
Anthony O. said:
It must be added.
Click to expand...
That's what I thought the manufacturers did if they claim UV protection whether it be a wax or a sealant. I think that waxes or sealants are blended products with many additives.
Anthony O. said:
So UV absorbers (benzotriazole UV blockers) must be added to a wax or even a sealant, they are not there naturally. One product has a patent on this technology.
Click to expand...
No disrespect, Anthony, but this sounds a little like a vendor or manufacturer making a vague claim. Actually, a vendor rep, but pretty close to the same thing. :)
Or maybe you were referring to Zaino as the one product that has a patent on this technology. :D

As an aside, there is considerable debate as to the value of sunscreen and SPF when it come to protecting the skin. Not all scientists agree on true protection other than preventing/reducing sunburn.

This post comes across as a little more argumentative than intended, but I don't have the patience to reword it. :wall
It is intended as discussion, not argument. :bow
Keep the comments coming. :bigups
 
No offense taken Charles :)

I didn't mention any product name as I didn't want to come across like I am pushing any product (yet again though a case of damned if I do and damned if I don't) but rather wanted to demonstrate that many waxes may claim UV absorbers but only one has a patent on that. So when others make the claim of UV protection it should be questioned.

That was my intention as I attempted to answer your question without any product names mentioned.

Anthony
 
Anthony O. said:
No offense taken Charles :)

I didn't mention any product name as I didn't want to come across like I am pushing any product (yet again though a case of damned if I do and damned if I don't) but rather wanted to demonstrate that many waxes may claim UV absorbers but only one has a patent on that. So when others make the claim of UV protection it should be questioned.

That was my intention as I attempted to answer your question without any product names mentioned.

Anthony
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that a manufacturer would advertise in a misleading manner or, Heaven forbid, even possibly mis-lead the customer? :confused:
:D :D :D
 
Why is UV protection important to a vehicle with clear coat? Isn't that what clear coat is for in the 1st place? To protect the base coat from fading? It's not like clear will discolor from the sun making the color appear different. I can see a value to UV blockers on vehicles where clear has been reduced, but not really outside that.
 
Anthony O. said:
Also the UV absorbers in paint have a half life of 5 years which means that after 5 years half of the system has broken down. In 10 years only 25% would be present and so on.
Click to expand...
David Fermani said:
Why is UV protection important to a vehicle with clear coat? Isn't that what clear coat is for in the 1st place? To protect the base coat from fading? It's not like clear will discolor from the sun making the color appear different. I can see a value to UV blockers on vehicles where clear has been reduced, but not really outside that.
Click to expand...
Here again, I have to rely on what I read from people that have more knowledge and experience with the actual "What happens" part of paint care, but.....
If the UV protection can help the clearcoat retain it's UV protection, it seems like it would be of some benefit.
From what I personally have seen, neglecting a clearcoat finish definitely has a bad effect on it. Just take a look at all the faded and peeling clearcoats on vehicles that get very little care.
The longest I have owned a basecoat/clearcoat vehicle is 14 years. It was a 1988 Chevy Astro van that I purchased new. It still looked new and the clearcoat was in good shape. It had a lot of wax on and off in those 14 years, and I don't think it would have been in anywhere near that good of shape without the care it received.
Now, as to whether the waxes of 1988 had any UV protection, I doubt it. Maybe the damage to paint from UV exposure is not as great as we are led to believe. It's possible that the paint that peels and looks crappy when neglected is being damaged by a combination of all the elements it is being exposed to. The UV being just a small part of it. :dunno:

Also, I wasn't really debating the value of the UV protection in a wax/sealant. I was just questioning the comments from "experts" and manufacturers that seemed to be totally opposite.

Hey, keep the comments coming. :bigups
 
Re: UV Protection

FWIW, A few years back I did a comparison of UV resistance on several products.
I took several glass slides, (10, I think), and applied a number of products on all but one. The products were waxes, sealants. 303 Protectant.
A local Optical shop checked all of the samples with an instrument they use that measures UV resistance.
I posted the results here, but I think they were lost when DC had a server problem.
The gist of the results was that there was very little difference between any of the products and none of them were a lot better than the slide with nothing on it.
The slides were glass and that could possibly have affected the results, but I kind of felt at the time that about the only real difference was because of a film of product on the glass slide rather than the product having any real UV blocking capabilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top