Who makes the BEST UVA-UVB paint protectant for Florida summer sun....

R

Risley

New member
Hey guys,

We have a 2024 silver 911 Carrera T arriving in July that will need to be outside in the Florida sun for July-Oct. What product can I apply that is the BEST protection for the paint against the suns damage.

And while I`m at it, would the 303 protectant be best for interior & exterior black trim?

Thanks a ton!!!
 
The BEST eh? I hope you realize that is subjective.

Optimum Car Wax is really the only product with patented UV protection. It`s actual effectiveness is often debated.

If you want true protection, get a car cover.

Or just wash and spray wax regularly and it`ll be fine.
 
I had a cover for me truck but fit too tighty and putting it on and taking off when any dirt present were problematic. The thread title says paint but then you mention the interior.
 
Bunky said:
I had a cover for me truck but fit too tighty and putting it on and taking off when any dirt present were problematic. The thread title says paint but then you mention the interior.
Click to expand...

You definitely run into issues with dirt and covers, but OP said the BEST UV protection. Can’t get better than a cover!
 
Dan said:
Optimum Car Wax is really the only product with patented UV protection. It`s actual effectiveness is often debated..
Click to expand...
Huh, I wasn`t aware that OCW`s UV protection was still being debated. Has somebody had reason to question its efficacy?
 
Zaino also has UV protection. But the question is how much UV protection can a sealant provide when it`s microscopically thin?
 
Accumulator said:
Huh, I wasn`t aware that OCW`s UV protection was still being debated. Has somebody had reason to question its efficacy?
Click to expand...

I can’t speak for everyone but i absolutely question its efficacy. Dr G gets my respect as a low key guy that seems to deliver a solid product so I have no doubt it blocks UV. However I have no idea how much it blocks vs say clear glass.
 
I don`t know if there is a product out there that given a long enough time line will protect paint from failure. It might reduce the chance of etching from a bird bomb if wiped off relatively soon. It might keep contaminants from sticking for some time period. But eventually the paint will fail. I`ve seen pictures of show cars stored for 30-40 years in climate controlled garages with peeling paint. If there was ever a miracle product, it was Fomblin(J/K).
 
Dan said:
I can’t speak for everyone but i absolutely question its efficacy. Dr G gets my respect as a low key guy that seems to deliver a solid product so I have no doubt it blocks UV. However I have no idea how much it blocks vs say clear glass.
Click to expand...
Heh heh, you kinda lost me there :o You have no doubt it blocks the UV, but you question whether it`s effective at that? I wouldn`t be surprised if glass did block it better either, but I was thinking about the paint and lenses, not the interior.

Sorry, sorry, yeah, I`m being a smart [aleck]. I can`t claim any real UV-protection expertise since I usually park inside. But OCWing my plastic lenses only takes a moment, and I`ve never had any of them yellow or otherwise oxidize, and even the `85 Jag`s lenses are still like new or the ones on the Tahoe that were badly oxidized when I go it but have stayed nice for over a decade now without any redoing.

Heh heh HEH...listen to me sounding like an Optimum/Dr. G fanboy, when that`s absolutely not the case.
 
Accumulator said:
Heh heh, you kinda lost me there :o You have no doubt it blocks the UV, but you question whether it`s effective at that? I wouldn`t be surprised if glass did block it better either, but I was thinking about the paint and lenses, not the interior.

Sorry, sorry, yeah, I`m being a smart [aleck]. I can`t claim any real UV-protection expertise since I usually park inside. But OCWing my plastic lenses only takes a moment, and I`ve never had any of them yellow or otherwise oxidize, and even the `85 Jag`s lenses are still like new or the ones on the Tahoe that were badly oxidized when I go it but have stayed nice for over a decade now without any redoing.

Heh heh HEH...listen to me sounding like an Optimum/Dr. G fanboy, when that`s absolutely not the case.
Click to expand...

The question is whether the UV protection is absorbed into the plastic more or less than paint.
 
Accumulator said:
Heh heh, you kinda lost me there :o You have no doubt it blocks the UV, but you question whether it`s effective at that? I wouldn`t be surprised if glass did block it better either, but I was thinking about the paint and lenses, not the interior.

Sorry, sorry, yeah, I`m being a smart [aleck]. I can`t claim any real UV-protection expertise since I usually park inside. But OCWing my plastic lenses only takes a moment, and I`ve never had any of them yellow or otherwise oxidize, and even the `85 Jag`s lenses are still like new or the ones on the Tahoe that were badly oxidized when I go it but have stayed nice for over a decade now without any redoing.

Heh heh HEH...listen to me sounding like an Optimum/Dr. G fanboy, when that`s absolutely not the case.
Click to expand...
Yes, and more importantly, is it any more effective than a cheaper product that does not claim UV protection. While I have no doubt you got good results, many have similar results with any spray wax.

Additionally Optimum was very enthusiastic about showing the scratching a normal wax did to the surface of a car compared to OCW, which I thought was odd. They could have compared UV protection....
 
Dan said:
Additionally Optimum was very enthusiastic about showing the scratching a normal wax did to the surface of a car compared to OCW, which I thought was odd. They could have compared UV protection....
Click to expand...

Wow, but you are going back over 20 years, OCW was the first Optimum product, I believe it was called Sun Wax back then, and Dr. G was trying to draw a contrast with cleaner waxes, as far as the "scratching" and mostly residue and staining of trim from cleaner waxes. Of course all those consumer "waxes" had cleaners in them, whether they called themselves that or not.
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Wow, but you are going back over 20 years, OCW was the first Optimum product, I believe it was called Sun Wax back then, and Dr. G was trying to draw a contrast with cleaner waxes, as far as the "scratching" and mostly residue and staining of trim from cleaner waxes. Of course all those consumer "waxes" had cleaners in them, whether they called themselves that or not.
Click to expand...

And they still do.

ocw.JPG
 
Does the presumed UV protection "soak in" or does it just "sit on top"?

Is OCW more expensive than other Spray Waxes?

Gee, what I don`t know....

Guess I figured that if other Spray Waxes offered comparable UV protection their makers would be emphasizing that. I can say that FK1000P, which Ketch assures me does *NOT* contain anything specifically for UV protection, seems to prevent oxidation of the exposed basecoat of my `93 Audi. Left unwaxed, those spots oxidize *fast*, but with the FK I don`t have to even think about it.

I *do* recall the bit about "other waxes causing damage". That "use the competition and you`ll have problems!" [crap] was big for a while there, seemed like everybody was saying it about everything ("wrong MFs will strip your wax", "wrong polisher will burn your paint", etc.)
 
Dr. G says that the UV inhibitor in OCW is the same as in clearcoat, and that it will migrate into the paint with continued use. The original OCW patent had to do with combining the UV inhibitor with the wax, IIRC, i.e., other people had the idea, but couldn`t get the chemical to mix with the wax or something along those lines. I guess the second patent was the actual UV protection part.

Getting back to the first part, I take Dr. G`s word about the migration, but who knows. I mean this is his original area of expertise, and he is the first guy who gave a good explanation for why the flexible urethane bumpers and other painted plastic parts used to fade before the rest of the car. Remember we always used to talk about that here? The theories were that the parts got hotter in the sun because of the lower thermal conductivity of plastic vs. metal parts, that they used different paint because the parts were flexible, that they used different paint because they couldn`t bake the paint at as high a temperature as the metal parts, etc.

Dr. G explained that they found that the UV inhibitor in the CC would migrate into the base coat and primer, and on a plastic part would keep migrating into the plastic, essentially drawing it out of the clear. They solved this later by adding the UV inhibitor into the plastic, so it was already at equilibrium and wouldn`t leach it out of the clear. Which I guess explains why this doesn`t seem to be happening on newer cars.

But even if the inhibitor in OCW penetrates, does it make any difference? Vs. using FK1000, in Accumulator`s example, which empirically provides UV protection even though it doesn`t contain anything specifically for that.
 
I think DR G is probably correct about the UV protection migrating into the paint. I know in the past that paint that I used Zaino on didn`t chalk up nearly as much as paint that was untreated. I`m not sure what else would cause the difference because the initial application of Zaino would have been long gone at that point.
 
But Zaino doesn`t have a UV inhibitor? It would seem you`re proving Accumulator`s point that more important than whether the LSP you use has a UV inhibitor, is using the LSP regularly (well, that wasn`t exactly Accumulator`s point). Just like the brand of oil you use is less important than changing your oil regularly.
 
So then you would think UV blockers like Tio2 or Sio2 in sprays and coatings would provide necessary UV protection. From my experience sprays do little to protect, maybe concentration is too low. Coatings may work as some like Gyeon Pure claim, like 70% concentration. Touch up with Wetcoat every few months might be a good start.
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Dr. G says that..
Click to expand...
Hey, thanks for the Cliff`s Notes about Optimum`s UV blocker (or at least Dr. G.`s claims).

Oh, and as for that..
..(well, that wasn`t exactly Accumulator`s point)...
Click to expand...
It`s close enough! If the car "seems like it`s just been waxed" that generally to correlate to "no oxidation problems" even when the LSP doesn`t claim UV protection.

No, not hard-and-fast proof, but inductively compelling to Yours Truly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top