Wolfgang Uber SI02 Rinseless Wash Review

Pats300zx

Pats300zx

Super Moderator
This is a quick review of the new Wolfgang SIO2 Uber rinseless wash. PMBG was gracious enough to send me a bottle for a review and with the weather changing here in the Northeast my frequency of doing rinseless washes will increase tenfold as winter sets in. I have been a huge fan of the original Wolfgang Uber Rinseless since it’s launch and feel it is probably one of the top slickest rinseless washes available in the detailing market. Uber Rinseless is such a versatile product and can be used for so many different uses as a clay lube, rinseless wash, waterless wash, and a detail spray. With the release of a SI02 enhanced version I was very excited to try it out.

Product Description:

Wolfgang Uber SiO2 Rinseless Wash is the rinseless wash you know and love but with added SiO2 qualities! Wolfgang Uber SiO2 Rinseless Wash is steeped with added SiO2 protection, so that not only is your car just simply cleaned, but has added protection. Wolfgang Uber SiO2 Rinseless Wash produces a highly lubricated wash that leaves your surface glossy and slick. Plus, it is all done with only one 2-gallon bucket of water!
Cost: $24.99/16 ounces

8iH47rj.jpg


Application:

I mixed the new per the instructed dilution ratio at 1 ounce per 2 gallons of water and proceeded to do a rinseless wash with several folded microfiber towels. Below are my observations compared to the original Uber formula.

Observations:

1. Wolfgang SI02 rinseless was much slicker than the original Uber version. The towel just glided across the paint surface leaving a very glossy finish when dried.
2. Wolfgang SI02 rinseless had excellent cleaning ability and dried easily with no streaking issues even with the added SI02 feature.

Final Thoughts:

For the detailer who has been a fan of Wolfgang Uber rinseless for years and is looking for the ability to add a layer of SI02 hydrophobic protection down while performing a wash or rinseless wash than this product is for you. This product would be perfect for the detailer who is using it to maintain a ceramic coated car and the added cleaning ability, gloss factor, and ease of use make it a must in any detailer’s arsenal. The SI02 version only costs about $5.00 more per 16 ounces than the original version. For a detailer to have all of the added features of the original Uber Rinseless with an increased SI02 protection component is a “win win” for any detailer.
 
top189h said:
I would be curious to know how noticable and how durable the protection it leaves behind is.
Click to expand...
Mike P. has a review on AGO, the protection laid down is very noticeable. I can’t speak to durability but I’ve used WG Waterless Wash RTU and it appeared to be present for 7-9 days. It snowed on day 9 and the salt killed it. Still pretty impressive for a Waterless Wash and I wonder if this new RW is as substantial.

https://www.autogeekonline.net/foru...d-face-off.html?highlight=Ceramic+QD+face-off
 
Slicker than the original Uber doesn`t seem possible, wow. Uber 2 slippery dippery doo.

Kind of curious how this compares to Carpro Ech2o. Ech2o takes noticeably more wiping compared to the original Uber. Does Uber2 wipe away as easy as Uber?
 
gorram said:
Slicker than the original Uber doesn`t seem possible, wow. Uber 2 slippery dippery doo.

Kind of curious how this compares to Carpro Ech2o. Ech2o takes noticeably more wiping compared to the original Uber. Does Uber2 wipe away as easy as Uber?
Click to expand...
I can’t vouch yet for Uber SiO2 RW, but will be trying it very soon. It’s always been my opinion that Ech2O gives poor dilution instructions and that it works just fine (lubrication and shine) when diluted 1:20 or even 1:25. I’m not saying it will wipe as easy/streak-free as original Uber RW at these lower dilutions (because it’s near impossible to apply easier than Uber RW); but it should definitely reduce streaking a lot while still maintaining enough positive, safe benefits.

This all just from my experience.
 
acuRAS82 said:
It’s always been my opinion that Ech2O gives poor dilution instructions and that it works just fine (lubrication and shine) when diluted 1:20 or even 1:25.
Click to expand...

Um...huh? I think part of the problem with the Ech2O instructions is it was originally intended as waterless wash, then because there are so many multi-use/multi-dilution products, people tried it/wanted to try it as a RW so Corey put up some RW dilutions. But you`ve got me all confused with the ratios you are suggesting which are in the QD range. CarPro US suggests 2/3-1 oz/gallon or 1:200 (.64 oz/gal), depending where you look, for RW. I think I usually use 1oz/gal, which as you suggest may be on the heavy side.
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Um...huh? I think part of the problem with the Ech2O instructions is it was originally intended as waterless wash, then because there are so many multi-use/multi-dilution products, people tried it/wanted to try it as a RW so Corey put up some RW dilutions. But you`ve got me all confused with the ratios you are suggesting which are in the QD range. CarPro US suggests 2/3-1 oz/gallon or 1:200 (.64 oz/gal), depending where you look, for RW. I think I usually use 1oz/gal, which as you suggest may be on the heavy side.
Click to expand...

Even though we are talking about rinseless’s heRe I think acura was talking about it in waterless form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Coatings=crack said:
Even though we are talking about rinseless’s heRe I think acura was talking about it in waterless form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Thanks bud. Yes, I was talking about waterless wash dilutions. I think the bottle recommends too strong of dilutions (1:10-1:15), which on some paints including both my vehicles with black paint, can cause significant streaking. 1:20 is my preferred dilution but think it is also could be safe and useful at 1:25. These are less diluted numbers than the current bottle’s QD recommendation.

I have no problem with the RW dilution, which like most RWs out there, is in the 1:2gal territory (1:200). I stick to 1:200, particularly 1.25oz:2gal for my RW use.

Sorry to move to WW dilution conversation... while WG is called an RW, to me it (and Ech2O) is every bit of RW, WW, QD combined so I have trouble keeping on only one topic, and it often leads to confusion. Coatings=crack knows this and has my back, lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top