An Expert Speaks About Waxes & Sealants

The following is from Jon Miller, Chemical Engineer/Author:

"I have been asked in several emails, what are the differences between waxes, nano coatings and ploymers?

The use of a wax or polymer sealant can make a subtle yet significant difference to the overall look of a car. This is very subjective and will depend on many personal preferences. This is because waxes and sealant layers have different physical properties (texture, density, opacity, etc), and thus reflect and refract light differently.

Organic Carnuaba waxes tend to produce a much softer, warmer, glossier finish, while inorganic (polymers and nanotechnology coatings) tend to produce a sharper, mirror type shine.

A polymer, nanotechnology, and a wax do essentially the same thing; that are all coatings that are applied to our car's paint to protect it from environmental damage. These products contain a mexture of ingredients that offer unique protection and gloss enhancing properties due to the way they reflect light.

A polymer provides better protection from heat radiation and provides a better durability than an organic wax; it also provides a bright mirror like shine that some say exceed them in durability, scratch resistance and hardness.

An organic wax will appear to have a deeper more refined colour and vibrancy (subjective) as well as a depth and warmth, creating a shine that looks more natural. An organic wax provides provides resistance to acid attack from bird excrement, industrial fallout and alkaline minerals from sprinklers.

Wax doesn't form a bond to the paint surface like a nano or polymer, but instead forms a hard shell. Without this sacrificial coating provided by the car wax, your vehicle's paint finish will quickly oxidize and deteriorate.

Nanotechnology and polymer coatings form a molecular bond with the paint surface and provide a limited sacrificial protection by oxidizing. They also provide better protection from ultra violet light than an organic wax.

Jon I absolutely love how Jon explains things in an easy to understand style of writing.

The following is from a chemist who has worked in, and is still working in the auto detail chemical industry, for more than 30 years. His name is withheld due to the fact that he is still working for a major and well known company in the industry.

He is also what I would consider an "expert" and his commentary on Mr Hill's comments are interesting:

"It appears to me that this chemical engineer is talking to hear himself talk, with all due respect.

Why does he differentiate between "polymer" and "nanotechnology?"

Nanotechnology is a "science" not a product catagory.

Nano can be in the form of micro-emulsion waxes, a filler material, for example a nano abrasive of even a polymer.

You can have nano materials in a polymer product or a wax product.

The nano material itself may be the "wax" or the "polymer."

My experience with chemical engineers is that they have an inflated view of themselves and like to pontificate, but it appears to me that he has never formulated, tested and re-formulated detailing protection products as I have done for more than 30 years.

Bits and pieces of what he states about wax shine and other shines make sense, but that is about it, in my opinion.

Regards

Interesting but also an interesting second post, Bud. We can get direction from both.

That is the key to knowledge, to get information from numerous sources and then use your logic to determine which source is the most reliable.

When you don't know anything then it is very easy to be mislead.

Both men are well intentioned in their contributions but which is really most correct?

Bud Abraham

Mr. anonymous had a really great opportunity to educate us if Jon's information was incorrect. Instead this phantom 30 year chemist pontificates and has not said a blasted thing nor provided any further insight into the subject.

Quite frankly what is the set up here...something stinks... Jons post was done on another site...why not challenge him there? Instead Jons statement is being posted here where he cannot see the reply of this phantom chemist.. nor can he defend his statements when someone questions the veracity of his claims and suggests he talking to hear himself..

This kind of BS stinks! I believe in a sense of fair play.

Gina

Why are you so suspicious. Nothing stinks here at all. This chemist works for a noted company in the industry. I have known him for years and run things by him quite often for his opinion.

He has asked me to not use his name for obvious reasons.

There is nothing to be paranoid about here, no alterior motives at all, just providing information to the industry.

This is an area where I certainly do not have the knowledge to comment on what either person says.

Take it for what it is worth and nothing more.


Regards



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/22/2010 01:38AM by buda.

I will take your word for it and take it for what it is worth and nothing more.

Gina you seem to think you are judge and jury of what is posted on this forum and you certainly insure to monitor what I post and say.

I should be flattered that you follow my posts with such scurtiny.

Thank you

Gina you seem to think you are judge and jury of what is posted on this forum and you certainly insure to monitor what I post and say.

I should be flattered that you follow my posts with such scurtiny.

I am not the judge of anyone or anything... and was sincere when I said I would take your word for it.. Please don't flatter yourself too much.. I think fair play does matter,,, using anonymous sources to discredit another person is not the type of values I subscribe to...

Perhaps it is because I hold you to a higher standard and expect too much of you as an industry expert why I scrutinized the way you set this up and find it all so very disappointing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/22/2010 03:22AM by concoursgarage.

As I said Gina you are setting yourself up as judge and jury. And you seem to have an obsession of monitoring what I post and having a retort to it.

Actually I asked Jon to post on the forum. He posted on another forum and I took the liberty of taking that post and putting here because I thought it quite valuable information.

At the same time I sent his post to the chemist that I know and respect to see what he had to say. The comments posted were not intended in any way to discredit Jon, far from it. I was simply posting what another said.

The readers, including you can "take what you like and leave the rest, or take none."

Rather than taking or leaving you seem, as usual, to be judging, especially what I have to say. Do you have a problem with me and what I say?

Regards

I pretty much am in agreement with what Mr. Miller has shared with us.
He cuts it down to the quick, so most can comprehend and understand the basic differences.

Good information, and presented very well.

I find this comment interesting:

My experience with chemical engineers is that they have an inflated view of themselves and like to pontificate, but it appears to me that he has never formulated, tested and re-formulated detailing protection products as I have done for more than 30 years.

Bits and pieces of what he states about wax shine and other shines make sense, but that is about it, in my opinion.

Bud says I know nothing because I challenge so called experts. According to this
expert who does not give his name for no reason stated leads me to believe
more people should.

Hey Bud

A little touchy arent we?

As I said Gina you are setting yourself up as judge and jury. And you seem to have an obsession of monitoring what I post and having a retort to it.

Gina you should no better than that? You are just a detailer, not an expert.

By the way, compare this statement from one of expertdetailers posts to me:
Re: Worlds best wax, $99 for 3ozs. It would not take me 7 years to figure out this scam.
Posted by: expertdetailer (IP Logged)
Date: March 22, 2011 01:46PM

Hey Bill what do you care what he sells his customers? You the judge and jury here? Cleave it be let him do what he wants why should he listen to you? You don't listen to those here who know more than you. Frankly speaking I wish someone else would post not you.

Oddly similiar

Hey Bill

Stop by Jim Farrell's detail operation in Naples and let him demonstrate his revolutionary new BUFFPRO Polishing Tool.

He gets up to $4,000 to polish cars so I believe he knows a thing or two about detailing and polishing. I asked him about AT-5 and he never heard of it but would be willling to try it if you stop by and show him how to use it.

Jim is one of the most open and receptive detail people I know in the industry and would welcome you coming by and seeing him.

Should I tell him you will contact him?

Bud Abraham

Bud

I will give him a call.What is his number again?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/25/2011 02:15AM by billd55.

His number 239-992-2220
Jim Farrell

Bill how did your meeting with Jim Farrell go?

Bud Abraham

Bud

Jim and I are on the same page when it comes to swirl marks. We both hate them.
If you are using compound for correction, then the Buff Pro is the only ticket.

We compared notes on boat detailing. He uses a 3 step grit method with the
Buff Pro. It does work, but it is time consuming, and it does wear the gel coat down.It costs him $150 a gallon for the compound he uses.

I feel the results from my 1 step method are virtually the same as his IMO. He cleans the non skid floors on a boat ,and I polish it.This cannot be done with compound.

It really makes a big difference when they are polished using the Gem product I use.It costs $20.00 a gallon if used full strength.

He only had an hour to spend with me,but hopefully we can get together in the
near future. He stated he was going to try AT-5, so maybe you can contact him
to get an opinion of what he thinks about it.

He told me the product he now uses is a $150 a gallon. He can get a gallon of AT-5
for around $50 with shipping included.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2011 09:04PM by billd55.

See my post under the other topic where I comment on what he told me about your one step process.

I do not know about the products he uses, but the only compound that might cost that kind of money is a 3M compound. I will aske him.

If you are talking price our DIAMOND Shine PLUS only costs $26.95 a gallon and for you I would sell for $23.95.

Regards
Bud ABraham

Bud

Comparing your product to AT-5 by price is not the question. AT-5 should be sold for much more for what it does.To get the price I mention is not well known.I have been dealing with these people for many years.

Paying $600 for a can of wax that offers a nice shine for a car show, and beads water that is really no different from Turtle wax makes my point. Price
is not a reflection of quality.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2011 04:30AM by billd55.

Bill

So what you are telling me is that the AT5 are ripping people off charging an even higher price than $50 gallon. But only special people like you get this special price.

Anyone can buy my DIAMOND Shine PLUS for $26.95 gallon whether a first time or long time customer.

The only companies getting away with charging $600 for a can of wax are Zymol and Swissvax. More power to them if they find those "suckers who are born every minute," as PT Barnham said years ago.

Actually, Menzerna does not do a bad job of getting way too much for their chemicals too.

Bud
Anyone can get that price, but very few people know about Gem products except professionals. Their products are not marketed to the general public like others are.

My point is that you infer that a cheap price is all you should look for when buying a product. Jim is paying $150 a gallon for a product that he says is not a
wax, but a synthetic. He did not mention the name.

I mentioned that he could get AT-5 with a slower drying time formula which costs
more for around $50 including shipping. He is looking for a product that will
provide true protection against the Florida elements, not a cheap price. If AT-5
works better than the one he is now using, than the $100 savings is just extra money in his pocket.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2011 12:47PM by billd55.

Bud

I am interested what is in your sealant? Does it contain wax? What does it offer me for a lower price.Do I have to use a special soap for washing? Does it offer any UV protection?Does it seal the finish or just create a shell through cross linking.

If I get tree sap on my paint will it prevent a dark spot in the clear when I get around to removing it? How long will it last, and what do I have to do when I need
another coat?

$26.95 is cheaper, but what will it offer me besides paying a little less money?
Here is your chance to promote your product to me.

It offers all of the above, plus it provides protection against acid rain to a pH of 3 which is about as acidic as you can get without destroying the finish.

It is one of the most duruable products against salt water corrosion and looses very little shine after several washings, verified by tests with a Glossometer.

If you would like a MSDS on the product happy to provide for you. Send your email to buda@detailplus.com

Regards
Bud A

Bud

I am interested what is in your sealant? Does it contain wax? What does it offer me for a lower price.Do I have to use a special soap for washing? Does it offer any UV protection?Does it seal the finish or just create a shell through cross linking.

If I get tree sap on my paint will it prevent a dark spot in the clear when I get around to removing it? How long will it last, and what do I have to do when I need
another coat?

$26.95 is cheaper, but what will it offer me besides paying a little less money?
Here is your chance to promote your product to me.

I found this about your product:

Unquestioningly the finest and most carefully formulated paint sealant on the market. USC rated Diamond Shine Plus as the BEST wax and paint sealant on the market after being put up against 25 of the best waxes and paint sealants on the market! Factors to determine results included gloss, durability and corrosion resistance. Diamond Shine Plus was proven to: 1. Increase the gloss of the test area by 20% or more 2. Lose less than 2% of the gloss after the washings 3. Not lose any water beading during and after the 12 washings 4. Exhibit corrosion protection that was better than the unwaxed control panel

It increases shine by 20% or more

After 12 washings it loses less than 2% after 12 washings. What soap did you use?

Not lose any water beading during and after the 12 washings

Exhibit corrosion protection that was better than the unwaxed control panel.
I would hope it would.

Bud these test results are nothing to write home about.Basically, your product
offers shine and water beading longer than others on the market. You may be right
that it may be the best, but compared to what AT-5 offers, I will pay the extra
money unless you can tell me something different.

That is your choice Bill. But as PT Barnham said, "there is a _______born every minute."

Bud

This is not much of sales pitch for your product. Is everything a quote
for you?

Bill bet you drove your mother and your teachers crazy.

Bud

Do you ever make a point. Everything is a quote or a comment from you
when someone does not agree with you.You are very closed minded, and
very opinionated. I posted comments from others who say the same thing.


I seems you are on a mission to prove me or anyone else that does not agree with you as wrong.You do not ask questions for knowledge, but to discredit people.

Everything you say is based on your opinion, or what some chemist says. It really
seems you cannot stand anyone saying that there may be a better sealant than yours.

I may not agree with what everything Jim Farrell says, but he has an open mind.
I respect him for his passion to build a better polisher to solve the swirl mark
problem.Although, he has the fore sight to believe that there maybe a better
product for protection than what he us using. You do not.