Is this crazy?

[Top Gear]

Re: Is this crazy?

Uh, no, RPPM/Guz, nothing was debunked. Points were misunderstood, though, as it seems they are again. The facts of what are in Meg's products are not under dispute, and certainly not by me. The reality of keeping a daily driver properly protected in areas where we actually have weather, though, that's another story. There is essentially no difference in longevity between Meg's waxes and sealants when put to such tests, and that is what Stoops has said to me. Once again, no protection from a wax or sealant could last more than a month or so, perhaps even more like a week, when dealing with rain, road grime, cleaning, etc, and NOT being regularly boosted.

Maybe in SoCal or other areas of the SW, where it's very dry, never rains, and the car isn't driven except to shows, maybe then there is some seeming difference, but even then, I've seen no evidence whatsoever to support it. If you're waiting for your sealant to wear out because you erroneously think it will last six months, you're just wrong. Claims like that are the only false information I see spread by some on this site.

Since it is the case that no Meguiar's protection can be 100% effective for more than a week or maybe a month given wide swings of weather and washing, it doesn't matter what protection is used. The war between wax and sealant is pointless in terms of Meguiar's products, because of the true and valid points I have made. What is important is that your choice of protection is very regularly boosted. Topping is not boosting. Mixing product on the pad might yield some placebo effect that works for you.

[RPPM]

Re: Is this crazy?

Do you have the back up to what Mr. Stoops said? That certainly wasn't what he said in the forum post on this topic a couple of years ago.

[Top Gear]

Re: Is this crazy?

It's not up to me to show you how to search the forum. I think another way of explaining it is this: How long can you go with a fresh application of ULW or other Meg's sealant on a daily driver before you're reaching for UQW or UWWA?? I guarantee you, in exactly equal conditions, it's exactly the same time frame for me in reaching for GCQW or UWWA with GC or Detailer D301. I also reject (due to a complete lack of evidence) that Meg's sealants outlast Meg's carnauba-polymer blends by any significant measure. You'll need to back that one up yourself. I'll give you a day or two, but months it will not be. GC, D301, and others are blends, and that is a fact - that's what makes them awesome Meguiar's products. Rain, sunlight, road grime, etc, will destroy any protection layer in a matter of hours or days, and that is also a fact.

[RPPM]

Re: Is this crazy?

I know how to search the forum. I know what was said in the thread from a few years back, and Mr. Stoops didn't say what you typed in your reply above on the public forum. He distinctly said with all things being equal, a pure Meguiars sealant would outlast a Meguiars Carnauba blend by a significant amount of time. I'm pretty sure there are others on here that remember it as well. By all means, believe what you want to believe. All I am asking is for you to say all these things are your opinion, not the facts you state them to be.

[The Guz]

Re: Is this crazy?

I recall that thread as well. Top Gear I would like to see you post this topic over on Autogeek or Autopia. I can say that most if not all will disagree with you regardless of brand/manufacturer.

I don't know which is worse your continuous posting about false information regarding sealants and carnauba's. Or the posts about how all paint is hard or even how the Mirror Glaze line, Ultimate Line and DAMF line leave a different color hue on the car.

[wheckathorn]

Re: Is this crazy?

Top Gear, If there is no protection difference? Why does Megs continue to make two product? Sealants & Waxes.....

[Top Gear]

Re: Is this crazy?

Guys, I realize you may want to disagree with me, but the problem is you've all conceded the point I'm actually making long ago, when you've admitted to using quik wax (of any type) to boost your so-called "sealant" (ie. synthetic wax), or when you've talked about re-waxing in any interval less than 6+ months (or whatever the latest claims are regarding longevity). If a synthetic wax with no carnauba was so automatically long-lasting and durable as the claims suggest (eg. calling it a "sealant"), you wouldn't need to boost it, or regularly re-apply it. A synthetic wax is not a coating, but you talk as if it were. Yet, Meguiar's carnauba-enriched waxes are also not pure carnauba products, either. They are combinations of various synthetic ingredients along with some carnauba-like ingredients. Thus, the typical arguments regarding "pure synthetic vs pure carnauba" totally miss the point of this discussion, because of Chemistry, but also because of weather, washing, and sunlight. Here is Mr. Stoops directly on point:

(Re: Caught driving in rain the day after I waxed my car. Rewax? Wax washed off?)
While prolonged, heavy rain can and will greatly shorten the lifespan of any wax (synthetics will hold up much longer than carnaubas, by the way) a fresh coat exposed to a bit of rain the next day should be no big deal. In fact, it should actually make cleaning the car a bit easier! If you didn't spend a lot of time on a freeway in a massive downpour, getting dumped on by a bunch of semi trucks kicking up all the crud from the road surface, you should be able to easily clean the car using a rinseless or waterless wash instead of pulling out the hose and bucket. That, however, is a decision only you can make.

You don't need to rewax every time you get rained on, but keep in mind that there is a difference in how tenacious a wax will hold depending on how old it is. In your current situation a fresh coat of wax is going to be fine but if you hadn't waxed in many months and the wax you did was a carnauba, odds are there wouldn't be much left anyway and a good rain will deplete the remaining. Remember, carnauba waxes degrade naturally over time, they don't simply suddenly disappear one day. Synthetics behave the same way, they just tend to be much more durable. You can, however, quickly kill any fresh coat of wax by using a truly "touchless" car wash, like the ones often found at gas stations. These tend to use a very low pH wash followed by a very high pH wash, then a neutralizing rinse. It's those two extreme pH washes that will strip wax off in one go. It's nice that they're truly touchless because they can't inflict any swirl marks, but they'll take your wax off very quickly.

Since you've got a fresh coat of wax on your car get a feel for how a quick detail spray feels on it - how the towel glides across the paint; how quickly it picks up the quick detailer; how easily the quick detailer dries from the surface. When that ease fades and you find yourself wiping a bit more or the towel starts to drag, that's a good indicator that your wax has depleted and it's time for a fresh application.

So, here is a respected Meguiar's product rep telling you the same thing I've been saying, even describing something like ULW as a synthetic wax. Would a pure synthetic wax like ULW seem to last longer than one blended with carnauba, like GCLW? Possibly, but not in my experience. I've seen no real evidence to say otherwise, other than wild claims on discussion forums. Also, it may seem bold or controversial to say so on this forum, but a product rep, even as well-spoken and knowledgeable as Mr. Stoops or others, are posting on this product discussion forum in such a manner as to provide broad support to all their customers, and that includes me as well as it includes you. I'm not disagreeing with anything said by the product reps on this site because they know their products better than I do, but they also don't negate my real world experiences, where I have to deal with frequent and violent rain storms, wide swings of humidity, pollen and tree sap, and so forth, on top of sun exposure, sand/grit at interstate speeds, etc.

Ergo, it is totally irrelevant how long a given synthetic wax might possibly last. There are two reasons for me to say that: (1) Non-carnauba synthetic waxes simply have not lasted significantly longer in my experience (less in some tests) despite the claims of product reps or others on discussion forums; (2) Even if a synthetic wax did last significantly longer, normal maintenance techniques such as waterless washing, wax boosting, and bucket washing will mean I'll be wiping that synthetic wax off just as quickly as I would a carnauba-enriched synthetic blended wax.

The other thread you guys seem to remember wrongly is where Stoops and others also misunderstood my similar point (which was not what they were arguing against). That disconnect in what we were actually talking about was later cleared up by phone and in PMs with Mr. Stoops. I've since had two more years to see my basic point affirmed over and over and over again. Maybe where you live you don't have to deal with strong rains or wild swings of humidity or epic pollen or high-speed grit, so you might be completely unable to understand how devastating any of that can be to your chosen synthetic wax, as great a product as that may be.

So, to restate, if your argument is somehow that sunlight and weather have no effect on your synthetic wax, then you're wrong. If your argument is that maintenance, like washing and wiping, doesn't affect your synthetic wax, then you're wrong. If your argument is that Top Gear is disagreeing with Stoops, then you're also wrong. If your argument is that something like ULW will always outlast something like GCLW, then you could possibly be right, or very wrong, depending on the facts of life. The material point you all have conceded is that it doesn't matter how long a given synthetic wax supposedly lasts in theory, because you will have wiped it off long before it would normally expire anyway. That a given synthetic wax might possibly outlast a given synthetic/carnauba blend is really a pointless argument found only on discussion forums. Therefore, the related point is that "topping" is a waste of time and product (in terms of longevity), because again, due to weather and driving in the real world, you will be wiping all that work off within days, or certainly weeks, compromising your own protection, making it fail faster if not otherwise boosted. Since "weeks" is all I can reasonably expect from a temporary protective product like a synthetic wax or blend in the real world, this is why I happily use carnauba-enriched blends and boost very regularly...

...and also, because it looks better

[RPPM]

Re: Is this crazy?

In your own attachment, Mr. Stoops makes two statements that fly directly in the face of what you have been writing. One, Synthetics are far more durable than a carnauba based wax, and two, the polymers in Megs Carnauba blends have NOTHING to do with durability. I am done debating with you. Yes, obviously a quick wax topper will boost protection. NOBODY in this thread ever said anything contrary to that. You change the subject to back up the fiction you write.

Here is what Mr. Stoops writes. Pretty straight forward if you ask me...

Top Gear, please stop assuming that there is a myth to synthetic sealants lasting longer than traditional carnauba waxes. You seem to have an agenda here that we can't quite figure out. From a previous thread:

Originally Posted by Top Gear
Well, M26 is not a Quik Wax (as the OP was asking about), but is the blended (ie. Hi-Tech) Yellow Wax (ie. with carnauba) on which Gold Class Liquid/Paste/Quik Wax is based. GC 2.0 is more advanced than M26, I've read somewhere here, due to its newer ingredient blends. IMO, the only reason to choose M26 over GC is if you're buying volume and doing a LOT of cars professionally. Otherwise, all waxes and quik waxes I'm aware of from Meg's are either synwaxes or synwax/carnauba blends. Ergo, GC Liquid, Paste, and Quik Waxes are all hybrids. GC products last every bit as long as UW/NXT, despite the bogus myths.




And our response to that:

You're assuming, then, that all synthetic ingredients are the same, right? There is no doubt that the long chain polymers used in "purely synthetic" waxes like NXT and Ultimate are very different from any synthetic ingredient used in Gold Class or M26. Different like night and day. It's almost like saying "all tires are the same because they use some percentage of natural rubber and a bunch of synthetic materials in their tread compound". On the face of it, that's true (some natural rubber and a whole recipe of "other") but in reality there are enormous differences in tire performance and it's not just because of the percentage mix of ingredients - it's the actual ingredients used and how they behave.

Synthetic polymers encompass an enormous range of possibilities, and that's the beauty of them. They are totally man made and as such we have complete control over their characteristics because they are designed in. While it is indeed true that all carnauba waxes are hybrids of some sort, just what those other ingredients are can play a huge role in user experience, durability, gloss, etc. There is no "bogus myth" about synthetics lasting longer than carnaubas - it's fact, based on the very unique ingredients used in full synthetic products. Is it possible to take a product like Ultimate Wax and add some carnauba to it and call it a hybrid? Sure. But that's definitely not what's happening with our carnauba waxes.


Your response to the above was:

Originally Posted by Top Gear
No, not at all. I'm assuming that Meguiar's has created a wide array of different and frequently changing blends using the wonders of advanced chemistry. I did not say all Meg's waxes are the same, but that they are all either synthetic wax blends or synthetic wax blends with carnauba. In short, I do not see a 100% carnauba-only product on your website. This is not a criticism. My amazement at Gold Class in particular is that it is such an advanced blend, a "best of both worlds" approach, but I certainly have never thought it was simply Ultimate or anything else with carnauba added.

I also said that Gold Class will last, for me anyway, as long as anything else you sell. I did not say that carnauba oil alone lasts as long as a synthetic wax, because it does not. I've also used various synwaxes that washed off in a couple of weeks. The bogus myths, to me, are about Gold Class/M26, not carnauba. People right here on these forums assume that Gold Class/M26 are not going to last more than a few days because they are "carnauba waxes", as they put it, so they choose Ultimate, NXT, or others, because they assume those will last longer. Yet, I've never seen a real world comparison that proves the synthetic aspects of Gold Class/M26 do not last, near enough as to make no difference, as long as any straight synthetic. However, my argument has been very clear that regardless of how long these waxes last, we will be boosting them one way or another long before, if we do very simple things like using a wash-n-wax soap or a quik product.



This still seems to show a lack of understanding of the fact that the "synthetic" ingredients that are contained in Gold Class/M26 have absolutely zero to do with those found in Ultimate or NXT. Yes, we agree that some synwaxes will wash off pretty quickly, but again, not all synthetics contain the same ingredients. We have always said that synthetics, as a group, will out last carnauba waxes, as a group. On the face of it, that implies that there may in fact be some overlap. We have no doubt at all that if you were to look at all sealants and waxes on the market today, and compare the most durable "carnuaba wax" to the least durable "synthetic sealant", you would probably see better durability out of that particular carnauba product compared to that particular synthetic product. No big shock there, really. But without a doubt, and there is no "myth" about it, the synthetic polymers found in Ultimate Wax will provide longer lasting protection than the whole mix of ingredients found in Gold Class. You are right when you say that carnauba waxes are not terribly durable and do require regular reapplication or boosting. Certainly the actual carnauba component is more susceptible to temperature extremes and heavy rain fall, but the fact of the matter is that the synthetic ingredients that offer protection in Ultimate are able to withstand these extremes much better. That said, prolonged heavy rain is extremely hard on any wax or sealant. What's really important to consider, however, is that the synthetic ingredients found in most carnauba waxes are not there to necessarily provide durability or protection, but rather to aid with the very subjective visual appearance and/or the ease of application and removal. Some of those same ingredients may well be found in Ultimate, and for the same reasons. But they have nothing to do with the durability of either product. NXT and Ultimate are both 100% synthetic polymers, but the list of ingredients is quite different.

We are almost shooting ourselves in the foot by admitting that Ultimate will outlast and out protect Gold Class, but it's true. But not everyone puts durability at the top of their list when selecting a wax/sealant. Some people don't even like the look of synthetics and much prefer carnauba for that reason alone. That's fine. Buy what you like - and there are plenty here on MOL who recommend and use brands other than Meguiar's, and we have no problem with that, either. But please stop saying that some sort of myth is being perpetuated regarding our carnauba waxes versus our synthetics. It's simply not true.

[davey g-force]

Re: Is this crazy?



Not this argument again!

[Philt922]

Re: Is this crazy?

It's weird that I actually read the original "discussion" last night/this morning and I'm reading the 2016 version this evening. From everything I've ever read anywhere sealants last longer than waxes and two coats are better than one. However, I'm still learning...

[uziel5000]

Re: Is this crazy?

Wow... I post for the first time and cause controversy (an old one at that it seems) so I guess I'm batting 1.00. LOL First, sorry about that. I thought that the question was straight forward. Was not aware that it was hot topic. Second, Top Gear: After reading your very thought-out posts on this and I certainly appreciate your passion on this, I don't think you understood what I was trying to ask or I just didn't explain it properly. I'm in no way saying that adding a coat of carnauba will make the finish last longer. My question was geared towards aesthetics more than anything else. Will a synthetic wax coat followed by a carnauba coat will give me the best of both worlds from an aesthetic standpoint. This is merely a "looks" thing.

As far as the "sealant vs. carnauba" argument, I am certainly no expert. In fact, I'm "brand newb". However, I have read several articles of tests conducted by Consumer Reports where they found that synthetics do in fact last longer than carnauba-based waxes. Specifically, they found the protection provided by synthetic waxes to be more resistant to "real life" variables like regular washing and rain which you mention and confirms your posted quote from Michael Stoops that they last longer.

[Michael Stoops]

Re: Is this crazy?

Wow... I post for the first time and cause controversy (an old one at that it seems) so I guess I'm batting 1.00. LOL First, sorry about that.

Nah, you didn't cause any controversy and you have zero to apologize about!!

Uhm, no this isn't true. No less an authority than Meguiars own Mr. Mike Stoops debunked what Top Gear said about carnauba wax/polymer blends vs. pure sealants and longevity. Please stop spreading false information. Just because there is a "polymer" in Megs GC+ doesn't mean it will last close to as long as say Megs ULC. There are all different kinds of polymers, some manmade, some occurring naturally. Some make the product easier to use, etc.

Go ahead and top your sealant with a wax if you want No harm in it. Will it last longer? It might. It won't do any harm. Do what feels best for you.

Yes, this ^^

Uh, no, RPPM/Guz, nothing was debunked. Points were misunderstood, though, as it seems they are again. The facts of what are in Meg's products are not under dispute, and certainly not by me. The reality of keeping a daily driver properly protected in areas where we actually have weather, though, that's another story. There is essentially no difference in longevity between Meg's waxes and sealants when put to such tests, and that is what Stoops has said to me. Once again, no protection from a wax or sealant could last more than a month or so, perhaps even more like a week, when dealing with rain, road grime, cleaning, etc, and NOT being regularly boosted.

Oh boy.

OK, once again: Yes, Gold Class Carnauba Plus and M26 High Tech Yellow Wax, while both classed as carnauba waxes, do indeed contain some polymers. But that in no way whatsoever means they'll last as long as fully synthetic polymer sealants. And, again, here's why: The polymers used in fully synthetic polymer sealants are polymers designed to add durability to the product. As others have pointed out here, the word "polymer" is incredibly broad in scope, and represents an almost infinitely variable group of material. DNA, the building block of life, is a polymer. Styrofoam is a polymer. Neither of which are found in fully synthetic polymers, nor as part of the polymers added to carnauba waxes such as Gold Class or M26. There is no crossover in the polymers used in Ultimate Wax or NXT with those found in Gold Class or M26. The polymers in GC/M26 are there to help with gloss, ease of application and removal, etc. They are not durable, highly protective polymers like those found in Ultimate or NXT. To say that they are is like saying a Ferrari F12berlinetta and a Toyota Corolla are the same car because both use a front mounted internal combustion engine (using the typical 4 stroke Otto cycle, no less) that drives two wheels through a variable ratio transmission; they are both powered by the kind of gasoline you can find at any local filling station; both are controlled by a steering wheel situated in front of the driver and a set of foot actuated pedals that govern both speed and braking parameters. That sure makes them sound like the same thing on paper, but in the real world they are light years apart in every measurable metric.


Now, uziel5000, to your original question about whether there is anything to gain from using both a carnauba and a synthetic on your car at the same time: while you certainly can, there is no real reason to do so. Both are stand alone products and each will suffice on its own. Any visual differences that may exist are such that not everyone can discern the difference, and even when someone can their choice of which one looks "best" is purely subjective. I've always likened this to wine tasting. For some people there are two choices: white wine and red wine, and that's as far as their pallet can take them. To others, the complexity differences between various varietals of red wines will dictate which they choose depending on the dish they are pairing it with. Similarly, those who profess to see differences not only between synthetic and carnauba waxes often take that even further and will tell you that they see differences between different carnaubas! And they'll have a favorite wax for almost every color of car you can come across. Fine. Cool. If they can see the difference (just as the wine connoisseur can tell the difference between a Zinfandel and a Merlot) then who's to tell them that their choice in wax is wrong? It's an opinion based on personal taste. Nothing there is based in science, unlike the choice of which polymer is selected for which purpose when formulating a wax or sealant - because the science there is actually amazingly complex.

So, if you want to lay down a carnauba over a synthetic, for whatever reason, go for it. If you want to do it the other way around, go for it. Just keep these points in mind:

• if you have selected a certain synthetic because of it's hydrophobic polymer characteristics, you will effectively lose those characteristics if you apply a carnauba on top of it. The top layer will dictate surface tension, and that is what dictates water beading or sheeting, and even the tightness of the water beads
• you can not layer carnauba waxes - the solvents in the formulation necessary to make the carnauba wax usable in first place will break down the first layer of wax when the second one is being applied, giving you a net gain of zero. It's in the science, and you aren't going to fool science.
• whether you choose a carnauba or synthetic, a liquid or a paste, always apply it very thin and allow it dry fully before wipe off. Again, science is going to dictate how much product is going to bond to the paint and remain behind after you wipe off the hazed residue. And, as stated previously, you aren't going to outsmart science.
• when wiping off the residue, you shouldn't have to do anything more than that - wipe. A vigorous buffing will not produce more gloss, and it may well remove that microscopically thin layer you wanted to leave behind in the first place. Plus it's just more work than you need to be doing in the fist place - don't make this harder than it needs to be!!

[Michael Stoops]

Re: Is this crazy?

I just reread this again:

Uh, no, RPPM/Guz, nothing was debunked. Points were misunderstood, though, as it seems they are again. The facts of what are in Meg's products are not under dispute, and certainly not by me. The reality of keeping a daily driver properly protected in areas where we actually have weather, though, that's another story. There is essentially no difference in longevity between Meg's waxes and sealants when put to such tests, and that is what Stoops has said to me. Once again, no protection from a wax or sealant could last more than a month or so, perhaps even more like a week, when dealing with rain, road grime, cleaning, etc, and NOT being regularly boosted.

I most certainly did NOT say that there is no difference in longevity between our waxes and sealants under real world weather conditions. What I said, and what I always say at every single Saturday Class, TNOG, seminar, trade show, etc (and I can't even count how many training sessions I've been involved in over the years!!) is that weather extremes are hard on both carnaubas and synthetics, but that synthetics will withstand such attacks far better than carnaubas will. Durability of synthics can easily be double that of a carnauba. So in a "best case" scenario - a perfectly prepped car sitting in an enclosed garage all the time - a carnauba wax may last several months while a synthetic will last closer to a year. But subject that same car to heavy rains, road salt, extreme heat, etc and the lifespan of both falls away, sometimes sharply. But the synthetic will still outlast the carnauba. A situation of extreme heavy rain that lasts for a couple of weeks can kill a carnauba in that time frame. The synthetic would survive it, even though it will still likey be compromised to some extent. Heck, a good APC wash will strip even a fresh carnauba application, but it will take several APC washes to remove a fresh synthetic.

Even when I prep our demo hoods for our Advanced Class, I make sure to strip off whatever might be on them before we start wet sanding. Why, even if we're going to wetsand? Because the presence of a fresh polymer sealant will load up a sanding disc and dramatically slow down the sanding process! And what I have to go through to strip something like Ultimate Wax or even UQW from the paint is crazy - multiple spray downs with IPA, glass cleaner and APC. I hate nothing more than seeing one of our guys demo Ultimate Wax or UQW/D156 on one of these hoods days before I know I'm going to be doing a sanding seminar because I know it's going to be a real bugger to get that stuff off the paint. If they just did a demo on Gold Class/M25, I wouldn't care. Give me a little dish soap and it's gone in a heartbeat.

[Mr. Slick]

Re: Is this crazy?

Well glad that's solved. I had gold class carnauba wax, and High Tech yellow. When I saw Ultimate class, I got it because I wanted something that would last longer than carnauba because most of my customers will only get their cars waxed once a year at most.

[Top Gear]

Re: Is this crazy?

The gang's all together again I'm still not hearing anything contradictory. I respect anyone's true first-hand experience in what they think they are getting out of a synthetic wax. Must be nice. By the same token, I've had no reason whatsoever to trust pure synthetics will last any notable time longer than a carnauba blend. Sorry, if that offends anyone's assumptions about their wax. If a given unboosted synthetic lasts even twice as long as an unboosted carnauba blend (and it won't), why that would still only be a total of weeks at best, not months, in my experience. The marketing hype around synthetic waxes like ULW and NXT is irrelevant to me in the context of weather, humidity cycles, and frequent boosting and cleaning. Perhaps during a rare seasonally dry period in the Southeast a difference between two waxes might be notable, but it's not repeatable, and it begs the question of what you mean by "lasting" in the first place. The micron-thin protection layer will be scratched, thinned, and made ineffective within days or weeks of driving and weather. This is why there is effectively no difference.