Scott HD used to do good tests before his channel went into hibernation 1.5 years ago. He would apply product to test panels, leave them outside 24hrs/day at his shop in Texas, and snow foam & wash once a week until the last product failed. Each update he would state what products he was using to wash it, he would include the average weather conditions of the time period since the last update and the conditions including temperature on the day of the update. He also published and maintained Google Doc spreadsheets tracking his results. Of course that has certain limitations (tells you how the product performs in Texas, not so much in Northern Canada) but I consider that more real world than most of the chemical resistance tests we see today on RUclips.
Yeah those were good tests. Only downside is that they’re not exposed to the exact conditions of a car driving on the road, but the weather being the source of degradation is much more relatable. I am doing a test in a similar fashion, need to probably cue up a few more but I am limited in how many panels I can put outside before my strata starts getting upset.
I really enjoy your tests and testing criteria. I’m an avid RUclips researcher and am constantly trying to find the “best” bang for my buck products. I watch all the channels you stated and they all bring their own subjective tests. Dimitri’s has the closest,most scientific approach even though not quite real world. I like the contact angle and wash tests. That’s raw data, not just a “yeah it’s hydrophobic”. What I’ve been thinking about mostly lately is the abrasion effect on sealants and coatings, but not sure there would be a way to test without severely scratching. In my opinion it is a drastic factor in durability. If I drive 25000 miles per year and someone drives 5000, the vehicle is seeing 5x the abrasion, oils,sand dirt etc. I’d be curious if companies even have a way to check this in their testing. Sorry for the ramblings. Thanks for all you’re doing!
@ That makes maybe more sense. But then again is it highway mileage, dirt roads? There isn’t an exact way to do it. More of an idea of what they think. And I think most brands seem to give the number it lasts for a car that sits in the garage and gets driven once a month🤣
Detail Projects and Forensic Detailing are up there too. The former was really an eye opener for rinseless washes (a lot of them encapsulate and lubricate very poorly compared to others)
@@TheBreakfastLover interesting for sure. All products have their limits. Just like with soap I wouldn’t go directly on the paint without a chemical and rinse first
Love this little rant and facts session. I actually learned some stuff too. As far as lighting, I really like Milwaukees pen light and headlamps. The light color temperature is really nice to see defects and true colors. Plus the batteries tend to last quite a long time. I use them primarily for surprise mechanical work, especially wiring, but works well for paint too.
@@sheepstardetail it’s justified for sure. I haven’t thought of many of the points you brought up when it comes to other channels testing and how it compares to my own real world results. I thought it was purely my own fault in product application or prep. Specifically I have noticed cold vs hot water performance since I have my spigot hooked up to hot soft water (water softener hooked up), yet rain and snow performance (NW IA) have been less than admirable. I do tend to gravitate toward spray on sealants since coatings require maintenance to the point of topping with a sealant where it makes me wonder if a coating is useful if you’re just layering on top of the same product almost infinitely to the point it’s the same as a coating.
@ you don’t need to top coatings, just a deeper clean every few months. I never topped my Cquartz lite section on the van for over a year and it’s still performing.
Interesting video. Very thought provoking - how valid is some of the product testing we see? Totally agree about chemicals. Liked the thoughts on gloss, if you can’t see it does it exist? Slickness is nice - does it help to stop dirt sticking? I would say one of the most important factors is ease of application - if a product fights you when applying (streaky, grabbing etc.) you probably won’t buy that again unless the results are fantastic.
That’s the main thing - it needs to translate in to something the consumer can appreciate. You can use equipment and conduct tests that show differences and variances, but if they aren’t noticeable to the human eye, they should be devalued when rating the product. Easy of use is why spray coatings and sealants have become the most popular product. I have not applied Nu finish graphene to a whole car, because it is miserable to apply.
I like your focus on real world results. Speaking of, I've used a few spray sealants that 'tested well' by other channels (Griot's 3-in-1, Jimbo's, Meguire's). All of them degrade very quickly on the lower body just behind the front tires, while doing much better on the rest of the car. My cars are carefully driven, garage kept and hand washed. Yet I can't go more than 1 or 2 washes before these products break down in that specific area
I have a couple of ways to determine if I like a products hydrophobics. The first one is after I wash the car how well does the water move off the panel with the blower. The other is when the car is a bit dirty and I am driving down the highway in the rain how well does the dust or dirt roll off the hood as I am driving. The durability of products I believe has a lot to do with sun exposure vs washings, which is never really tested unless someone like yourself is putting a product on their daily and checking every now and then. The number one enemy of clear coat is sun and heat cycles. I think Dimitri’s scrubber thing is cool but it’s not anything I would use to determine if I like a product or not. Also for ceramic coatings on my vehicles or my sons I leave a small inconspicuous high spot. It’s not a perfect solution for durability, but it does give me an idea if the coating is hanging on.
I use my Bilt-Hamber pre-washes in the IK Foam Pro 12 using 4 oz of product and 1 gallon of water and have been doing so for about 4 years and hands down its THEE BEST pre-wash I've ever used❗️ You can see it melting away salt/muck during winter use and when used on say days of dust, a simple foam/dwell/rinse is all you need, literally a touch-free wash, plus it resets your coated finish (if your infact ceramic coated) If you haven't used either Touchless or Auto-foam, get some and be ready for pure results👍👍
I do the same but I actually run Touch-Less through my MultiPro9. So it doesn’t foam but I actually prefer it this way after seeing a few reviews based off foaming vs traditional. You are right though it’s definitely the way to go and uses much less product. In which cases do you see yourself reaching for Touch-Less over Auto-Foam & vise versa? I’ve only used Touch-Less and every time I use it I never see myself using something else in its place. Curious to hear your thoughts. Cheers
@BreezeMW honestly, I had a gallon of both and thought they were both similar in performance but because The Clean Garage was phasing it out I got a gallon of Touchless VERY cheap! I'll always have/use Bilt-Hamber for pre-washes, sure I have many others but when it's really bad...there's only 1 choice for me👍👍
I've been using CARPRO Lift for years now, it works fairly well. If a vehicle is exceptionally dirty (particularly the first spring wash after winter salt exposure and build up) I will add a bit of APC to the mixture for some extra cleaning boost. I am currently testing out Armoured Detail Supply Decon but haven't made up my mind about it yet. I will have to try some Bilt-Hamber. Is the IK sprayer substantially better for application than a foam cannon?
When you use a sprayer you don’t need as much chemical (it doesn’t “double dilute” like a foam canon). If you have a foaming sprayer you can get a similar effect. I use mine at 9:1 (roughly 1% PIR) and it is more than enough for most situations (chassis/engine I would go higher).
@@sheepstardetail I'm not that worried about how much product I use, the best possible result with the least amount of effort is more important to me. If a foam cannon costs twice as much but works better than that's the way I will go BUT if a sprayer is more effective I will make the switch, if it's also cheaper that is a welcome bonus. I don't run a detailing business, I maintain my own fleet of cars (5-8 cars that changes yearly) and I buy, recondition, and sell classic cars as a side hobby that makes me a bit of money on the side. I can easily recover the cost of products in the sale price.
I really appreciate you doing these. They are emotionally draining. Ive sort of given up. If manufacturer's claims can't be met in summer, what hope have you in winter? I'm going to just use the products i have, and use them more regularly. Also, how long before products go off? Some say 2 years, and ive a bottle of TW Ceramic Spray that's still got loads in after 4ish years. Is it performing as well now? Wtf knows without buying another. So from your YT point of view, how do you know if a 1 or 2yr old product has degraded or not. Its a minefield this testing game.
Good stuff as always. The spray sealant torture test stuff always rubbed me the wrong way... especially when done by the company/person that created it or sells it (looking at you Pan, Eddie, Jamie and Jimbo). If you have a product that is easy/enjoyable to apply and is relatively cost effective, who cares about durability or chemical resistance? Just apply more as needed. It makes a little more sense on coatings since they are generally more expensive and require more effort to prep and apply (or reapply). But even then... I'm not dumping chemical after chemical onto my car. I'm going to use the least aggressive method to clean it effectively without damaging/staining my plastic trim and rubber seals, or etching my glass.
You forgot one other thing…. …it’s wasteful. Almost half my autofoam has gone towards chemical testing. While I am okay with this as I’m using it to share with others (so only one person is wasting it), eventually it really starts to add up.
Scott HD used to do good tests before his channel went into hibernation 1.5 years ago. He would apply product to test panels, leave them outside 24hrs/day at his shop in Texas, and snow foam & wash once a week until the last product failed. Each update he would state what products he was using to wash it, he would include the average weather conditions of the time period since the last update and the conditions including temperature on the day of the update. He also published and maintained Google Doc spreadsheets tracking his results. Of course that has certain limitations (tells you how the product performs in Texas, not so much in Northern Canada) but I consider that more real world than most of the chemical resistance tests we see today on RUclips.
Yeah those were good tests. Only downside is that they’re not exposed to the exact conditions of a car driving on the road, but the weather being the source of degradation is much more relatable.
I am doing a test in a similar fashion, need to probably cue up a few more but I am limited in how many panels I can put outside before my strata starts getting upset.
Miles driven is by far the most impactful wear metric on protection.
Something that simulates that would be killer.
@@YanniObkirk that would be the real world testing I do on my hoods. Only so many products you can run on there before it gets hairy though.
I really enjoy your tests and testing criteria. I’m an avid RUclips researcher and am constantly trying to find the “best” bang for my buck products. I watch all the channels you stated and they all bring their own subjective tests. Dimitri’s has the closest,most scientific approach even though not quite real world. I like the contact angle and wash tests. That’s raw data, not just a “yeah it’s hydrophobic”. What I’ve been thinking about mostly lately is the abrasion effect on sealants and coatings, but not sure there would be a way to test without severely scratching. In my opinion it is a drastic factor in durability. If I drive 25000 miles per year and someone drives 5000, the vehicle is seeing 5x the abrasion, oils,sand dirt etc. I’d be curious if companies even have a way to check this in their testing. Sorry for the ramblings. Thanks for all you’re doing!
Germany products often give expected service life in km and not in months..
@ That makes maybe more sense. But then again is it highway mileage, dirt roads? There isn’t an exact way to do it. More of an idea of what they think. And I think most brands seem to give the number it lasts for a car that sits in the garage and gets driven once a month🤣
Detail Projects and Forensic Detailing are up there too. The former was really an eye opener for rinseless washes (a lot of them encapsulate and lubricate very poorly compared to others)
@@jfarm_1311 Of course, they do.
Yes, no one really knows. It's different from country to country, from season to season and from user to user..
@@TheBreakfastLover interesting for sure. All products have their limits. Just like with soap I wouldn’t go directly on the paint without a chemical and rinse first
Love this little rant and facts session. I actually learned some stuff too. As far as lighting, I really like Milwaukees pen light and headlamps. The light color temperature is really nice to see defects and true colors. Plus the batteries tend to last quite a long time. I use them primarily for surprise mechanical work, especially wiring, but works well for paint too.
I guess rant session is a fitting title. An encouraging rant though right?
@@sheepstardetail it’s justified for sure. I haven’t thought of many of the points you brought up when it comes to other channels testing and how it compares to my own real world results. I thought it was purely my own fault in product application or prep. Specifically I have noticed cold vs hot water performance since I have my spigot hooked up to hot soft water (water softener hooked up), yet rain and snow performance (NW IA) have been less than admirable. I do tend to gravitate toward spray on sealants since coatings require maintenance to the point of topping with a sealant where it makes me wonder if a coating is useful if you’re just layering on top of the same product almost infinitely to the point it’s the same as a coating.
@ you don’t need to top coatings, just a deeper clean every few months. I never topped my Cquartz lite section on the van for over a year and it’s still performing.
Interesting video. Very thought provoking - how valid is some of the product testing we see? Totally agree about chemicals. Liked the thoughts on gloss, if you can’t see it does it exist? Slickness is nice - does it help to stop dirt sticking? I would say one of the most important factors is ease of application - if a product fights you when applying (streaky, grabbing etc.) you probably won’t buy that again unless the results are fantastic.
That’s the main thing - it needs to translate in to something the consumer can appreciate. You can use equipment and conduct tests that show differences and variances, but if they aren’t noticeable to the human eye, they should be devalued when rating the product.
Easy of use is why spray coatings and sealants have become the most popular product. I have not applied Nu finish graphene to a whole car, because it is miserable to apply.
I like your focus on real world results.
Speaking of, I've used a few spray sealants that 'tested well' by other channels (Griot's 3-in-1, Jimbo's, Meguire's).
All of them degrade very quickly on the lower body just behind the front tires, while doing much better on the rest of the car.
My cars are carefully driven, garage kept and hand washed. Yet I can't go more than 1 or 2 washes before these products break down in that specific area
Yeah that is a very high wear area, separates the men from the boys
Re: Turtle Wax Seal n Shine, i noticed the same. It's highly resistant when newly applied, but lacks longevity and putters out after 3 months.
And at $14-17 dollars depending, totally acceptable performance. I wish it had slightly tighter beading, but V2 is a great product for its cost.
Very nice. Bilt Hamber knows.
I have a couple of ways to determine if I like a products hydrophobics. The first one is after I wash the car how well does the water move off the panel with the blower. The other is when the car is a bit dirty and I am driving down the highway in the rain how well does the dust or dirt roll off the hood as I am driving.
The durability of products I believe has a lot to do with sun exposure vs washings, which is never really tested unless someone like yourself is putting a product on their daily and checking every now and then. The number one enemy of clear coat is sun and heat cycles. I think Dimitri’s scrubber thing is cool but it’s not anything I would use to determine if I like a product or not. Also for ceramic coatings on my vehicles or my sons I leave a small inconspicuous high spot. It’s not a perfect solution for durability, but it does give me an idea if the coating is hanging on.
I use my Bilt-Hamber pre-washes in the IK Foam Pro 12 using 4 oz of product and 1 gallon of water and have been doing so for about 4 years and hands down its THEE BEST pre-wash I've ever used❗️
You can see it melting away salt/muck during winter use and when used on say days of dust, a simple foam/dwell/rinse is all you need, literally a touch-free wash, plus it resets your coated finish (if your infact ceramic coated)
If you haven't used either Touchless or Auto-foam, get some and be ready for pure results👍👍
I do the same but I actually run Touch-Less through my MultiPro9. So it doesn’t foam but I actually prefer it this way after seeing a few reviews based off foaming vs traditional. You are right though it’s definitely the way to go and uses much less product. In which cases do you see yourself reaching for Touch-Less over Auto-Foam & vise versa? I’ve only used Touch-Less and every time I use it I never see myself using something else in its place. Curious to hear your thoughts. Cheers
@BreezeMW honestly, I had a gallon of both and thought they were both similar in performance but because The Clean Garage was phasing it out I got a gallon of Touchless VERY cheap! I'll always have/use Bilt-Hamber for pre-washes, sure I have many others but when it's really bad...there's only 1 choice for me👍👍
I've been using CARPRO Lift for years now, it works fairly well. If a vehicle is exceptionally dirty (particularly the first spring wash after winter salt exposure and build up) I will add a bit of APC to the mixture for some extra cleaning boost. I am currently testing out Armoured Detail Supply Decon but haven't made up my mind about it yet.
I will have to try some Bilt-Hamber. Is the IK sprayer substantially better for application than a foam cannon?
When you use a sprayer you don’t need as much chemical (it doesn’t “double dilute” like a foam canon). If you have a foaming sprayer you can get a similar effect. I use mine at 9:1 (roughly 1% PIR) and it is more than enough for most situations (chassis/engine I would go higher).
@@sheepstardetail I'm not that worried about how much product I use, the best possible result with the least amount of effort is more important to me. If a foam cannon costs twice as much but works better than that's the way I will go BUT if a sprayer is more effective I will make the switch, if it's also cheaper that is a welcome bonus.
I don't run a detailing business, I maintain my own fleet of cars (5-8 cars that changes yearly) and I buy, recondition, and sell classic cars as a side hobby that makes me a bit of money on the side. I can easily recover the cost of products in the sale price.
I really appreciate you doing these. They are emotionally draining. Ive sort of given up. If manufacturer's claims can't be met in summer, what hope have you in winter? I'm going to just use the products i have, and use them more regularly.
Also, how long before products go off? Some say 2 years, and ive a bottle of TW Ceramic Spray that's still got loads in after 4ish years. Is it performing as well now? Wtf knows without buying another. So from your YT point of view, how do you know if a 1 or 2yr old product has degraded or not. Its a minefield this testing game.
That is pretty much my thoughts as well. But, thanks for a new video idea!
Good stuff as always.
The spray sealant torture test stuff always rubbed me the wrong way... especially when done by the company/person that created it or sells it (looking at you Pan, Eddie, Jamie and Jimbo). If you have a product that is easy/enjoyable to apply and is relatively cost effective, who cares about durability or chemical resistance? Just apply more as needed.
It makes a little more sense on coatings since they are generally more expensive and require more effort to prep and apply (or reapply). But even then... I'm not dumping chemical after chemical onto my car. I'm going to use the least aggressive method to clean it effectively without damaging/staining my plastic trim and rubber seals, or etching my glass.
You forgot one other thing….
…it’s wasteful. Almost half my autofoam has gone towards chemical testing. While I am okay with this as I’m using it to share with others (so only one person is wasting it), eventually it really starts to add up.
What about automotive tape?
You have to test it. Some chemicals are fine, some aren’t.
Sounds like your assumption
What part?
Can you elaborate?