I'm seeing many lightbulbs going off in the comments in this RW series and wanted to share my thoughts with the community. I am not a person that is easily persuaded by detail marketing claims or processes or methodologies of detailing. One needs to take a stance of “skepticism” as many initially believe what an YT influencer or manufacturers says without any rational thought and that's the narrative, they sell products on and one will/would believe moving forward and will ultimately defend it without asking any questions. The best way to approach something in car detailing is to just ask questions for yourself - make your question’s list for ANY detailing process or chemical product. Find what actually works for YOU and why? Here is a sample of questions for a RW chemical product and washing contact process that I developed for myself: - Is rinseless washing truly safer than a traditional contact wash? - Is proper rinseless washing actually quicker than a traditional wash? - Can a RW be used for all types of grime accumulation on a vehicle like a traditional contact wash? - Is modern RW methodology or process better now or when it was first developed as now some say to pre-rinse or soak with a RW before you do a RW wash or even rinse after the RW contact wash, why was the narrative changed? - Like all things does RW have limitations and what are they? - Does the 256:1 ratio standardized narrative actually work for ALL RW formulations as no two formulations are the same nor use the same cleaning agents, chemicals or formulations? - Has anybody actually tested what is the best dilution ratio to use for a given RW product? - Does the choice of different wash media work better with a given RW chemical formulation or ratios than others (best pairing)? - Why believe you should only use a sponge with every RW formulated product? - Clearcoat gets scratched from the detailing process by more “contact” and surface resistance on the vehicle clearcoat from the wash media, type of media selected, the chemicals selected, and the drying process selected (towel dry or blow dry) - which washing process has the least amount clearcoat contact on clearcoat over time traditional wash or RW’ing? - Traditional contact wash, rinse, blow dry off versus towel dry in RW process - which will scratch the vehicle less over time? - What wash media or RW multiple media process by design has the least probability to scratch clearcoat in a RW process? - Why is a twist loop towel the best drying towel for the RW process? Does the height of the twist loop pile matter as twist loop pile can be aggressive on the clearcoat surface based upon the applied pressure downwards, least surface resistance when a drying towel is a little wet and was that why drying aids were developed? - Does a surfactant type by classification leave less surfactant residue on the surface after drying in a RW process? - Does a RW containing surfactants leave behind surfactant residue after drying the surface without rinsing? - Do the chemicals chosen in the RW formulation scratch the surface because the chemical(s) chosen in the formulation? - Am I reviewing SDS sheets before purchasing a product and reaching out to the manufacturers with my questions on the product before using them on vehicles? Granted, the list can go on and on or get “crazy” but it’s illustrating a point here, that being - are you thinking like this (you should be as chemicals are dangerous) or just simply believing what someone, albeit who they are, says? That’s what I do, I test my questions and post review videos at the attempt to validate or “try to validate” the product marketing claims, process and methodology claims in the detail industry the best I can, with the resources available to me and the knowledge I possess and the contacts I have in the detail industry. I pose only illustrations of my findings to my community. I’m a sample of one, not perfect, have my own opinions and testing my “question lists” so I can choose for myself the best possible process and detailing products for my applications in car detailing. How about you?
I appreciate the time you took to do this review, very detailed, very informative, very educational! It’s refreshing to have someone like you do this kind of testing and review so that we don’t have to! Thank you for your contribution to this community, it is valuable and needed. Stay Blessed!
This man is an absolute genius when it comes to doing testing on various products! He brings out the strong points or negatives of products and makes you think about things you never thought of when dealing with various detailing products, showing that much of what is known about detailing products truly is a lot of HYPE! Of course, people have to make their own determinations about products and may love using something, but it's nice to see some real world testing that proves that some of these products do not do what they claim they can do, or they don't perform nearly as well as they are hyped to be. There are so many new rinseless washes on the market these days, it's a difficult area of detailing to figure out which one actually is the best one to purchase so I take a lot of faith in what this gentleman says because it does make sense. It's very interesting that almost every rinseless wash touts that they "encapsulate" dirt lifting it away from the surface which we now see may not exactly be the case with all rinseless washes or maybe not any of them. Regular old soap would probably do a better job of softening and loosening the dirt from the surface over a rinseless wash but of course that takes the point out of using a rinseless wash in the first place which is supposed to be for times when you don't have free flowing water. I wonder how P&S Pearl would do? It's sold as a soap primarily BUT it also has a recommended dilution on the bottle to be used as a rinseless wash. I wonder if that product would actually encapsulate the dirt better than a true rinseless? That would be an interesting test against some of them. Is is really "encapsulating" the dirt, or is it simply softening up the dirt and loosening it on the surface? Very interesting test sir.
Need Clean by Pan and Feynlab. I think the point of the one dunk is only with the wash media sponge. It works for me. I don’t use microfiber and even in the videos such as Eddie, the dunk w the microfiber doesn’t work half the time. I only use a sponge anyway. I do find DIYs ability to one dunk and it’s real good. Forensic detail channel proved it. Great test!
Well done. And thank you for diving into the SDS. Sloppy of them to not have it updated. And I like the key points you made about what you found on the SDS.
@@NoFix the v2 wipes off easier after drying. I understand placebo is a huge thing but seeing them dry side by side and then wiping away can't be placebo
Very detailed review for sure ! Impressive. I think there are so many variables in the real world which may add some complexity to this test such as actual grime type on the panel, the use of drying aids, warm water, etc. But I like what you're doing. It's a good baseline. So in your opinion, based on all your tests with washing medias, which mit or microfiber provided you with the least concerns (love marks) while washing while using a rinse-less or a typical foaming soap? And I know all foaming soaps are not equal also. But if you had to narrow it down....what would you recommend ?? What do you gravitate to? And It's apparent that the legacy type sponge is made specifically for rinse-less washes. I'm more curious around a great all around choice. thx
Very informative video. I'm a Chemical Engineer and I agree with all your testing methodology. It brought me back to my Honours days when I was doing my thesis on RAFT Polymerization.
My travels in the chemical world I have come across an "Anthony Sarino" twice - once at the Conway Lab, Princeton University and once in a working group within Procter and Gamble - if so, Hello
this is what I call a proper review. imagine the amount of planning and effort put into this video. Looking forward to your future review about car care products! I would love to see you 're-review' ONR v5 in this format
After all these years using rinseless wash products and trying out all the hyped new options, I finally decided to order an Optimum product again. It was ONR V5. After my first use, I was honestly stunned. It worked almost *too* well. It was slick, had strong cleaning power, added gloss, kept the bucket clean, and dried better than anything else I’ve tried. I’m certain that if ONR V5 were to get a good review, it would be well-deserved.
Thank you, this was eye opening. One question i have is if the plexiglass gets marred, does that mean your paint will also get marred? Are the learnings from plexiglass relevant for clearcoat?
In actual testing labs for car detailing products, plexiglass is the chosen medium for testing many car detailing products and specifically product chemical parameters. Yes, the learnings from Plexiglas are relevant to vehicle clearcoat in so many ways. ...The better question to ask is - what is the "correlation value" between both as what I have seen happen on plexiglass, I have seen with a very high likelihood and correlation to happen on vehicle clearcoat resulting in the same or even the identical outcomes on vehicle clearcoat. The advantage of plexiglass over clearcoat testing as first test medium, is clearcoat refracts light very well to extremely well hiding and/or masking damage on the clearcoat until there is so much damage its finally seen with the naked eye as the surface no longer is smooth enough to refract light while Plexiglas does not refract light well enough making things way more visible to the naked eye initially versus using microscopes on vehicle clearcoat of which is done also as a "confirmatory step" based on the tested applications and outcomes we see from the initial plexiglass testing. Know, not all RW formulations with scratch nor mar plexiglass given the correct RW dilution ratio and chosen washing media paired together correctly. The default standard of 256:1 with a sponge most often is not the answer across the board for all RW products. In addition, the Achillies heel per say of RW products is "lubrication properties" are insufficient, but not all RW products as some have just the right amount of lubrication for its intended use case.
@DetailProjects I appreciate your thorough response. Yes, "correlation value" was the spirit of my question and it's good to know that the correlation is high so we can use plexiglass to derive meaningful conclusions... It's unfortunate that I came across your video after buying an entire gallon of DIY Rinseless 🤦♂️ better late than never, I suppose lol. What is your current RW + dilution ratio of choice that produces the least marring? I plan to watch your other review videos but want to make sure I don't miss that one.
I really enjoy your rinseless videos. It would be great to see you try Ethos hybrid rinseless. If you haven't already. I just purchased it. And really enjoyed it. Keep up the great work.
Hi Great review. I’ve watched lots of DIY vids of them using their rinse less wash and their dilution is 256:1 for all uses, like hand wash, clay lube, interiors, glass cleaner, etc. I’ve only used Absolute myself. My experience with P&S has always been great so when I wanted to try rinseless I went with them. I find Absolute to be a terrific product. I use it on interiors and windows and I find myself grabbing my spray bottle of it at 256:1 and use it in the house to clean glass, mirrors and light fixtures. Since I bought a gallon bc like you, said it’s most cost effective that way, it’ll probably be another year before I get to try another brand!😂
extremely good review going to hold off on buying more rinseless until your series is over. i don't see the streaking you saw but perhaps because my car is white. in regards to clay lube diy has you use pre soaked clay towel that's sitting in the rinseless bucket. Was your perforated decon towel dry?
Thank you! Yes the clay towel was sitting in the bucket solution at 256:1, as I showed in my video setting up the bucket including the wash media and clay towel.
@ life is full of carcinogens,, but very few SDS sheets for detailing products have a big fat warning on the first page saying saying it could give you cancer... and more to my point is that when it does, most people don't know... even when they're spraying it in interiors where they are going to be. My point is, They don't read these sheets. I'm glad he is pointing them out.
@@chrisbradley3224 Chris, I’m sorry I offended you. I have a degree in science, is that ok? I have been interested in this topic for years... I didn’t know we were talking about household cleaners but as you are I can say that there are plenty of household cleaners without carcinogens, again you have to look for them.
Now you got me curious which rinseless is the least toxic, but then again, I am betting most, if not all, "cleaning" products are somewhat toxic. I just looked up Dawn dish soap and now I wish I hadn't... I think the lesson here is to use protection on ALL cleaning products. I just end up dunking my whole hand in the rinseless bucket and my gloves fill up with the solution... We need better gloves.
@@justlovethisgame3537The entire industry is a joke. With a few exceptions. Look at the last few years. Everyone is coming out with the same products. Literally nothing new. Raw materials have become more commodity and “chemist-as-a-service” who’ll mix them up for you have arisen. It allows douchenozzles like Pan to easily come out with products that are the exact.same.shit as everything else (maybe a different smell, and some different raw materials ratios). Detailing has become like the toothpaste aisle at a drug store as a result: Pure marketing to get a slice of the detailer pie.
V1 had just a problem with delivering. Now they can handle more demand because it gets made somewhere else. Same with their sponges. They speak about on reddit, offcourse Yvan replied these are rumours to me on youtube. I like the guy, but that info came from one of his own certified C6 installers. I mean…. Yeah it is what it is.
Strange how all unbiased tests give poor results for the best of them (DIY, Hero, etc.) How is it possible to give streak free glass, but leave streaks on paint? This proves my gut feeling that rinseless washes are far from perfect yet. I have a bike chain cleaner which makes all dirt and grime fall off the chain immediatelly. And if you spray on your hand it`s like thin air, like no residue whatsoever. That`s what I`m expecting from the future rinseless washes.
I think this was a good attempt at an in depth video, but could use a little refinement. While I agree with some points, that they aren't clear that it should be paired with the legacy sponge and can be used for a variety of things like a drying aid. I felt like some things like the plexiglass scratch test were kind of pointless? Idk if plexiglass and paint are the same hardness. Considering you have hoods, I'd probably move the mar/scratch test to those and simply be interested in knowing if a moderately dirty panel + rinseless + legacy sponge = scratches. I do believe they have some guidance depending on how dirty the panel is overall. But like you said, its not readily available, its in youtube videos. I appreciate the effort you put in. Keep refining it and keep up the good work.
Thank you and I do appreciate the feedback! The purpose of using plexiglass as a chemical test media or medium is to test and/or determine chemical etching (burning) or scratching called frost lining. Unlike clearcoat on a hood, plexiglass with show a surface frost line we commonly call a chemical scratch but really is mild to moderate to advanced chemical etching. Unlike clearcoat on a hood plexiglass will etch or scratch easily to identify with the "naked eye " chemicals like ammonia, buffers, acetone, surfactant identied by classification as ionic surfactants have a tendecy to frost line etch, solvents, etc. in the product formation. The list goes on and on what plexiglass and polycarbonate can tell us, think beyond the media contacting the surface but the product's chemicals in the formulation contacting the surface and its reaction when heat is built up when adding pressure, resistance and contact washing with the RW product and the chosen media. Plexiglass is used in chemistry labs to easily identify this cause and effect relationship then verified by microscope analysis. That's why I guard against media scratching by wiping in 2 directions. It may not be a full proof test but I chose test parameters and mediums any detail enthusiast can do for themselves versus buying a thousand dollar gamma or hamma handheld 500x microscopes to see the same scratch etching on the clearcoat of a hood. ... Hardness has nothing to do with chemical burns at the surface nor frost lining because of a chosen chemical product being used. "Frost lining" is "chemical cystalization" that causes a scratch on the surface as it (crystallization) is moved along "a or the surface of the medium" from downward pressure! Higher chemical dilutions like 32:1 and 64:1 will ferret out the most frost lining cystalization.
@@DetailProjects Ah I see, thanks for the explanation. I didn't realize it was so deep. Makes more sense now. At the end of the day I guess I just assumed most of these companies aren't necessarily going to sell their consumers something that will easily or readily damage/ruin their paint/trim/interiors. DIYDetail comes off as somewhat reputable, Yvan has been around for a while, its definitely not as obnoxious as something like chemical guys which is 100% an advertising brand. Again I appreciate your thoroughness, better to find out here rather than something going amiss on your own car. Also, I do agree DIYdetail products are a bit pricy, but at the moment they are running a 25% off site wide promotion so it seems more reasonable overall. Not sure if its available to canadians.
If your soap has to be used with a specific media, it really isn't as good as claimed. It should perform well with many different forms of cleaning media.
@@TheOutdoorDetailer Is rinseless wash a soap? I honestly don't know, considering you can just wipe/dry it off and call it good. I'm pretty sure it works with other media, but was designed with the legacy sponge in mind (or vice-versa). They don't say you have to use the sponge, it's just recommended. Apparently sponges (or the legacy sponge in particular) don't tend to hold onto grit/particulate like a microfiber towel or chenille wash mitt where things tend to stick to it even after simply dunking it back in your wash bucket.
Technically speaking from a PURE chemical perspective, a RW chemical product "true to its roots" developed by Dr G. years ago does NOT contain "any" surfactants. TH-cam influencers drive and drove a modern version of a RW chemical product incorporating surfactant(s) to meet or exceed this one dunk media test that was developed, of which, does NOT prove better cleaning ability on the vechile (proven by John @ Foresnsic Detail) and to have higher cleaning ability like a touchless car wash. To do so, higher surfactant concentrations and multiple surfactants are needed which has its own negatives and potential damage to the vechile. Correct, a RW with a single or multiple surfactant load in the RW formulation IS a "soap" per chemistry standards in product development!
I would like to know this as well. I have asked this question in the past on FB and got no response. I believe the concerns of detailing products are not openly discussed enough and the manufacturers/influencers cop out by say “wear gloves”. But, even if you wear PPF, and you wash in your garage, what is left over after the wash…like the next day/week. If your family also uses the same garage, what concerns if any, should be considered? Great question.
No chemicals are safe for humans PERIOD The SDS is available to everyone and is required by law, so you are able to identify the hazards and categories of severity. (1 is extreme 4 least dangerous) . Always look at the ingredients category levels on section 3. There is always information on how dangerous a product is when in contact with humans and environment. This is why I emphasize for everyone to review SDS before buying or using a product.
Where diy shines is their videos and social media is like having a tech line on how to use their products.its all a bunch of hype to me . However you do a great job testing these products .i hope you will continue. I will be watching.
So you sprayed rinseless on a thick layer of filth and then let it dry without touching it and you were surprised that the dirt didn't just magically disappear? You could have done that with soap and had the same result, not how the product is even engineered to be used so I believe that really showed nothing. Then you tried to remove it from another filthy panel and it did a pretty good job from what I saw in the video with contact washing. Streaking could have easily been from the gauntlet towel, I got rid of mine because i had the same issue with it. Ive used multiple rinseless washes and I have gotten great and safe results using DIY's properly and using common sense 🙂
@@justlovethisgame3537LOL.. I mean, i’m not going to say the guy isn’t honest, but c’mon… the last thing we need is another car janitor trying to sound “scientific” and showing flawed testing.. Like motor oil? Hahahaha. Next i’m gonna put a layer of lithium grease on a panel. When it doesn’t remove it i’m gonna conclude that the rinseless won’t remove polishing oils 😂. Oh, not before I say “lubricity”, “hydrophobics”, and “surfactants” a bunch of times.. it’s laughable man. BTW, I’m also not defending these BS detailing companies.
@@BananaChipzzz cars drip motor oil on streets. That gets on cars. I want to clean it off. I'm good with the test. Do you honestly not find that helpful?
@justlovethisgame3537 All im saying is it was flawed dude. Just because the video was an hour long with a bunch of flawed testing doesn't make it an "honest" review.
I'm a Chemical Engineer. Yes, Yvan markets his product to encapsulate and remove dirt from a surface just by pre spraying. Those words have come straight out of his mouth. That is exactly how he claims the product is "engineered" to be used, which is clearly false. What basis do you have for stating you've got great and safe results? To your untrained eye you are likely unable to identify swirl marks properly.
@@DetailProjects as this list keeps growing i was wondering what your thoughts are for the need for extensive testing at stronger concentrations. I suspect us typical end users won't go much stronger than 128:1 , and most will stick to standard dilution. thanks for engaging with us on this topic!
The better question to ask is why test RW dilution ratio to begin with? Because the dilution ratios are taken for granted in rinseless washing as some may think it's a gold standard and not buck industry norms, thus the industrial set norm at 256:1 and this detail narrative is being sold for RW washing; simply not true. Truth be told, the chosen surfactant by classification either Anionic, Cationic, Nonionic or Amphoteric will not have the same dilution ratio of cleaning ability, chemical application, user experience, chemical marring ability nor hazard ability. Especially, if some RW formulations includes PDMS as a lubricate component. Wouldn't it be nice to know the actual dilution ratio that works or does not work for a given RW chemical product based in its chemical formulation? In my testing, I'm not seeing 256:1 to work for some currently marketed RW products.
I really think if you’re interpreting an SDS and making conclusions based on ingredients you should either explain your expertise/experience or have a prefoessiinal (i.e. chemist) interpret.
You don’t need to be an expert to read an SDS. Anyone can do proper research and the facts are right in front of you. It’s called google. Every person should do proper research to see what they are working with but the problem is nobody talks about it. Everyone is focused on how slick and how good a product smells! But if it makes you feel better, I do happen to know a thing or two about detailing, my empirical tests can attest for that!
Unfortunately diy are not thorough when it comes to correct information. They are sloppy. I had to look at the sds for RRW, I'm shocked to see how toxic this is. Also had to extrapolate how much water there is and it's around 95%. Think about guys we are all.paying big bucks for a for a water bottle.
Toxicity is hard to know unless you understand what each chemical is. Chemical grade is an indicator and also its bio Toxicity. Koch Chemie is very clear in its sds. The contents of each chemical is very low but how bad they are I wouldn't know. It does highlight how water we buy in each bottle. Why do they do it this way would good to know.
The purpose of using plexiglass as a chemical test media or medium is to test and/or determine chemical etching (burning) or scratching called frost lining. Unlike clearcoat on a hood, plexiglass with show a surface frost line we commonly call a chemical scratch but really is mild to moderate to advanced chemical etching. Unlike clearcoat on a hood plexiglass will etch or scratch easily to identify with the "naked eye " chemicals like ammonia, buffers, acetone, surfactant identied by classification as ionic surfactants have a tendecy to frost line etch, solvents, etc. in the product formation. The list goes on and on what plexiglass and polycarbonate can tell us, think beyond the media contacting the surface but the product's chemicals in the formulation contacting the surface and its reaction when heat is built up when adding pressure, resistance and contact washing with the RW product and the chosen media. Plexiglass is used in chemistry labs to easily identify this cause and effect relationship then verified by microscope analysis. That's why I guard against media scratching by wiping in 2 directions. It may not be a full proof test but I chose test parameters and mediums any detail enthusiast can do for themselves versus buying a thousand dollar gamma or hamma handheld 500x microscopes to see the same scratch etching on the clearcoat of a hood. ... Hardness has nothing to do with chemical burns at the surface nor frost lining because of a chosen chemical product being used. "Frost lining" is "chemical cystalization" that causes a scratch on the surface as it (crystallization) is moved along "a or the surface of the medium" from downward pressure!
Now, I explained my purpose of using the plexi-test panels (chemical crystallization marring), I will now address your direct question. If I'm following you, in your reasoning you believe clearcoat hardness or "clearcoat layer thickness" is somehow more scratch resistant than my plexi-test panels - maybe if the plexi-panel is not calibrated to same ratio scratch resistance level. Clearcoat is measured by mil on top of paint and primer. In the last 10-13 years car manufacturers have reduced clearcoat thickness application by 1.55 mils across all manufactured vehicles to save money on per vehicle unit cost, more profits. Some brands like the German vehicles (BMW) have harder perceived clearcoat, meaning, "thicker" layers in mils of clearcoat application. The average brand-new car (not truck) coming off the assembly line in modern times the clearcoat averages under 4.5 mils. Over time clearcoat degrades lowering its thickness clearcoat layer and the reason why you put LSP on clearcoat to prevent UV and physical degradation or at least slow it down over time. You can buy plexi and polycarbonate test panels that are "scratch resistant" which will resist physical and chemical scratches greater than any vehicle clearcoat thickness, granite, aluminum, steel, marble, etc. You can also buy plexi test calibrated panels that have the same 4.5 mil layer to align with the average car vehicle clearcoat thickness but, and admittedly, may not be the same hardiness level but they are called calibrated clearcoat panels for similar scratch resistance and fall in a 95% confidence interval. If you take a pencil and scratch your clearcoat and the calibrated pexi-panel (as I do) and they both pencil scratch, then you have similar "testing correlation mediums." At this point if it scratches that plexi medium in my testing it will scratch my clearcoat. My plexi-panels are aligned to 4-4.5 mil clearcoat and have some test panels as high as 5.234 mils. Clearcoat is "very soft" and why feather micro marring (love marks) occurs when your drying MF runs across the clearcoat to dry the vehicle, and he reason why the detail industry marketed and developed drying aids. Lots of drying towel hitting the paint panels when Rinseless washing drying - what do you think it's doing to your clearcoat. Please don't think plexi or polycarbonate test panels are not as scratch resistant as vehicle clearcoat or even cannot be replicated to be the same level of scratch resistance in an empirical lab test.
@@DetailProjects Nice! By the way, I really like that you are showing us SDS and keeping us aware of safety issues regarding any chemical. Maybe you can take a look and review Nanolex GreenX Car care lineup with this aspect?
LOL…..LOL….I have only used V1 so far but I have had a totally different experience than this TH-camr. I have had excellent results thus far. Will have circle back on V2 for sure.
Someone with an honest speech. There is more to find about all the DIY on reddit btw. His sponges and pads are now made at URO fiber btw. And the rinseless is the same as the v1 accordingly to a certified C6 installer i spoke with. Ivan commented that those are rumours but yeah whatever. Hes a brilliant salesman tho. xD. The sds sheet had me scratching my head also on a few components. U got urself a subscriber for these tests! Regarding DIY and the products/chemists: Turtle Wax - Rinseless wash, incredible suds, ceramic gloss, tire dressing 3D Car Care - Gold Standard Polish (probably Owner's Pride is identical) ECP Inc. - 3/5/8 Year Ceramic coatings, interior ceramic, interior clean and protect Technician's Choice (ECP Inc.) - Quick Beads (TEC582 concentrate + graphite flakes + DI water) Generic products - Iron remover (identical to Owner's Pride DeconX), All Clean (same as Owner's Pride), Panel Prep (IPA), Water Spot Remover (vinegar), Tree Sap remover (methanol). The only thing that is worth mentioning is that the iron remover is sodium mercaptoacetate based rather than the more potent ammonium mercaptoacetate. That means a clay towel can be used in combination with their iron remover.
@@DetailProjects Haha thank you. Dno why brands get offensive when these things get shared online. They take us for fools it looks like when they get mad. Honestly we all know a bit how the business works, and it is what it is. If u also see what stuff in Japan goes around, its rly amazing their products to protect. Offc, i never watched the sds sheets yet so thats that... Im looking forward to ur test with the og onr with the clay towel which gets described so many times as super safe. Edit: Owh i rly tought the suds was from TW 3 in 1 wash slick n slide but offc, with different ingredients here and there. Interesting.
I don’t know who your “sources” are, but they are not correct. We own all our own IP, formulas. The internet’s need to “find” connections between companies is interesting to say the least.
Jesus Christ, my favortie rinsless getting DESTROYED. I'm really disappointed. Trully. A great test, smiliar to what John from Forensic Detailing is conducting. Although about the marring, even if you use 100 towels and the cleaning solution is always clean, in my and my fellow pro detailer friends opinion EVERYTHING marrs the paint. If it's not visible with the naked eye - do you really care about it so much? Yes sure it can accumulate over time and get's shown, but if the scratches are so minute they are shown only on the microscope, accumulating them over time to be shown will take A LOT of time, but that's only my opinion on it (and maybe a few of my friends in the buisness) ,It's just a case of minimizing it, and also i didn't had a smiliar experience with leaving such obvious marring as you had with DIY rinsless on my or any of my familys or firends cars (i maintain them all, often with DIY Rinsless so i have plenty of experience with this product) nevertheless i think I'm going to switch to a different product. It's just that the choice between rinsless washes is a lot smaller here in the EU. No Koch RRW, no ADS Hero, no Ethos, no Feynlab. Considering ONR (have Absolute but not impressed with the cleaning ability of it). Severly sad, espiecially it's not the first test that gave DIY really low marks.
I'm seeing many lightbulbs going off in the comments in this RW series and wanted to share my thoughts with the community.
I am not a person that is easily persuaded by detail marketing claims or processes or methodologies of detailing. One needs to take a stance of “skepticism” as many initially believe what an YT influencer or manufacturers says without any rational thought and that's the narrative, they sell products on and one will/would believe moving forward and will ultimately defend it without asking any questions.
The best way to approach something in car detailing is to just ask questions for yourself - make your question’s list for ANY detailing process or chemical product. Find what actually works for YOU and why?
Here is a sample of questions for a RW chemical product and washing contact process that I developed for myself:
- Is rinseless washing truly safer than a traditional contact wash?
- Is proper rinseless washing actually quicker than a traditional wash?
- Can a RW be used for all types of grime accumulation on a vehicle like a traditional contact wash?
- Is modern RW methodology or process better now or when it was first developed as now some say to pre-rinse or soak with a RW before you do a RW wash or even rinse after the RW contact wash, why was the narrative changed?
- Like all things does RW have limitations and what are they?
- Does the 256:1 ratio standardized narrative actually work for ALL RW formulations as no two formulations are the same nor use the same cleaning agents, chemicals or formulations?
- Has anybody actually tested what is the best dilution ratio to use for a given RW product?
- Does the choice of different wash media work better with a given RW chemical formulation or ratios than others (best pairing)?
- Why believe you should only use a sponge with every RW formulated product?
- Clearcoat gets scratched from the detailing process by more “contact” and surface resistance on the vehicle clearcoat from the wash media, type of media selected, the chemicals selected, and the drying process selected (towel dry or blow dry) - which washing process has the least amount clearcoat contact on clearcoat over time traditional wash or RW’ing?
- Traditional contact wash, rinse, blow dry off versus towel dry in RW process - which will scratch the vehicle less over time?
- What wash media or RW multiple media process by design has the least probability to scratch clearcoat in a RW process?
- Why is a twist loop towel the best drying towel for the RW process? Does the height of the twist loop pile matter as twist loop pile can be aggressive on the clearcoat surface based upon the applied pressure downwards, least surface resistance when a drying towel is a little wet and was that why drying aids were developed?
- Does a surfactant type by classification leave less surfactant residue on the surface after drying in a RW process?
- Does a RW containing surfactants leave behind surfactant residue after drying the surface without rinsing?
- Do the chemicals chosen in the RW formulation scratch the surface because the chemical(s) chosen in the formulation?
- Am I reviewing SDS sheets before purchasing a product and reaching out to the manufacturers with my questions on the product before using them on vehicles?
Granted, the list can go on and on or get “crazy” but it’s illustrating a point here, that being - are you thinking like this (you should be as chemicals are dangerous) or just simply believing what someone, albeit who they are, says?
That’s what I do, I test my questions and post review videos at the attempt to validate or “try to validate” the product marketing claims, process and methodology claims in the detail industry the best I can, with the resources available to me and the knowledge I possess and the contacts I have in the detail industry.
I pose only illustrations of my findings to my community. I’m a sample of one, not perfect, have my own opinions and testing my “question lists” so I can choose for myself the best possible process and detailing products for my applications in car detailing.
How about you?
I appreciate the time you took to do this review, very detailed, very informative, very educational! It’s refreshing to have someone like you do this kind of testing and review so that we don’t have to! Thank you for your contribution to this community, it is valuable and needed. Stay Blessed!
This man is an absolute genius when it comes to doing testing on various products! He brings out the strong points or negatives of products and makes you think about things you never thought of when dealing with various detailing products, showing that much of what is known about detailing products truly is a lot of HYPE! Of course, people have to make their own determinations about products and may love using something, but it's nice to see some real world testing that proves that some of these products do not do what they claim they can do, or they don't perform nearly as well as they are hyped to be. There are so many new rinseless washes on the market these days, it's a difficult area of detailing to figure out which one actually is the best one to purchase so I take a lot of faith in what this gentleman says because it does make sense. It's very interesting that almost every rinseless wash touts that they "encapsulate" dirt lifting it away from the surface which we now see may not exactly be the case with all rinseless washes or maybe not any of them. Regular old soap would probably do a better job of softening and loosening the dirt from the surface over a rinseless wash but of course that takes the point out of using a rinseless wash in the first place which is supposed to be for times when you don't have free flowing water. I wonder how P&S Pearl would do? It's sold as a soap primarily BUT it also has a recommended dilution on the bottle to be used as a rinseless wash. I wonder if that product would actually encapsulate the dirt better than a true rinseless? That would be an interesting test against some of them. Is is really "encapsulating" the dirt, or is it simply softening up the dirt and loosening it on the surface? Very interesting test sir.
Which one would you recommend?
Need Clean by Pan and Feynlab.
I think the point of the one dunk is only with the wash media sponge. It works for me. I don’t use microfiber and even in the videos such as Eddie, the dunk w the microfiber doesn’t work half the time. I only use a sponge anyway. I do find DIYs ability to one dunk and it’s real good. Forensic detail channel proved it.
Great test!
Well done. And thank you for diving into the SDS. Sloppy of them to not have it updated. And I like the key points you made about what you found on the SDS.
V1 and v2 is the same. Different manufacturer. Yvan denies but whatever.
@@NoFixthe user experience is noticeably different from my testing
@ i believe u. Some things can rly be placebo but i take all into consideration. :)
@@NoFix the v2 wipes off easier after drying. I understand placebo is a huge thing but seeing them dry side by side and then wiping away can't be placebo
Great in-depth review, looks forward to more great content!🇬🇧
Thank you for logical testing and good filming/lighting work. Keep these coming!
Very detailed review for sure ! Impressive. I think there are so many variables in the real world which may add some complexity to this test such as actual grime type on the panel, the use of drying aids, warm water, etc. But I like what you're doing. It's a good baseline.
So in your opinion, based on all your tests with washing medias, which mit or microfiber provided you with the least concerns (love marks) while washing while using a rinse-less or a typical foaming soap? And I know all foaming soaps are not equal also. But if you had to narrow it down....what would you recommend ?? What do you gravitate to? And It's apparent that the legacy type sponge is made specifically for rinse-less washes. I'm more curious around a great all around choice. thx
I have the same questions you have and it would be great if detail projects give us answers.
Very informative video. I'm a Chemical Engineer and I agree with all your testing methodology. It brought me back to my Honours days when I was doing my thesis on RAFT Polymerization.
My travels in the chemical world I have come across an "Anthony Sarino" twice - once at the Conway Lab, Princeton University and once in a working group within
Procter and Gamble - if so, Hello
@@DetailProjects That is an incredible memory. Are you a P&Ger? I assumed from the channel you were a full time detailer.
Awesome video man I cannot wait for the next one
this is what I call a proper review. imagine the amount of planning and effort put into this video. Looking forward to your future review about car care products! I would love to see you 're-review' ONR v5 in this format
After all these years using rinseless wash products and trying out all the hyped new options, I finally decided to order an Optimum product again. It was ONR V5. After my first use, I was honestly stunned. It worked almost *too* well. It was slick, had strong cleaning power, added gloss, kept the bucket clean, and dried better than anything else I’ve tried. I’m certain that if ONR V5 were to get a good review, it would be well-deserved.
Thank you, this was eye opening. One question i have is if the plexiglass gets marred, does that mean your paint will also get marred? Are the learnings from plexiglass relevant for clearcoat?
In actual testing labs for car detailing products, plexiglass is the chosen medium for testing many car detailing products and specifically product chemical parameters. Yes, the learnings from Plexiglas are relevant to vehicle clearcoat in so many ways. ...The better question to ask is - what is the "correlation value" between both as what I have seen happen on plexiglass, I have seen with a very high likelihood and correlation to happen on vehicle clearcoat resulting in the same or even the identical outcomes on vehicle clearcoat.
The advantage of plexiglass over clearcoat testing as first test medium, is clearcoat refracts light very well to extremely well hiding and/or masking damage on the clearcoat until there is so much damage its finally seen with the naked eye as the surface no longer is smooth enough to refract light while Plexiglas does not refract light well enough making things way more visible to the naked eye initially versus using microscopes on vehicle clearcoat of which is done also as a "confirmatory step" based on the tested applications and outcomes we see from the initial plexiglass testing.
Know, not all RW formulations with scratch nor mar plexiglass given the correct RW dilution ratio and chosen washing media paired together correctly. The default standard of 256:1 with a sponge most often is not the answer across the board for all RW products. In addition, the Achillies heel per say of RW products is "lubrication properties" are insufficient, but not all RW products as some have just the right amount of lubrication for its intended use case.
@DetailProjects I appreciate your thorough response. Yes, "correlation value" was the spirit of my question and it's good to know that the correlation is high so we can use plexiglass to derive meaningful conclusions... It's unfortunate that I came across your video after buying an entire gallon of DIY Rinseless 🤦♂️ better late than never, I suppose lol.
What is your current RW + dilution ratio of choice that produces the least marring? I plan to watch your other review videos but want to make sure I don't miss that one.
I really enjoy your rinseless videos. It would be great to see you try Ethos hybrid rinseless. If you haven't already. I just purchased it. And really enjoyed it. Keep up the great work.
Hi
Great review. I’ve watched lots of DIY vids of them using their rinse less wash and their dilution is 256:1 for all uses, like hand wash, clay lube, interiors, glass cleaner, etc.
I’ve only used Absolute myself. My experience with P&S has always been great so when I wanted to try rinseless I went with them. I find Absolute to be a terrific product. I use it on interiors and windows and I find myself grabbing my spray bottle of it at 256:1 and use it in the house to clean glass, mirrors and light fixtures.
Since I bought a gallon bc like you, said it’s most cost effective that way, it’ll probably be another year before I get to try another brand!😂
Very well done video! Keep it up 👍
Thanks for this. Incredible channel.
Amazing! Keep going👍
Nice honest review!
You should do this exact same test with regular car soap.
Yes, It’s on my content list
Thanks, much needed information
Could have been divided in 5 episodes to keep it more accessible?❤
extremely good review going to hold off on buying more rinseless until your series is over. i don't see the streaking you saw but perhaps because my car is white.
in regards to clay lube diy has you use pre soaked clay towel that's sitting in the rinseless bucket. Was your perforated decon towel dry?
Thank you! Yes the clay towel was sitting in the bucket solution at 256:1, as I showed in my video setting up the bucket including the wash media and clay towel.
keep up the great work!
Very good job, you opened my eyes
Its good to hear people talking about SDS. DIYs interior cleaner sds says its a carcinogen and nobody seems to know (or care).
@ life is full of carcinogens,, but very few SDS sheets for detailing products have a big fat warning on the first page saying saying it could give you cancer... and more to my point is that when it does, most people don't know... even when they're spraying it in interiors where they are going to be.
My point is, They don't read these sheets. I'm glad he is pointing them out.
@@chrisbradley3224 Chris, I’m sorry I offended you. I have a degree in science, is that ok? I have been interested in this topic for years... I didn’t know we were talking about household cleaners but as you are I can say that there are plenty of household cleaners without carcinogens, again you have to look for them.
DIY's biggest plus for me is that you can comment on their videos with a question about product questions and expect a reply same day/next day.
Now you got me curious which rinseless is the least toxic, but then again, I am betting most, if not all, "cleaning" products are somewhat toxic. I just looked up Dawn dish soap and now I wish I hadn't... I think the lesson here is to use protection on ALL cleaning products. I just end up dunking my whole hand in the rinseless bucket and my gloves fill up with the solution... We need better gloves.
Please test CLEAN rinse-less and Detail Co. rinseless! :)
On my list!
Jon from forensics detailing gave the same conclusion. This is just marketing. Consumers need to be smart and do more research.
@@justlovethisgame3537The entire industry is a joke. With a few exceptions. Look at the last few years. Everyone is coming out with the same products. Literally nothing new. Raw materials have become more commodity and “chemist-as-a-service” who’ll mix them up for you have arisen. It allows douchenozzles like Pan to easily come out with products that are the exact.same.shit as everything else (maybe a different smell, and some different raw materials ratios). Detailing has become like the toothpaste aisle at a drug store as a result: Pure marketing to get a slice of the detailer pie.
V1 had just a problem with delivering. Now they can handle more demand because it gets made somewhere else. Same with their sponges. They speak about on reddit, offcourse Yvan replied these are rumours to me on youtube. I like the guy, but that info came from one of his own certified C6 installers. I mean…. Yeah it is what it is.
Your reviews are like visiting a testing lab, awesome review.
Strange how all unbiased tests give poor results for the best of them (DIY, Hero, etc.)
How is it possible to give streak free glass, but leave streaks on paint?
This proves my gut feeling that rinseless washes are far from perfect yet. I have a bike chain cleaner which makes all dirt and grime fall off the chain immediatelly. And if you spray on your hand it`s like thin air, like no residue whatsoever. That`s what I`m expecting from the future rinseless washes.
I think this was a good attempt at an in depth video, but could use a little refinement. While I agree with some points, that they aren't clear that it should be paired with the legacy sponge and can be used for a variety of things like a drying aid. I felt like some things like the plexiglass scratch test were kind of pointless? Idk if plexiglass and paint are the same hardness. Considering you have hoods, I'd probably move the mar/scratch test to those and simply be interested in knowing if a moderately dirty panel + rinseless + legacy sponge = scratches. I do believe they have some guidance depending on how dirty the panel is overall. But like you said, its not readily available, its in youtube videos.
I appreciate the effort you put in. Keep refining it and keep up the good work.
Thank you and I do appreciate the feedback!
The purpose of using plexiglass as a chemical test media or medium is to test and/or determine chemical etching (burning) or scratching called frost lining.
Unlike clearcoat on a hood, plexiglass with show a surface frost line we commonly call a chemical scratch but really is mild to moderate to advanced chemical etching.
Unlike clearcoat on a hood plexiglass will etch or scratch easily to identify with the "naked eye " chemicals like ammonia, buffers, acetone, surfactant identied by classification as ionic surfactants have a tendecy to frost line etch, solvents, etc. in the product formation. The list goes on and on what plexiglass and polycarbonate can tell us, think beyond the media contacting the surface but the product's chemicals in the formulation contacting the surface and its reaction when heat is built up when adding pressure, resistance and contact washing with the RW product and the chosen media. Plexiglass is used in chemistry labs to easily identify this cause and effect relationship then verified by microscope analysis.
That's why I guard against media scratching by wiping in 2 directions. It may not be a full proof test but I chose test parameters and mediums any detail enthusiast can do for themselves versus buying a thousand dollar gamma or hamma handheld 500x microscopes to see the same scratch etching on the clearcoat of a hood. ...
Hardness has nothing to do with chemical burns at the surface nor frost lining because of a chosen chemical product being used.
"Frost lining" is "chemical cystalization" that causes a scratch on the surface as it (crystallization) is moved along "a or the surface of the medium" from downward pressure!
Higher chemical dilutions like 32:1 and 64:1 will ferret out the most frost lining cystalization.
@@DetailProjects Ah I see, thanks for the explanation. I didn't realize it was so deep. Makes more sense now. At the end of the day I guess I just assumed most of these companies aren't necessarily going to sell their consumers something that will easily or readily damage/ruin their paint/trim/interiors. DIYDetail comes off as somewhat reputable, Yvan has been around for a while, its definitely not as obnoxious as something like chemical guys which is 100% an advertising brand. Again I appreciate your thoroughness, better to find out here rather than something going amiss on your own car.
Also, I do agree DIYdetail products are a bit pricy, but at the moment they are running a 25% off site wide promotion so it seems more reasonable overall. Not sure if its available to canadians.
If your soap has to be used with a specific media, it really isn't as good as claimed. It should perform well with many different forms of cleaning media.
@@TheOutdoorDetailer Is rinseless wash a soap? I honestly don't know, considering you can just wipe/dry it off and call it good.
I'm pretty sure it works with other media, but was designed with the legacy sponge in mind (or vice-versa). They don't say you have to use the sponge, it's just recommended. Apparently sponges (or the legacy sponge in particular) don't tend to hold onto grit/particulate like a microfiber towel or chenille wash mitt where things tend to stick to it even after simply dunking it back in your wash bucket.
Technically speaking from a PURE chemical perspective, a RW chemical product "true to its roots" developed by Dr G. years ago does NOT contain "any" surfactants.
TH-cam influencers drive and drove a modern version of a RW chemical product incorporating surfactant(s) to meet or exceed this one dunk media test that was developed, of which, does NOT prove better cleaning ability on the vechile (proven by John @ Foresnsic Detail) and to have higher cleaning ability like a touchless car wash. To do so, higher surfactant concentrations and multiple surfactants are needed which has its own negatives and potential damage to the vechile.
Correct, a RW with a single or multiple surfactant load in the RW formulation IS a "soap" per chemistry standards in product development!
What would you say Is the safest in regards to physical human health and is also effective as a good Rinsless wash?
I would like to know this as well. I have asked this question in the past on FB and got no response. I believe the concerns of detailing products are not openly discussed enough and the manufacturers/influencers cop out by say “wear gloves”. But, even if you wear PPF, and you wash in your garage, what is left over after the wash…like the next day/week. If your family also uses the same garage, what concerns if any, should be considered?
Great question.
No chemicals are safe for humans PERIOD
The SDS is available to everyone and is required by law, so you are able to identify the hazards and categories of severity. (1 is extreme 4 least dangerous)
.
Always look at the ingredients category levels on section 3. There is always information on how dangerous a product is when in contact with humans and environment.
This is why I emphasize for everyone to review SDS before buying or using a product.
Thank you for this…. Nemesis next!
Thanks, it’s on the list!
Thank you for testing DIY Detail Rinse Less Wash
😂 You guys got exposed HARD
Great video! Shouldn't you have used a slightly damp towel for drying? Dry microfiber can mare surfaces, and a damp towel usually dried better.
Would love to see owners pride eco wash in these tests!
test fynlab v3 rinseless wash
Yup
Where diy shines is their videos and social media is like having a tech line on how to use their products.its all a bunch of hype to me . However you do a great job testing these products .i hope you will continue. I will be watching.
So you sprayed rinseless on a thick layer of filth and then let it dry without touching it and you were surprised that the dirt didn't just magically disappear? You could have done that with soap and had the same result, not how the product is even engineered to be used so I believe that really showed nothing. Then you tried to remove it from another filthy panel and it did a pretty good job from what I saw in the video with contact washing. Streaking could have easily been from the gauntlet towel, I got rid of mine because i had the same issue with it. Ive used multiple rinseless washes and I have gotten great and safe results using DIY's properly and using common sense 🙂
@@justlovethisgame3537LOL.. I mean, i’m not going to say the guy isn’t honest, but c’mon… the last thing we need is another car janitor trying to sound “scientific” and showing flawed testing.. Like motor oil? Hahahaha. Next i’m gonna put a layer of lithium grease on a panel. When it doesn’t remove it i’m gonna conclude that the rinseless won’t remove polishing oils 😂. Oh, not before I say “lubricity”, “hydrophobics”, and “surfactants” a bunch of times.. it’s laughable man. BTW, I’m also not defending these BS detailing companies.
@@BananaChipzzz cars drip motor oil on streets. That gets on cars. I want to clean it off.
I'm good with the test. Do you honestly not find that helpful?
@justlovethisgame3537 All im saying is it was flawed dude. Just because the video was an hour long with a bunch of flawed testing doesn't make it an "honest" review.
I'm a Chemical Engineer. Yes, Yvan markets his product to encapsulate and remove dirt from a surface just by pre spraying. Those words have come straight out of his mouth. That is exactly how he claims the product is "engineered" to be used, which is clearly false. What basis do you have for stating you've got great and safe results? To your untrained eye you are likely unable to identify swirl marks properly.
Can I ask what was the clay towel you used
It’s the DIY Detail clay towel
Awesome review! Could you do an onr review like this?
Of course!
considering doing their new hyper foam product as it is has added surfactants to the ONR formula.
Yes this one got my attention, it’s on my long list of RW
@@DetailProjects
as this list keeps growing i was wondering what your thoughts are for the need for extensive testing at stronger concentrations. I suspect us typical end users won't go much stronger than 128:1 , and most will stick to standard dilution. thanks for engaging with us on this topic!
The better question to ask is why test RW dilution ratio to begin with? Because the dilution ratios are taken for granted in rinseless washing as some may think it's a gold standard and not buck industry norms, thus the industrial set norm at 256:1 and this detail narrative is being sold for RW washing; simply not true. Truth be told, the chosen surfactant by classification either Anionic, Cationic, Nonionic or Amphoteric will not have the same dilution ratio of cleaning ability, chemical application, user experience, chemical marring ability nor hazard ability. Especially, if some RW formulations includes PDMS as a lubricate component.
Wouldn't it be nice to know the actual dilution ratio that works or does not work for a given RW chemical product based in its chemical formulation? In my testing, I'm not seeing 256:1 to work for some currently marketed RW products.
I really think if you’re interpreting an SDS and making conclusions based on ingredients you should either explain your expertise/experience or have a prefoessiinal (i.e. chemist) interpret.
You don’t need to be an expert to read an SDS. Anyone can do proper research and the facts are right in front of you. It’s called google. Every person should do proper research to see what they are working with but the problem is nobody talks about it. Everyone is focused on how slick and how good a product smells!
But if it makes you feel better, I do happen to know a thing or two about detailing, my empirical tests can attest for that!
I am a Chemical Engineer. His interpretation of an SDS is correct.
@@AnthonySarino-f7nAwesome.
Correction material safety data sheets
Unfortunately diy are not thorough when it comes to correct information. They are sloppy.
I had to look at the sds for RRW, I'm shocked to see how toxic this is. Also had to extrapolate how much water there is and it's around 95%. Think about guys we are all.paying big bucks for a for a water bottle.
Rrw is pretty toxic?
“How you do one thing is how you do everything”
Are we saying RRW is really toxic or DIY? Yes these rinseless products are a lot of water and I hope we can move to half the water soon.
Toxicity is hard to know unless you understand what each chemical is. Chemical grade is an indicator and also its bio Toxicity. Koch Chemie is very clear in its sds. The contents of each chemical is very low but how bad they are I wouldn't know. It does highlight how water we buy in each bottle. Why do they do it this way would good to know.
Does the test panel you used have the same hardness as clearcoat on a car?
The purpose of using plexiglass as a chemical test media or medium is to test and/or determine chemical etching (burning) or scratching called frost lining.
Unlike clearcoat on a hood, plexiglass with show a surface frost line we commonly call a chemical scratch but really is mild to moderate to advanced chemical etching.
Unlike clearcoat on a hood plexiglass will etch or scratch easily to identify with the "naked eye " chemicals like ammonia, buffers, acetone, surfactant identied by classification as ionic surfactants have a tendecy to frost line etch, solvents, etc. in the product formation. The list goes on and on what plexiglass and polycarbonate can tell us, think beyond the media contacting the surface but the product's chemicals in the formulation contacting the surface and its reaction when heat is built up when adding pressure, resistance and contact washing with the RW product and the chosen media. Plexiglass is used in chemistry labs to easily identify this cause and effect relationship then verified by microscope analysis.
That's why I guard against media scratching by wiping in 2 directions. It may not be a full proof test but I chose test parameters and mediums any detail enthusiast can do for themselves versus buying a thousand dollar gamma or hamma handheld 500x microscopes to see the same scratch etching on the clearcoat of a hood. ...
Hardness has nothing to do with chemical burns at the surface nor frost lining because of a chosen chemical product being used.
"Frost lining" is "chemical cystalization" that causes a scratch on the surface as it (crystallization) is moved along "a or the surface of the medium" from downward pressure!
Now, I explained my purpose of using the plexi-test panels (chemical crystallization marring), I will now address your direct question. If I'm following you, in your reasoning you believe clearcoat hardness or "clearcoat layer thickness" is somehow more scratch resistant than my plexi-test panels - maybe if the plexi-panel is not calibrated to same ratio scratch resistance level.
Clearcoat is measured by mil on top of paint and primer. In the last 10-13 years car manufacturers have reduced clearcoat thickness application by 1.55 mils across all manufactured vehicles to save money on per vehicle unit cost, more profits. Some brands like the German vehicles (BMW) have harder perceived clearcoat, meaning, "thicker" layers in mils of clearcoat application. The average brand-new car (not truck) coming off the assembly line in modern times the clearcoat averages under 4.5 mils. Over time clearcoat degrades lowering its thickness clearcoat layer and the reason why you put LSP on clearcoat to prevent UV and physical degradation or at least slow it down over time.
You can buy plexi and polycarbonate test panels that are "scratch resistant" which will resist physical and chemical scratches greater than any vehicle clearcoat thickness, granite, aluminum, steel, marble, etc. You can also buy plexi test calibrated panels that have the same 4.5 mil layer to align with the average car vehicle clearcoat thickness but, and admittedly, may not be the same hardiness level but they are called calibrated clearcoat panels for similar scratch resistance and fall in a 95% confidence interval.
If you take a pencil and scratch your clearcoat and the calibrated pexi-panel (as I do) and they both pencil scratch, then you have similar "testing correlation mediums." At this point if it scratches that plexi medium in my testing it will scratch my clearcoat. My plexi-panels are aligned to 4-4.5 mil clearcoat and have some test panels as high as 5.234 mils.
Clearcoat is "very soft" and why feather micro marring (love marks) occurs when your drying MF runs across the clearcoat to dry the vehicle, and he reason why the detail industry marketed and developed drying aids. Lots of drying towel hitting the paint panels when Rinseless washing drying - what do you think it's doing to your clearcoat.
Please don't think plexi or polycarbonate test panels are not as scratch resistant as vehicle clearcoat or even cannot be replicated to be the same level of scratch resistance in an empirical lab test.
CarPro ECH2O would be nice to have reviewed
On the list!
@@DetailProjects Nice! By the way, I really like that you are showing us SDS and keeping us aware of safety issues regarding any chemical. Maybe you can take a look and review Nanolex GreenX Car care lineup with this aspect?
How do we know that the marring wasn’t there before you started the wash on the back door your testing is flawed!
He didn't even comment on marring on the back door.
LOL…..LOL….I have only used V1 so far but I have had a totally different experience than this TH-camr. I have had excellent results thus far. Will have circle back on V2 for sure.
You've had excellent results because you don't know what a swirl mark looks like
@@AnthonySarino-f7nno different then traditional contact soap wash
Someone with an honest speech. There is more to find about all the DIY on reddit btw. His sponges and pads are now made at URO fiber btw. And the rinseless is the same as the v1 accordingly to a certified C6 installer i spoke with. Ivan commented that those are rumours but yeah whatever. Hes a brilliant salesman tho. xD. The sds sheet had me scratching my head also on a few components. U got urself a subscriber for these tests!
Regarding DIY and the products/chemists:
Turtle Wax - Rinseless wash, incredible suds, ceramic gloss, tire dressing
3D Car Care - Gold Standard Polish (probably Owner's Pride is identical)
ECP Inc. - 3/5/8 Year Ceramic coatings, interior ceramic, interior clean and protect
Technician's Choice (ECP Inc.) - Quick Beads (TEC582 concentrate + graphite flakes + DI water)
Generic products - Iron remover (identical to Owner's Pride DeconX), All Clean (same as Owner's Pride), Panel Prep (IPA), Water Spot Remover (vinegar), Tree Sap remover (methanol).
The only thing that is worth mentioning is that the iron remover is sodium mercaptoacetate based rather than the more potent ammonium mercaptoacetate. That means a clay towel can be used in combination with their iron remover.
Many thanks, to add to your list, incredible suds is the same as owners pride ultra shampoo !
@@DetailProjects Haha thank you. Dno why brands get offensive when these things get shared online. They take us for fools it looks like when they get mad. Honestly we all know a bit how the business works, and it is what it is. If u also see what stuff in Japan goes around, its rly amazing their products to protect. Offc, i never watched the sds sheets yet so thats that... Im looking forward to ur test with the og onr with the clay towel which gets described so many times as super safe. Edit: Owh i rly tought the suds was from TW 3 in 1 wash slick n slide but offc, with different ingredients here and there. Interesting.
We will get there!
@ absolutely.
I don’t know who your “sources” are, but they are not correct. We own all our own IP, formulas. The internet’s need to “find” connections between companies is interesting to say the least.
Jesus Christ, my favortie rinsless getting DESTROYED. I'm really disappointed. Trully. A great test, smiliar to what John from Forensic Detailing is conducting. Although about the marring, even if you use 100 towels and the cleaning solution is always clean, in my and my fellow pro detailer friends opinion EVERYTHING marrs the paint. If it's not visible with the naked eye - do you really care about it so much? Yes sure it can accumulate over time and get's shown, but if the scratches are so minute they are shown only on the microscope, accumulating them over time to be shown will take A LOT of time, but that's only my opinion on it (and maybe a few of my friends in the buisness) ,It's just a case of minimizing it, and also i didn't had a smiliar experience with leaving such obvious marring as you had with DIY rinsless on my or any of my familys or firends cars (i maintain them all, often with DIY Rinsless so i have plenty of experience with this product) nevertheless i think I'm going to switch to a different product. It's just that the choice between rinsless washes is a lot smaller here in the EU. No Koch RRW, no ADS Hero, no Ethos, no Feynlab. Considering ONR (have Absolute but not impressed with the cleaning ability of it). Severly sad, espiecially it's not the first test that gave DIY really low marks.
Why r u rubbing 10 times when it should b 1lite pass so really 😮
Correction material safety data sheets