Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfectlap
well I had a black DAILY DRIVER for five years so I can speak with experience.
Allot of people will say try this brand or that brand and its not really to do with brand but the types of products.
The 'pool of water' deep shine vs. the sharp glassy shine has mostly
do with bio ingredients vs. synthetics.
Pure carnauba waxes give you that wet natural look but they aren't very durable unless you coat them with an anti-static or polymer sealant that works over carnauba.
The synthetic waxes/sealants dry up hard and last very long lengths of time. These look good on Silver and metallics. They give black and reds a candied finish which most people love but views are mixed among more discerning eyes.
to try to bridge the gap allot of synthetics are being blended with higher concentrations of carnauba.
But most of what you see in that photo is down to good prep. The swirls have been obliterated which keeps the overhead sun light from reflecting and allows the wax to show its depth. There is also a fair bit of layering going on there I imagine.
Some good carnaubas I've tried: Pinnacle $ouveran and Natty's Blue(for black).
But I wouldn't use either without FK 425 as pure carnaubas have sticky finishes that attract lots of dust and pollen.
p.s.
the 911 in that pic was dirty 30 minutes after the photo was taken.
|
I suspected as much, just wanted it confirmed that it's the difference between a natural (carnauba) wax and a synthetic one. I especially thought Zaino finish pics I've seen are among the most shiny and reflective ones.
I agree that the 911 will be dusty 30 minutes after the photo but there's just something so beautiful about how black soaks up all light, especially on a curved Porsche body.
wetstuff, I agree lighting also plays a role and photos can be manipulated, but I've seen this difference in real life, as well. I see many clean black cars that are just too shiny, crisp and reflective for my taste, and once in a while I'll see one I like.
Z.