ilogikal1

I was involved in a discussion elsewhere regarding the virtues of snow foaming mainly but also other pre-washes. As I have too much time on my hands today I decided to do a write up and thought I'd share it here too. The theory put forward was that you can achieve as much by simply blasting the dirt away with just a pressure washer as you can by using a snow foam (basically that foaming doesn't actually do anything), thus making snow foam little more than a costly gimmick. So I decided to test this theory (largely due to my enjoyment of saying "I told you so" to the proposer of this theory ). I also decided to do the same with the citrus pre-wash at the same time, just for the sake of it and I had some to hand anyway. Method; take one filthy Z, apply pre-wash to half the car, allow to dwell, rinse the entire car, present the results. Passenger side will be snow foamed, driver side will be citrus pre-washed. On the rear, half will be foamed, half will be citrus to see which, if either, is the more effective cleaner. The pre-washes in question; I was only using what I had to hand, however these are both currently widely considered to be amongst the best in their respective field. Citrus Power is used neat whereas Autofoam is slightly more involved as it requires a 4-8% solution to hit the panel to be most effective (according to posts from Bilt Hamber on Detailing World), so a bucket, 30 seconds of my time and a bit of maths later I had the correct amount of solution in the lance for exactly 5% solution to hit the panel ready to go. So we begin with one very filthy car; Autofoam was then applied to the (already slightly cleaner) passenger side, as such; And Citrus Power to the driver's side; And both to the rear; All of which was allowed to dwell for 10 minutes. Which looked like this; Autofoam Citrus Power Both The entire car was then thoroughly rinsed which left it looking like this (please note, this is the result of an entirely touchless wash); Which all looks lovely and whatnot. What you might be able to see (particularly on the Autofoam side as that had, had a little longer to sheet the rinse water) is a definite line of remaining traffic film impeding sheeting (about level with the bottom of the door handle on that side in the first picture), demonstrating that neither foam nor citrus pre-wash is a replacement for the usual contact wash stage. The car wash then left to dry for an hour or two to show the difference better. So without further ado, here are the 'result' pictures, from which you may make your own conclusions. Autofoam side; Which looks pretty even. Until you get a bit closer; I will draw your attention, in particular, to this area right above here ^^^^ It may not be obvious in the photo, but in person you can clearly see where the foam has run down the panel. And the Citrus Power side; The difference is more evident here. I will just remind you though that the foam side was cleaner to start with. And for those who are wondering what cleans better, Autofoam or Citrus Power, here are the results of that one; Autofoam side; Citrus Power side; Which better demonstrates Autofoam's cleaning power as, to me, it's fairy even between Autofoam and Citrus Power. I will add that Autofoam is, in my personal opinion, the best foam I've tried in terms of cleaning power (to quantify that statement my previous foams include Megs Hyperwash, AD Magifoam [blue & purple versions], VP PH Neutral, and AF Avalanche). So for me it comes down to cost which breaks down as such; I used exactly 400ml of Autofoam to get the 5% on the panel (which was enough to foam the entire car as well, after this test). Previously I when I've done the whole car with Citrus Power I also used roughly 350-400ml. Autofoam is £17 for 5 litres and Citrus Power is £35 for 5 litres at the time of writing. Oh, and foaming just looks way cooler too. So there's that. And anyone still reading by this point may be glad to know that I did a full & proper foam and 2 bucket wash immediately after the last photo was taken so the poor Z is all clean and shiny again, but it started raining just as I finished up so I have no evidence of that so you'll just have to believe me.

Search is your friend. But to save you the bother; http://www.350z-uk.com/topic/75808-bluetooth-new-phone-pairing-but-nothmm/

No need to buy a specialist clay lube, any decent QD will do the job but even that's unnecessary as you can simply use a decent, properly diluted car shampoo as lube. Better still though; That, & use water for lubrication.

Sorry to hear this Rob. Let's hope you're in that GTR before too long.

No worries, I didn't mean to imply that you were wrong, just that I disagreed and offered another opinion to the OP. With regards to abrasive polishes, I did specify in my original post that choice would be determined by the level of correction required. I agree with your point about SN over Natty's though; SN gives much better, sharper reflections (SN Hybrid especially) but I find SN gives a more of a clinical finish as a result so for wet look and depth I prefer Natty's. All in my personal opinion, of course.

Yes and no. LPL is primarily a pre-wax cleanser - it's actually the better cleanser of the two, but also leaves oils behind for the wax to bond to along with some fillers (like a glaze). BH is primarily a glaze - it contains more fillers than LPL (so will mask more swirls than LPL), it won't cleanse as well as LPL but does contain mild cleansers too and leaves the same oils for wax bonding. I didn't say the do the same, but actually... they really do, as it happens (see above). They just do each thing to different degrees and will achieve difference results with each hence my opinion would be that both is unnecessary and a preference for a proper (perhaps corrective) polish instead (although maybe I didn't make that bit clear). Now if you'd suggested using Lime Prime (rather than Lite), I might see the point of using both due to the abrasives in LP. However, this is just my opinion.

Although I have no personal experience with them myself (I will do when I next run out of clay) but I understand from others that the Fine Dodo Juice ones are bit too mild to do the job. However in general there are those who swear by these new sponges/pads/towels and those who think they're the devil's work and prefer traditional clay. General consensus is they're very much a personal thing, so try one and see if you get one with them basically. Just remember to use plenty of lube (over-use is much better than under-use. Less is certainly not more in this case) and apply no pressure when using and you should be alright.

Get the Black Hole from here and the SN from Envy Valeting on here with a members discount (Tim might even sell BH too, but I'm not sure - although I personally think Natty's gives a slightly wetter finish, personally. Do a full wash, decontamination (fallout, tar remover & clay) and spend some time polishing it - level of correction requires would determine what polish. I'd also suggest using both Black Hole a Lime Prime Lite is unnecessary - one or the other really as neither has any cut and both contain cleaners so the first will just be removed by the second anyway.

I Is that a threat, Will I'd be more worried if it's a promise...

That's true. It would be an insult to muck...

Did no one have the heart to tell him how bad it looks? I'm not even sorry.

There was a point?

Oh, you joker!

Iron-X doesn't remove tar, it removes fallout which is equally as important. You'll need a separate product to remove tar, such as Tar-X or better still Tardis. You're less likely to inflict marring with the clay if the tar and fallout has been removed prior to claying, but claying will itself remove tar and reduce fallout (clay actually cuts the top most part of fallout contamination off rather than removing it entirely like Iron-X will). So to amend your process slightly; Wash - Iron-X - another rinse - Tardis - rinse - clay - rinse - correct - protect. To the OP, if you're claying in this cold weather or if the panel is cold, warm the clay up in warm/hot water - I would split the bar into a few pieces and have a couple of bits warming in the water whilst using a third and then swap to a warmer piece every so often. Cold clay will damage paint, especially the soft Nissan paint.

You'll get no lubrication with just water, so you will inflict marring. A good shampoo will also clean more efficiently/effectively too so yes, you will notice a difference between using a shampoo and just water, but you might also notice differences between shampoos too; some clean better, some lubricate better, some add gloss enhancers, some add protection, some gives lots of suds, some just smell nice. For me, the two main things a shampoo must do is firstly remove dirt effectively, and secondly be well lubricated whilst doing that - I like a shampoo that feels nice and slick on the paint over one that gives loads of suds in the bucket/on the panel. On the odd occasion I may also want something that leaves a decent gloss but most of the time I don't, as such my choice of shampoo is usually dictated by the LSP on the car. Which shampoo does what best though is quite subjective, as shown in this thread.

A little bit of digging, starting from here, led me to this and these; The four seats suggest it's not an Ultima and it even has a rear view mirror too And then I found this, from here; And then I lost interest. So if you want more you'll have to find them yourselves, I suggest starting with the Festival of Speed at Mission Inn on 5th May 2013.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but points tend to interfere with insurance for 5 years, rather than just the three they're on your license so don't bank on it dropping because of that.

Yeah I liked it too - did Rich tell you? The blind test product, for anyone else interested, is from a company called 50cal - you can't buy it just yet though as they don't launch for "a few weeks" yet. Oh, and good luck finding it on Google, that one's eluded me so far!

Not a bad haul there.

That is true, but "better than 5 minutes ago" and "enough" could easily be very different things. Especially in your case where you are, at best, guessing based on your assumptions. Assumptions such as; Which I'm assuming you've read (probably in the manual) yet completely ignored the preceding "up to". Which means it can be less than that but it can also me more than that, it's not the definitive figure that you car will be using that you seem to think it is. You could easily have used 1.8l in that 800miles you've owned the car, so even if the previous owner decided to top up the oil the day you bought it, you'd still have less in it now than you did then, so you actual don't nor I appreciate that you've had a stressful day with this but really listen to the advice above and stop driving it. If you can't get an accurate level reading, change the oil and start from scratch, if you can't do that yourself then enlist the help of someone who can even if it means trailering it to a garage. If you do top it up yourself, take regular readings to ensure that you're adding the right amount, don't just guestimate. And leave the dipstick out whilst actually filling too, you'll find it easier to get a clean reading that way.

I quite like making other people stand in the cold and I also blame it on them for it not unlocking in the first place. It's the simple things.

It seems to depend entirely on what day your car came off the line, mine is a UK 55 plate and it doesn't work on mine but it did on someone else with a similar age car, although I don't recall if theirs was an import or not.

You can't change it on the earlier cars.

Yes it's standard. You can change it if you've got a later car, there's plenty of information on it around here if you use the search.

Oh, I agree, Poorboys contains some as well, but I've never had any problems with either Britemax or Poorboys and I think they're both excellent shampoos (I've not tried Banana Gloss though). Even in the sun I've not had any problems so long as it doesn't dry out but that's the same for all shampoos.