|
|
|
 |
| Zespół muzyczny "MY WE DWOJE" Wołów-Brzeg Dolny-Wińsko- Warzęgowo |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
Zapraszamy Was do dyskusji na naszym forum.
Forum - Does PPF actually stop stone chips and scratches, or just minimize them?
Isolde Wren (Gość)
| | I'm about to pull the trigger on paint protection film for my new SUV, but before I hand over a significant amount of money, I want to be realistic about what it can actually do because I've seen some marketing claims that sound almost too good to be true. I do a lot of highway driving between Abu Dhabi and Dubai, and the amount of debris that gets kicked up by trucks on the E11 is genuinely terrifying, I've had to replace my windshield twice in the last three years and my front bumper is absolutely peppered with tiny chips that make me cringe every time I wash the car. From what I've read, good quality PPF is around 8 mils thick, which is about five times thicker than a typical ceramic coating, so it should provide genuine impact protection rather than just chemical resistance, but I'm wondering whether it actually stops stones from damaging the paint or just reduces the severity of the damage. I've also seen demonstrations where the film self-heals from light scratches and swirl marks, which would be a game-changer for me because I'm obsessive about keeping my car looking good but I hate the constant battle against washing-induced marring. I came across a breakdown of Reliable PPF scratch and stone chip protection for cars in Abu Dhabi, which gave me a realistic picture of what the film can and can't do, but I'd still like to hear from people who've actually lived with it. Has anyone here had a significant stone strike that would definitely have chipped the paint, and found that the film absorbed the impact without any damage to the paint underneath? And on the flip side, has anyone had a strike that was so severe it went straight through the film and still damaged the paint? I'm trying to understand whether this is genuine protection or just a layer that makes minor damage less visible. Any honest feedback from people who've been through this would be massively helpful. | | | | Rogelio Burch (Gość)
| | It stops the vast majority of chips, but not everything. A decent film takes the hit from a normal stone at highway speed and the paint underneath stays clean. A sharp piece of gravel off a truck at 120 can still dent it or leave a small mark through the film. It's a big improvement, not armour. | | | | Sergio Burgess (Gość)
| | Ran XPEL on the front of my Pajero for two years of Abu Dhabi to Dubai runs. Found a few tiny pits in the film itself, but when I peeled one corner back for a repair the paint under it was spotless. Windscreen is still glass though, so the film won't save that. | | | | Ignacio Burke (Gość)
| | Be a bit careful with the "8 mils" talk. Thickness alone doesn't decide it, the quality of the urethane matters more, and cheap film at the same thickness can yellow or fail early. And the self-healing only deals with light swirls, it won't fix a proper gouge, and it works faster in heat. | | | | Mateo Burnett (Gość)
| | Impact protection depends on the film absorbing and spreading the energy, so a bigger stone at close range can still bruise the film and lift an edge. Panels that take the worst hits, like the bonnet leading edge and the bumper, are worth covering first. Full body is rarely needed for stone chips alone. |
Odpowiedz:
Tematy łącznie: 3993 Posty łącznie: 63208 Użytkownicy łącznie: 4
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eugeniusz Opyd
WARZĘGOWO 14
56-100 WOŁÓW
kom. 604789247
opyd@autograf.pl
www.mywedwoje.pl.tl |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
|
|