Originally Posted by Tsuyoi
Wow I feel like I'm doing my dissertation in front of a panel again!
No, I didn't conduct a full series of controlled and replicable experiments and then extrapolate a factual and quantifiable result taking into account allowable degrees of variance.
My previous analogy was that if you put a layer of something hard over something soft, the something hard will protect the something soft. This is the basis for all safety gear, armor, protective clothing, etc. So if you have a layer of hard coating over soft paint, then the hard coating will protect the soft paint from harm.
I DID read several product reviews by other people who have used the product, and from my (admittedly limited) knowledge of chemistry and physics, the principals upon which the product is founded are also sound.
I'm happy to put the product on the car for the price I paid based on the analogous results of other users. If nothing else I'm quite pleased with the "just waxed" sheen it gives the car after every wash, and how water beads right off.
If you really are that concerned with the "scientific evidence" of how effective this product is, please feel free to go buy a tube, put some on a painted metallic surface, throw a bunch of gravel at it, and report back to us with the results
So where did you come with the MOHR scale data? Surely someone has done testing to determine its classification?
I'm not expecting that you performed scientific analysis, just point us to where we can read more on what this product is capable of (such as the MOHR rating).
I'm genuinely interested, but would only consider spending hundreds of $ if this is more than another overhyped paint coating.