Test of chemical resistance of urethane paint protection film made by the world’s top manufacturers (3M, CCL, KPMF, ORAFOL, XPEL and other)

[admin 519]

Greetings;

 

Our paint protection film business activity began in 2007 and since then we have used various suppliers. As installers, we are very often asked by other installers – “What type of film do you prefer in your work and what kind of film can you recommend to us?”.

 

To determine what type of film is best suited for our work we decided to create a few topics, each of them accompanied by a small test. The reason why we posted these topics is because Internet has no reliable and independent information regarding these topics. We say the information is independent, because we didn’t give any preference to one or another manufacturer, and we are not an official representative, distributor or dealer of any manufacturer. We are installers, similar to many others. We have no specialized or precision laboratory-scale equipment and in our tests we are using locally available material. That’s why, please, do not pass judgment on us.

 

In the first test, from the array of manufacturers we picked the paint protection film market leaders and made a few measurements: the thickness of the in-situ urethane paint protection film; thickness of the urethane paint protection film with glue lay and thickness of the whole product with underlay. In the second test we measured film durability. In our current test we will check film chemical resistance. It is quite interesting because all manufacturers claimed that their films are resistant to aggressive chemical environments. Analogous to the previous tests, for this test we used the same 19 samples:

 

1. 3М VentureShield

2. Avery Dennison Nano Fusion

3. KPMF PPF 82205-UV

4. Orafol Oraguard 280

5. Xpel Xtreme

6. Xpel Ultimate

7. VentureShield 2007 YOM

8. Suntek PPF TC

9. Orafol Oraguard 283

10. KPMF PPF 82200

11. Hexis CarPro 150

12. Sharpline DuraShield+

13. Premium Shield SPF Elite

14. Hexis CarPro 300

15. ISEE2 Total Protect PU 250

16. Premium Shield SPF

17. VITO Irmen SPT 1365

18. VITO Irmen SPT 1164

19. VITO Irmen SPT 1265

 

All samples were marked with permanent marker and experience has shown that both acetone and “White spirit” are not able remove completely marks which were made by that marker.

 

 

As an aggressive chemical we chose “646 Solvent”. Many of you probably will say that its way too strong, but for us it is does not matter – we want check it thoroughly because we should know for what we are plunking down our money.

 

 

Summary table:

 

[admin 519]

1. 3M Venture Shield

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

 

[admin 519]

2. Avery Dennison Nano Fusion

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

[admin 519]

3. KPMF PPF 82205-UV

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

 

 

4. Orafol Oraguard 280

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

 

 

5. Xpel Xtreme

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

 

[admin 519]

6. Xpel Ultimate

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

 

[admin 519]

7. VentureShield 2007 YOM.

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

 

[admin 519]

Eventually, “646 Solvent” removed the marker from the all samples. Marks on such samples as Nano Fusion, KPMF 82205, ultimately were removed very easily, practically with one application. In contrast is such samples as 3M VentuteShield, Oraguard 280, Xtreme, VentureShield 2007 – with them we needed about 5-7 applications. We also noticed that the gloss had disappeared and the film had become dull. Furthermore, as you can see in the photos, both samples of VentureShield have shown film delamination. It seemed to us that we had not tested these films thoroughly enough and, in addition to that, some of the samples did not show any reaction during the test. That’s why we decided to repeat the “646 Solvent” testing but in a more aggressive way – 2-3 solvent drops in the center of the sample and wait while it completely dries out.

 

[admin 519]

1.2. 3M Venture Shield

In the photos you can see the sample with the solvent freshly applied and 2 other samples for comparison – one with “646 Solvent” completely dry and the other is completely new film.

 

 

 

2.2. Avery Dennison Nano Fusion

In the photos you can see the sample with the solvent freshly applied and 2 other samples for comparison – one with “646 Solvent” completely dry and the other is completely new film.

 

 

 

3.2. KPMF PPF 82205-UV

In the photos you can see the sample with the solvent freshly applied and 2 other samples for comparison – one with “646 Solvent” completely dry and the other is completely new film.

 

 

 

4.2. Orafol Oraguard 280

In the photos you can see the sample with the solvent freshly applied and 2 other samples for comparison – one with “646 Solvent” completely dry and the other is completely new film.

 

 

 

5.2. Xpel Xtreme

In the photos you can see the sample with the solvent freshly applied and 2 other samples for comparison – one with “646 Solvent” completely dry and the other is completely new film.

 

 

 

6.2. Xpel Ultimate

In the photos you can see the sample with the solvent freshly applied and 2 other samples for comparison – one with “646 Solvent” completely dry and the other is completely new film.

 

 

 

7.2. VentureShield 2007 YOM

In the photos you can see the sample with the solvent freshly applied and 2 other samples for comparison – one with “646 Solvent” completely dry and the other is completely new film.

 

 

[admin 519]

After testing was complete we tried light polishing in order to remove the dullness and some blotchiness caused by application of the solvent. Technically you can fix it with polishing (see the attached photos).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[admin 519]

In the photos we took you can see 2 samples for comparison. In one of the photos “646 Solvent” was applied (in order to remove the marker writing) and the second one is a sample of completely new film.

 

Suntek PPF TC

 

 

Orafol Oraguard 283

 

 

KPMF PPF 82200

 

 

Hexis CarPro 150

 

 

Sharpline DuraShield+

 

 

Premium Shield SPF Elite

 

 

Hexis CarPro 300

 

 

ISEE2 Total Protect PU 250

 

 

Premium Shield SPF

 

 

VITO Irmen SPT 1365

 

 

VITO Irmen SPT 1164

 

 

VITO Irmen SPT 1265

 

 

The photographs show a sample treated with 646 solvent in order to remove an inscription. For clarity, the first picture was taken at the right angle, whereas the second one at the patch of light.

 

Suntek PPF TC

 

 

 

Orafol Oraguard 283

 

 

 

KPMF PPF 82200

 

 

 

Hexis CarPro 150

 

 

Sharpline DuraShield+

 

 

Premium Shield SPF Elite

 

 

Hexis CarPro 300

 

 

ISEE2 Total Protect PU 250

 

 

Premium Shield SPF

 

 

VITO Irmen SPT 1365

 

 

VITO Irmen SPT 1164

 

 

VITO Irmen SPT 1265

 

 

Summary Table: