lowbee

I get PPF for me and not for anyone else.

I can't stand having stone chips on my beautiful car. I want to keep my car in like new condition for as long as I can for me to enjoy. Beside, I don't have to worry about swirl marks.

But if I have to pay USD $7K+, I may not have done the whole car. For under $5K Canadian money with the quality I got, I am very happy with what I brought

Dana R

I used Automotive Elegance in Andover, MA on my CGTS 4.0. I paid $2k for the full front and mirrors, but the real value is the partial front w/ mirrors for $1k, I hate the line in the middle of the hood and fenders, so I spent the extra grand. I'd argue that there is an actual ROI with the partial, maybe on the full front. Just getting your bumper resprayed with a top quality job is around $700 these days.

dnimi123

Nope because I would not give these guys one penny! I just dont believe in it as a necessary process especially for THIS car. I might consider PPF for a more expensive or exotic car or one with a special paint - GT Silver is just way to easy to paint and doesnt show a lot of chips.... People need to know there is another side to the PPF coin and its not just a must have... PS. I spoke to Moe who responds to this thread and have nothing but respect for him and what he does... I just chose not to go this route for resons I think I have explained.

dnimi123

Moe is the best and he will get my business if I ever buy a car that warrants one sliver of PPF!

dnimi123

Dont really care that much about what the car will be worth when I sell it (I traded my 2001 BMW 540i for $1,500 in 2017, I sold wifes 1999 996 for $18,000 in 2021 and certainly could have gotten more for each...) - there are a myriad of factors that will come into play, though of course lower miles, desirable spec and condition all play a part in getting the best price. But what whats the spread between top dollar and average - no way to tell now unless you look at prior sales of similar cars, etc... Im just not that interested in $5,000, $10,000 or whatever is the spread as its immaterial to me. I think there is a lot of misplaced ego when it comes to these cars and the trading of them (ie I got this for my blah blah, etc...). To me its a total waste of my time to think about this at all when I completely enjoy the car and drive the crap out of it with negligible wear and tear on the paint thus far...

slowdown

I have a Telluride that I only got PPF on the B and C pillars where they used soft plastic for like $150. But the car was only 50k, and it's our everyday car. I didn't bother getting it PPF on the front/high impact areas. It's now riddled with rock chips everywhere since it sees lots of mountain passes. Do I regret it? No, not really. We'll probably sell it at 100k miles or drive it all the way to 200k miles. There's no way a KIA will get any more money on trade in for having PPF and being extra mint. If anything, I'll polish it up lightly if we sell it. But I'll live with the rock chips and touch up paint. It's a family hauler, one that I love but it is what it is.

Our LC100, I won't PPF, since it's now converted into an overland machine. Paint is still maintained with a coating or sealant. And it doesn't see tunnel washes - just the brushless water chamber every week, and I'll hand wash it once a month (or every other month). But again, PPF defeats the purpose of that car.

But my Porsches get PPF no matter what. The Cayenne GTS sees a ton of snow but is never driven off-road. It's our nice family car. And the CGTS4.0 is a keeper and a garage queen even if it's not a GT3, etc.

PPF makes it so much easier to hand wash and maintain my Porsches. Again, if you're not at all OCD, then there's no need for PPF. Or if you have unlimited funds, and you think of these Porsches like I think of my Telluride, then by all means skip any PPF. My neighbor never PPFs any of his Porsches and always drives it through the tunnel wash. He's not a car guy and always sells his cars before reaching 50k miles. He asked me about PPF, and I recommend that he not get it - it doesn't make sense for him. The ROI is just not there for him.

But if you're mildly OCD or worse, and you're a car guy who also likes the paint to be maintained even after hard driving, recent jumps in PPF technology has been a godsend imo. I hated taking out the Rupes every year and worrying about swirls even after hand washing my fast cars. Now I can even order a blacked out car and not worry. Personally, that's worth the $5k+ for me.

Odin

I’m using this PPF install as a guide to my detailer on how I wouldn’t like the end-result.

Outlaw 06

Sure... I won't ever be able to sell my 718 Spyder because I (can afford to) drive it like it's meant to be driven, and don't have it wrapped in tacky plastic.

Sharm

Agreed. I have sold 2 P-cars, one PPF’ed entire front and the other not but ceramic coated. The fact that I had PPF on one car but not the other made ZERO difference in the final negotiated price. Even after owning the second car for 5 years there were only 2-3 small chips (maybe somewhat salvaged by the coating). Using Dr. Color Chip they were not even noticeable and honestly even if they were most people just don’t care. In valuing the overall car it is negligible, unless there are major cosmetic defects due to an accident or vandalism.

Look, I have no problem with the idea of PPF..for those who are inclined and want to keep their car relatively chip-free it may be a worthwhile investment. What I have an issue with is the freaking absorbitant prices some installers are charging ($12K - seriously?). They are not performing plastic surgery here. Would you pay 10% of the cost of your home to cover it in plastic?

MaddMike

One day I aspire to be as cool as you.

Meanwhile, mere mortals like me use their cars as daily drivers. Unfortunately, I am also OCD so chips, scratches, door dings, and swirls in my DD would drive me crazy. In addition, I have a five-year-old and a toddler who constantly put their grubby paws and sometimes toys on my car. PPF lets mere mortals like me own a car without going crazy with paint defects. I actually sold a previous 911 because it became so chipped that I had it "professionally" touched up. The touch-up job was so bad that I couldn't stand it and got rid of it.

I don't care about the next owner, I care are me and my inexplicable obsessions.

sin911

Nobody is saying ‘you can’t sell your car because you don’t have PPF’, there is a buyer for everything at the right price. But ‘value’ is relative and subjective. If your car is for sale with a bunch of rock chips priced $10k lower compared to the market average with same miles, it may be a good deal for someone who does not care about the rock chips. For someone **** like myself, it may be a deal breaker.

There are plenty of cars without PPF and their paints are completely fine, but there could be one occasion that can f it up in a split second. Personally it would bother me if there is a stupid rock chip on the paint that I could have avoided by getting PPF. And PPF does not make your car bulletproof, just added safety measure. I drive on highways where there are bunch of 18 wheelers that kick up rocks and debris and I don’t have to stay 200 feet behind them to keep my paint pristine, gives me the peace of mind.

On my car you cannot really tell there is film on it, Moe did a spectacular job in regards to that part. Disassembled the bumper, door handles, etc to get everything done right. There are very few corners where the film edges are visible.

manifold danger

This thread is taking a turn for the worse...

It's pretty clear by now that folks who elect to get PPF really want PPF. As such, it's the same as many, many other things on this board that suffer from severe confirmation bias for those who elect to spend the money (Burmester, LWB, PCCB, the list goes on...).

Saying unsubstantiated things like "your car is less valuable if it doesn't have PPF" is classic confirmation bias and is really not helpful at all to those like me who are on the fence about it. Telling stories about why you, personally, want or don't want PPF is more helpful but still anecdotal.

The way this thread (and the other 3 dozen just like it) is headed, it would be really nice if the mudslinging could stop and the two camps could come together and post some kind of data-backed claims. Otherwise it still just seems like anyone who apparently has $10k lying around will tell you that you REALLY REALLY NEED IT, but otherwise offer not much ROI instead of peace of mind, easier to wash, and a threat that your car won't be worth as much someday (even though you pay a ton of money up front in sunk costs immediately, which in concept effectively makes it worth less anyway).

Xxyion

Yeah agree'd, at the end of the day value or not, its really about your comfort level on how you want to maintain your car. For those where this is a garage queen and sees maybe 2k miles a year, yeah PPF is honestly a waste of money, A good ceramic/enamel/graphene coating with regular upkeep will do wonders in protecting your paint when you just want to cruise around. For the rest of us who are going to be doing a ton of track days or autocross, the PPF will protect the paint against more than just rock chips. tar and tire rubber are also things to consider and PPF will really help protect your paint against things like that.

Also keep in mind area. Some of you live in areas where the roads are super nice and always paved, you almost never have cars in front of you and experience little to no traffic. For others like myself, we live in an area where being in bumper to bumper traffic is the rule and not the exception, our roads are filled with potholes and loose debris and where windshield chips and cracks are the norm. In those situations, not having PPF is almost crazy talk.

I think also some of our older members are remembering PPF from the 90s. PPF back then was horrible. Tacky plastic is literally the best term to describe it. You can feel the plastic and it will yellow within just a year or two. Then it starts the crack and I've heard horror stories where it would peel off the clear coat. I remember seeing a bunch of Porsches with it growing up and thought that's how the car came.

PPF now days is quite different. The material itself actually kinda feels like clear coat. It has some hydrophobic properties and some of the high end material comes with UV protection. I have a friend who PPF'd his BRZ back in 2013 and the car still looks brand new. There has been no yellowing at all and because of the PPF there is zero scratches or swirls. He regularly ceramic coats it as well which makes it even more hydrophobic. A good PPF job you shouldn't even be able to tell that its there. You should be able to put two cars side by side and you shouldn't be able to tell based on looks.

MaddMike

Go back and read the thread. The thread is about the quality of PPF installation when a few choice people decided to come down and tell everyone that they are fools for protecting their cars and expect not to get called out.

If you want a data based study on car values, please do one. If you want to add to the original question and post, please do. However, if someone wants to come on a thread and condensed to everyone on that thread that they alone are (checks notes) not tacky and utilize their car as it was intended then they will be called out for that.

manifold danger

Oh I'm sorry, the Thread Police has spoken. I forgot I'm not allowed to comment on on-topic posts if they're already off-topic or I'll "get called out".

......but if the conversation is still about the original topic (PPF) is it still off-topic though? You seem to have all the answers so figured you'd know.

Or maybe you just arbitrarily decided what is on- and off-topic as it suits the needs of whatever internet argument you're trying to win?

Anyone else care to chime in? Or should I pick one of the OTHER threads about PPF to make a perfectly viable request for actual facts or data rather than subjective emotion without fear of "being called out"?

And IB4 lock- I'm already aware this is likely a rhetorical question but I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised. One of you Pro-PPF guys must have done enough research to back up your "projected loss" claims, right?