When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I did 100% PPF with suntek all around the car where pint touches on the first week. It looks amazing and definetly worth it. I bought the car and is paid for and planning to keep 3-4 months before CPO warranty expires 8/2021. Leasing... mmmhhhh i don't know if I would spend the 4K it costs as most likely you will get a new on at the end of the lease. But it's definetly worth it.
I have a 16 GTS that I got preowned with 9k miles and selling it next week at 12000 miles...it has SO MANY MARKS it's not even funny. There isn't a car I get and plan on keeping that doesnt get a full car bra. Then maintenance is just easy as hell and i'm completely worry free. IF I was leasing (which I never do) I'd probably just have the front done. It's that much of a pain for me to see. But to each their own.
Black Cayenne Diesel bought 11/13. Waited 2 months and picked a few chips before the PPF was installed. Looks very good after almost 4 years. PPF on the hood has a slight discolorations from bird poop, but you really have to look for it. 911 was PPF'd day one, 3 months ago. No issues. Very happy both cars are done and I don't fear the little ground level meteorites that seem to be attracted to our cars.
No PPF here. Might reassess at the end of summer and do bumper but its like wrapping your couch or lampshades IMO. I'm at about 10,000(7000 or so are highway) miles and have 1 tiny chip. I'm sure bumper will look a little "sandblasted" in time but no way I'd wrap entire car. If I were leasing there is no way I would spend the $. Doesnt make sense.
I did PPF on my leased Cayman. They made more money when they sold my perfect car, but it didn't affect my lease trade in.
I did not put PPF on my leased 911 and have logged over 5K. I'll post a pic of the front end next week - I am traveling right now. No chips. I don't drive it on the highway in winter and keep my distance when following other cars.
Been hanging out here as I consider the leap from GT4 to 991.2.
I went no PPF on the nose of my GT4 and have no regrets 11,000 miles later. Still looks great. There are two chips, but they are small and don't bother me much—I am far more bothered by the scratches left by a bad wash job (the one time I let someone talk me into letting them wash the car). Only one of the chips is missing paint, and it's tiny. There are, of course, many tiny pits in the clear coat, but I can't see them unless I bend down and look at the car really closely and from funny angles. I don't spend a lot of time looking at the car that way—and the car and its paint still look showroom fresh from any normal viewing position...even standing right next to the car. I suspect a paint correction would help the pits a bit (though not eliminate them, of course).
I thought a lot about PPF, but ultimately skipped it because:
Only I would be driving the car for the vast majority of its miles, so I can adjust my following distances, etc.
Nasty worst-case chips have happened in my 28 years of driving, but maybe only 2-5 times. I view them like other hazards—possible, but not all that likely.
I don't like the surface of PPF very much compared to paint.
I really don't like a line across the hood and/or fender tops—nor do I love the idea of having a color mismatch from the front fenders to the doors. I house a 997 GT3 RS for a friend, and its older (but not that old!) film is yellowing badly.
I worry about the possibility of paint lift upon film removal, as well as razor cuts in the paint during install. Have a friend who had to repaint a lot of trim on his VW after a wrap job (and yes, it was factory paint, albeit old factory paint on trim pieces).
I know all of the above is debatable. These are just my positions at this time, and may be helpful points of consideration for the OP. Or not. I did add PPF along the lower rockers of my GT4 and to its side scoops, due to a press car that came with 5000 miles and these were totally blasted by the R-compound tires. I feel that was a good move.
I suspect it depends on where you live, but here in CA, I've been able to stay a bit further back from traffic and pick my spots on a freeway. Side benefits include mellowing me out on the freeway.
Leased my 991.2 C4 and did not do PPF, at least in for here in Hawaii, thankfully not too much road debris around the island.
After I saw what my old man's 991.1 C2 looked like at lease turn in after his 2 year lease a year ago, it was basically pristine with no paint or damage charges assessed at lease turn in.
Figured I wouldn't recoup the cost of PPF on a leased car unless I was intent on buying it out at lease end, which I don't do as that's why I lease, new car every 2 years with no worries on accidents or trade-in values
If I was purchasing with intent to keep the car beyond 2-3 years, I would PPF.
I know. Love the GT4. Feels special every time I drive it, and makes even the smallest journeys fun. But I need back seats, and two two-seaters has been fun for a year and a half but I need something with back seats for little ones. Good news is the innate goodness of the 991.2 blew me away at the launch in Tenerife and I very nearly canceled my GT4 order to swap to a 991.2. This way, I've had a chance to enjoy both. They're very different, but both amazing in their own right.
And both are painted with today's paint technology, which seems to me more delicate than paints of the past. Which makes this thread very interesting to me. Have to make the PPF call again soon...and there are some good arguments here to my current position on the matter.
Which brings me to one more reason I didn't do PPF and might not again: While I hate door dings, poor paint prep (wavy sides), and light scratches introduced by bad washing or drying techniques, I don't mind light spray/rock chip damage commensurate with a car's mileage. I might feel differently in other parts of the country, but here it seems like you can minimize the damage, and the light damage you do get is a sign of usage—so it becomes part of the car's texture.
Which brings me to one more reason I didn't do PPF and might not again: While I hate door dings, poor paint prep (wavy sides), and light scratches introduced by bad washing or drying techniques, I don't mind light spray/rock chip damage commensurate with a car's mileage. I might feel differently in other parts of the country, but here it seems like you can minimize the damage, and the light damage you do get is a sign of usage—so it becomes part of the car's texture.
Interesting that you state this. I'm in this exact camp. Sure, I'd rather not have it. But I first developed this opinion back in the early-'90s in my Miata track days. I tried to touch up a few spots on the hood and bumper and from 10 feet it looked fine, but up close it always bugged me, in a way the little road rash marks never had. Something about the rash seems honest and I'm okay with it.
I've never had PPF until this GT4, which I bought used and which has the partial "bra" coming halfway up the hood. It's still clear, of course, hasn't yellowed, but it bugs me a lot more seeing that stupid line across the hood than road rash would. In fact, there's some rash along the unwrapped rockers; I got a Carmine Dr. Colorchip kit and will give it a shot, since it's down low and probably won't catch the light like the hood or top of the bumper would. But if the first attempt doesn't go like I want it, I'll just leave it alone.
07-23-2017, 09:41 AM
