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.
The film on your car definitely looks like it has a "flatter" look to it than the uncovered paint. Probably wound't notice it on my white car (unless it yellows) but it seems a shame to cover up a deep factory shine with plastic to save the paint. I get it that you will avoid stone chips, but you don't really get the brilliance of an uncovered paint finish do you?
Originally Posted by justabout
The PPF does cut the crispness of the shine but you have to look closely to notice it
The front end is covered on my car. When approaching from the side, I see the reflections are not as sharp compared to the door but it's an equitable trade off because the car sits too low to avoid chips. I have a white PGTS without the coating and no significant damage after 20k miles. Car is not as low to the ground or perhaps white paint is less prone to chipping. The 991 has PTS color. Or perhaps the sticker tires on the 991 pick up more debris. Who knows.
The PPF does cut the crispness of the shine but you have to look closely to notice it
Here is a picture of mine (taken by someone else) from a gathering this weekend. No wash for 2 weeks and driven ~200miles. One outing had rain. No issues with crispness if it is done right. And again - Suntek is known to be more crisp than Xpel which is on my car.
Here is a picture of mine (taken by someone else) from a gathering this weekend. No wash for 2 weeks and driven ~200miles. One outing had rain. No issues with crispness if it is done right. And again - Suntek is known to be more crisp than Xpel which is on my car.
I have the latest 3M pro whatever that my installer recommended over some of the others which he used to use (not the cheap version dealers use). I'm sure all the modern options are good though and agree the installer is key. I don't have a long term experience on which to comment but I can say that I see no difference in the appearance of the paint. I don't have a full wrap so I would be able to see a contrast if there was one.
The PPF does cut the crispness of the shine but you have to look closely to notice it
I think its pretty easy to see the difference in Needscafe's post above. A reason why you wouldn't want to do only part of a panel - leads to an easy "A" - "B" comparison.
I'm not saying that it isn't a good paint protection option, but it seems like you give up some shine. Maybe the new "self healing" Expel products reduce the dulling effect?
Wish I'd have known... I drove to Greensboro from Charlotte; past dozens of PPF guys to have someone there do mine. Would have given you a heads up.
Are you going to fix this?
Side note as to the installer.... I was parked next to another 991 at Cars and Cappuccino this weekend with ppf and had to debate someone that my car was in fact covered in film. Literally had to get right up on my car to show it. The Poor 991 next to me had a dealer installed saran wrap covering that didn't have a single uniform edge and you could tell from 20-30 feet away. His has suntek - a more transparent film if done right and mine has Xpel which is more noticeable with the same instal.
It is.
It's the one thing I was disappointed in FCA in; their pictures hid this pretty well. I saw the half bra on it and almost had them pull it, but figured it would work well on the trip home. It did, took a big rock chip on the way home and it saved it.
The film has been "polished" and looks like crap. The paint is swirled but not terribly. The scratches are very fine. It can easily be corrected. I knew that the half bra was coming off when I saw it in the pictures. I didn't realize it was that bad, though. It almost looks matte. And I almost walked away from the car when I got there but realized pulling the film was going to happen anyway.
Needsdecaf, is the matte appearance more noticeable in person? Maybe it's the quality of the pic on my computer but I cannot tell any difference between above the line and below the line. But I agree having the line on the hood kind of sucks, I had that on my M3 but lived with it for the protection.
IMO - these manufacturers should not sell half hod coverage... people that want it would pay a little more if they didn't have another option and it just looks tacky 100% of the time.
My installer previously used XPEL ultimate but switched to 3M pro (gen4) they claimed there was a better warranty, easier to work with, and they passed some savings onto me too. They also said there was pending litigation against XPEL by 3M at the time but I forget the details specifically.
Anyway I went with the installer's preference since I knew their work and they stand behind their job/product. I have not had any issues thus far but I cannot say I can tell much difference from the 3M to the Xpel on my other car.
My installer previously used XPEL ultimate but switched to 3M pro (gen4) they claimed there was a better warranty, easier to work with, and they passed some savings onto me too. They also said there was pending litigation against XPEL by 3M at the time but I forget the details specifically.
Anyway I went with the installer's preference since I knew their work and they stand behind their job/product. I have not had any issues thus far but I cannot say I can tell much difference from the 3M to the Xpel on my other car.
My installer also made the switch from Expel to 3M. Wonder if we used the same installer(s). I used a guy named Rocco out of Rocky Hill who outsources to some local folks but he oversees all the work. They do the work from his house and save a bunch on overhead costs.
02-20-2017, 11:47 AM
