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.
Graphene coating on top of ceramic coating possible?
Folks,
My car has been coated with carpro ceramic coating product and lately I’ve been reading and watching about graphene coating. They do seem to last even longer with somewhat more protection. So my question is, can I layer up graphene coating on top of existing ceramic coating? I tried to do a search on google but nothing really confirms the answer. Has anyone tried this method? Your feedbacks are very much appreciated.
My car has been coated with carpro ceramic coating product and lately I’ve been reading and watching about graphene coating. They do seem to last even longer with somewhat more protection. So my question is, can I layer up graphene coating on top of existing ceramic coating? I tried to do a search on google but nothing really confirms the answer. Has anyone tried this method? Your feedbacks are very much appreciated.
cheers!
I'd guess it depends on which graphene 'coating' you'd want to put on top. If it's one of the recently released graphene 'coatings' that come from a spray bottle, you'll likely have no issues as you're pretty much using a ceramic-based product with a small amount of reduced graphene oxide sprinkled in the mix.
Longevity might be decreased as with any topcoat, things don't really like to 'stick' as well to coatings in a manner of speaking as they do to bare paint but that may very well be functionally irrelevant in a practical sense.
Lotsa stuff out there lately, some recently released ‘Graphene Coatings’ are sparking discussion, sometimes a bit contentious, sometimes optimistic, sometimes pessimistic but unusually entertaining. Plenty of folks saying it’s nonsense and taking it to task based upon wording (Graphene Coating, Graphene-Infused Coating, Graphene Ceramic Coating, etc.) and the suspect ability to currently actually produce a true ‘GRAPHENE COATING’.
I wasn’t around when coatings first came around, touting such nonsense as “Diamond-Infused 10h Hardness” and similar “9H hardness, over twice as hard as your clearcoat” claims (the latter while being technically correct, in reality proves to pretty close to functionally irrelevant…”This really soft pillow is harder than that really soft pillow”) so I’m not certain if the backlash was similar but it’s quite interesting nonetheless from a marketing v. reality perspective.
I’m certainly no scientist but it is all currently quite intriguing to me. I had SPS Graphene on my daily driver from May 2019 thru August 2020 (16k miles in NE Ohio), detailed notes on that experience here if interested: https://budgetplan1.wordpress.com/sps-graphene-coating/
While it was an excellent product that had many positive attributes some folks might find beneficial, in the end it came up a bit short in areas I consider important to my particular situation w regards to vehicle usage, maintenance and perhaps a little bit of the climate I live in. I have gone back to my preferred ceramics which have been proven winners for my situation since October of 2016.
Frankly, whether or not it says graphene on the label is of no matter to me, the coating in the bottle either works for me and my specific needs or it doesn’t. The SPS was a great coating overall, especially if you like slickness and high water contact angle entertainment. Didn’t meet my needs in the end but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad product at all, rather that it’s just not a great product FOR ME. Time will tell with graphene, I guess. The question that has recently come to the forefront is just what the graphene in the formulation contributed to the positive attributes I experienced. It appears that perhaps it was not the graphene at all.
A few articles/references regarding the current skepticism surrounding ‘graphene’ can be found below:
2. Rag Company Q & A w/ Gtechniq; 46 minutes in the topic of Graphene comes up: ASK Us About Detailing & Cars w/ GTECHNIQ! | Q&A Thursday #81 | August 6th, 2020:
4. A little bit from Alfred Yow, the mind behind the Art d’ Shine/SPS coatings. Kinda clarifies the role of the Reduced Graphene Oxide component in the coatings. From a Facebook post regarding graphene coatings. Seems like a bit of a ‘helper’ to the PDMS portion of the formulation:
"To add on some answers to the article on Graphene,
The polymer used in Artdeshine’s product, PDMS has very low thermal conductivity, absorbing less heat when exposed. And if heat has been absorbed, the better dissipation and thermal conductivity ability of reduced Graphene Oxide (rGO) will help to negate. What we do not want is all that heat absorbed to be trapped. To say it simply, this is a case of using rGO to reduce the insulation (keeping heat) properties of PDMS.
Artdeshine has never touted using flames in any of our tests or marketing materials. This serves no purpose to demonstrate any capability of our coatings. We are not making fire-proof/retardant materials. And again, we are not touting thermal insulation as a beneficial property, we are trying to negate insulation.
Water repellent capabilities do not come from the use of rGO and can be seen in our marketing materials and information. A very high polymer (PDMS) content is used to achieve the better water-repellent effects. The polymer has been functionalized to provide much better water repellent capabilities."
I think it's gonna take some time to figure all of this out re: graphene. Migliore, SPS/Art d' Shine, Ethos, Glassparancy, Adam's, TAC Systems and a few more have released products w graphene as part of their formulations but perhaps more telling are those mfg's who haven't; CarPro, Gyeon, Feynlab, Optimum and Gtechniq, some of whom have openly questioned the value of graphene given it's manufacturing limitations at this time.
The primary 'optimistic benefit' of graphene as it's currently marketed is the potential reduction in water spotting due to its ability to reduce surface temps; occasional mentions of graphene's toughness is tossed about but that seems to be a secondary point. Any visible performance benefits such as slickness, water behavior and similar are (as Albert Yow explains it) not due to graphene at all so, well...I dunno.
Will be fun to watch but not convinced that it's really any kind of 'revolution' given my personal experience with it. I guess that could change in future...or not.
What I get from all of this is:
1. Current technology does not allow for any fundamentally significant level of Graphene to be incorporated into a coating.
2. Any real or perceived benefits of a graphene coating have very little (if anything) to do with any trace amount of graphene in it.
3. The functional foundation of any graphene coating is basically the same as a ceramic, likely Siloxane/Polysiloxane/Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) or Polysilazanes.
So if we bake a 'Graphene Coating Cake' the cake batter itself is the same as if we baked a 'Ceramic Coating Cake' and the graphene in the cake is not significant enough to even be considered the frosting on the cake but rather merely the handful of 'sprinkles' on top of the frosting on top of the cake. Maybe.
I kinda view it as using a ceramic coating that for some reason has an extra word on the label, and merely taking up space on that label is likely the greatest visible contribution 'graphene' makes to the overall satisfaction.
Methinks just because it says `graphene` on the label doesn’t make it a bad product but perhaps merely a questionably marketed one. The graphene coating I had on my car was very good overall, had some great attributes…but not due to the graphene IMO. That aspect of it (graphene and waterspots) didn`t pan out but it was otherwise a solid performer, quite good actually but for my situation, not as good as my preferred ceramics.
And for me, that`s what is kinda sad about the current graphene landscape; sensationalist marketing is gonna drag down some otherwise good products just because they have the world `graphene` on the label.
If I had a vehicle that better fit the strengths of the graphene coating I used, I would not hesitate to use it again, not because it said `graphene` on it but because it worked exceptionally well in areas that have nothing to do with the currently reported benefits of graphene.
One of the more frequent positive user experience mentions w/ regards to using a graphene coating has to do with the water behavior…”This stuff is just crazy hydrophobic!!!”. Again, while this very likely has little to do with any graphene in it, it brings up a curious question of is graphene truly hydrophobic? As with much of the discussion regarding graphene in paint coatings, opinions vary.
Is graphene Hydrophobic or Hydrophilic?
Now I ain't saying I understand all of this but it appears as if it has something to do with the thickness of the graphene layer. I think in thin layers, it's actually hydrophilic. And as Albert Yow of SPS mentions, the excellent water behavior of their graphene coating is due to amped up PDMS as opposed to the graphene which is there primarily as an ?insulator? in hopes of keeping surface temps down. :shrug:
I suppose all we can do is wait and see how it all shakes out, will it become the next *real* thing or the next marketing buzzword. Having lived w a graphene coating for over a year, I’m not sold on the entire ‘thing’ yet in a universal “this is better than that” sense…but maybe that will change. Or not. And that’s what makes it interesting, no?
Bear in mind that I’m not a chemist, a scientist, a materials engineer nor even a professional detailer in any sense of the word. I’m just a curious person looking for the best products to fit my particular situation and as always, YMMV.
If you really wanna try a graphene product, pretty safe to say it won't harm your coating, and it may appear to even help it in the short term but that'll likely be due to the 'refreshing' of your existing coating, a 'top up' if you will.
However, as I've learned the hard way in the past 'more isn't always better' and sometimes two steps forward ends up being one step back. If you're happy with your coating as it is now, I'd skip the graphene addition. The benefits would, at this early stage, be negligable if any IMO.
I'd guess it depends on which graphene 'coating' you'd want to put on top. If it's one of the recently released graphene 'coatings' that come from a spray bottle, you'll likely have no issues as you're pretty much using a ceramic-based product with a small amount of reduced graphene oxide sprinkled in the mix.
Longevity might be decreased as with any topcoat, things don't really like to 'stick' as well to coatings in a manner of speaking as they do to bare paint but that may very well be functionally irrelevant in a practical sense.
Lotsa stuff out there lately, some recently released ‘Graphene Coatings’ are sparking discussion, sometimes a bit contentious, sometimes optimistic, sometimes pessimistic but unusually entertaining. Plenty of folks saying it’s nonsense and taking it to task based upon wording (Graphene Coating, Graphene-Infused Coating, Graphene Ceramic Coating, etc.) and the suspect ability to currently actually produce a true ‘GRAPHENE COATING’.
I wasn’t around when coatings first came around, touting such nonsense as “Diamond-Infused 10h Hardness” and similar “9H hardness, over twice as hard as your clearcoat” claims (the latter while being technically correct, in reality proves to pretty close to functionally irrelevant…”This really soft pillow is harder than that really soft pillow”) so I’m not certain if the backlash was similar but it’s quite interesting nonetheless from a marketing v. reality perspective.
I’m certainly no scientist but it is all currently quite intriguing to me. I had SPS Graphene on my daily driver from May 2019 thru August 2020 (16k miles in NE Ohio), detailed notes on that experience here if interested: https://budgetplan1.wordpress.com/sps-graphene-coating/
While it was an excellent product that had many positive attributes some folks might find beneficial, in the end it came up a bit short in areas I consider important to my particular situation w regards to vehicle usage, maintenance and perhaps a little bit of the climate I live in. I have gone back to my preferred ceramics which have been proven winners for my situation since October of 2016.
Frankly, whether or not it says graphene on the label is of no matter to me, the coating in the bottle either works for me and my specific needs or it doesn’t. The SPS was a great coating overall, especially if you like slickness and high water contact angle entertainment. Didn’t meet my needs in the end but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad product at all, rather that it’s just not a great product FOR ME. Time will tell with graphene, I guess. The question that has recently come to the forefront is just what the graphene in the formulation contributed to the positive attributes I experienced. It appears that perhaps it was not the graphene at all.
A few articles/references regarding the current skepticism surrounding ‘graphene’ can be found below:
2. Rag Company Q & A w/ Gtechniq; 46 minutes in the topic of Graphene comes up: ASK Us About Detailing & Cars w/ GTECHNIQ! | Q&A Thursday #81 | August 6th, 2020: https://youtu.be/XjyLge_H22c?t=2709
4. A little bit from Alfred Yow, the mind behind the Art d’ Shine/SPS coatings. Kinda clarifies the role of the Reduced Graphene Oxide component in the coatings. From a Facebook post regarding graphene coatings. Seems like a bit of a ‘helper’ to the PDMS portion of the formulation:
"To add on some answers to the article on Graphene,
The polymer used in Artdeshine’s product, PDMS has very low thermal conductivity, absorbing less heat when exposed. And if heat has been absorbed, the better dissipation and thermal conductivity ability of reduced Graphene Oxide (rGO) will help to negate. What we do not want is all that heat absorbed to be trapped. To say it simply, this is a case of using rGO to reduce the insulation (keeping heat) properties of PDMS.
Artdeshine has never touted using flames in any of our tests or marketing materials. This serves no purpose to demonstrate any capability of our coatings. We are not making fire-proof/retardant materials. And again, we are not touting thermal insulation as a beneficial property, we are trying to negate insulation.
Water repellent capabilities do not come from the use of rGO and can be seen in our marketing materials and information. A very high polymer (PDMS) content is used to achieve the better water-repellent effects. The polymer has been functionalized to provide much better water repellent capabilities."
I think it's gonna take some time to figure all of this out re: graphene. Migliore, SPS/Art d' Shine, Ethos, Glassparancy, Adam's, TAC Systems and a few more have released products w graphene as part of their formulations but perhaps more telling are those mfg's who haven't; CarPro, Gyeon, Feynlab, Optimum and Gtechniq, some of whom have openly questioned the value of graphene given it's manufacturing limitations at this time.
The primary 'optimistic benefit' of graphene as it's currently marketed is the potential reduction in water spotting due to its ability to reduce surface temps; occasional mentions of graphene's toughness is tossed about but that seems to be a secondary point. Any visible performance benefits such as slickness, water behavior and similar are (as Albert Yow explains it) not due to graphene at all so, well...I dunno.
Will be fun to watch but not convinced that it's really any kind of 'revolution' given my personal experience with it. I guess that could change in future...or not.
What I get from all of this is:
1. Current technology does not allow for any fundamentally significant level of Graphene to be incorporated into a coating.
2. Any real or perceived benefits of a graphene coating have very little (if anything) to do with any trace amount of graphene in it.
3. The functional foundation of any graphene coating is basically the same as a ceramic, likely Siloxane/Polysiloxane/Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) or Polysilazanes.
So if we bake a 'Graphene Coating Cake' the cake batter itself is the same as if we baked a 'Ceramic Coating Cake' and the graphene in the cake is not significant enough to even be considered the frosting on the cake but rather merely the handful of 'sprinkles' on top of the frosting on top of the cake. Maybe.
I kinda view it as using a ceramic coating that for some reason has an extra word on the label, and merely taking up space on that label is likely the greatest visible contribution 'graphene' makes to the overall satisfaction.
Methinks just because it says `graphene` on the label doesn’t make it a bad product but perhaps merely a questionably marketed one. The graphene coating I had on my car was very good overall, had some great attributes…but not due to the graphene IMO. That aspect of it (graphene and waterspots) didn`t pan out but it was otherwise a solid performer, quite good actually but for my situation, not as good as my preferred ceramics.
And for me, that`s what is kinda sad about the current graphene landscape; sensationalist marketing is gonna drag down some otherwise good products just because they have the world `graphene` on the label.
If I had a vehicle that better fit the strengths of the graphene coating I used, I would not hesitate to use it again, not because it said `graphene` on it but because it worked exceptionally well in areas that have nothing to do with the currently reported benefits of graphene.
One of the more frequent positive user experience mentions w/ regards to using a graphene coating has to do with the water behavior…”This stuff is just crazy hydrophobic!!!”. Again, while this very likely has little to do with any graphene in it, it brings up a curious question of is graphene truly hydrophobic? As with much of the discussion regarding graphene in paint coatings, opinions vary.
Is graphene Hydrophobic or Hydrophilic?
Now I ain't saying I understand all of this but it appears as if it has something to do with the thickness of the graphene layer. I think in thin layers, it's actually hydrophilic. And as Albert Yow of SPS mentions, the excellent water behavior of their graphene coating is due to amped up PDMS as opposed to the graphene which is there primarily as an ?insulator? in hopes of keeping surface temps down. :shrug:
I suppose all we can do is wait and see how it all shakes out, will it become the next *real* thing or the next marketing buzzword. Having lived w a graphene coating for over a year, I’m not sold on the entire ‘thing’ yet in a universal “this is better than that” sense…but maybe that will change. Or not. And that’s what makes it interesting, no?
Bear in mind that I’m not a chemist, a scientist, a materials engineer nor even a professional detailer in any sense of the word. I’m just a curious person looking for the best products to fit my particular situation and as always, YMMV.
If you really wanna try a graphene product, pretty safe to say it won't harm your coating, and it may appear to even help it in the short term but that'll likely be due to the 'refreshing' of your existing coating, a 'top up' if you will.
However, as I've learned the hard way in the past 'more isn't always better' and sometimes two steps forward ends up being one step back. If you're happy with your coating as it is now, I'd skip the graphene addition. The benefits would, at this early stage, be negligable if any IMO.
Thank you for your detailed and knowledge reply. Those are great information especially for new coating user like myself.
I’m also very late to the game of ceramic coating as my recently purchased 922 is the first car I’ve tried coating product. In fact I bought some ceramic coating product back in 2016 but was never motivated to apply them on my cars or I was simply too lazy.
I agree with you that more doesn’t necessarily mean better. I think I should be patient and stick with my current product and see how it turns out. Our raining season is around the corner and it will get this CarPro coating a full test of its durability. The reason I want to get it coated is because I want to minimize the effort of keeping the car looking clean. As I am aging, frequent car washing and detailing has become more difficult than it was just a few years ago.
I’d really like to thank you for including these useful information and your feedbacks regarding to coating product experiences. Greatly appreciate your help. Wishing you a wonderful weekend.
Thank you for your detailed and knowledge reply. Those are great information especially for new coating user like myself.
Glad it helped! Sounds like we have the same goals in this area...while I like clean cars, I really don't like cleaning cars 😄
Dunno if you're using a maintenance product on your coating (CarPro Reload perhaps) as there's some really easy and effective ones out there, Kamikaze Overcoat & Polish Angel Cosmic Spritz are 2 I enjoy. Give a little extra 'pop' to the paint and great water behavior. Use after every 3 or so washes, keeps things looking nice and performing well.
For me, easy to use and effective is the name of the game. 😎
If I ever hear anyone say, "The polymer has been functionalized................", I'm going to back away slowly with one hand on my wallet and the other reaching for my car keys.
I have a lot of time on my hands and used a ceramic coating in March of 2018 (Avalon King Armor Shield IX) It looked great and lasted as advertised. I also applied it to my wife's Audi Q5 and it is going strong. great product, easy to use, looks fantastic.
For the last year I have been reading and watching videos (the ones above in this article are among the ones I viewed) about the new graphene products out there and decided to give it a shot on my car. I chose Glassparency Products Graphene coating and the Booster that comes with it in the kit. I sat on this for about four months to see if there would be any degradation in the ceramic coating from my washes. There did not seem to be any breakdown of the ceramic coating. Water ran away from the car as if it owed it money. OK, I decided to possibly waste money and my time and pulled the trigger and coated the car while my wife was out of town. She seems to find all kinds of things for me to do when I tell her I am going to clean my car.
I spent time making sure that all the contaminants were off the paint, I used a foam cannon, washed, rinsed, dried, applied de-contamination product (Iron remover), rinsed completely and followed up with Isopropyl alcohol as a last step in preparation. I did not have to do color correction or a buff out because there were no swirls or scratches.
After reading the directions and watching another video about the application process (which is really easy, fast and mindless), I used the supplied applicator and followed the directions for coating the car. It is very similar to ceramic coating except you level it by wiping it before it has dried. You can see where you have applied quite easily. Ensure you don't leave high spots or you will have to buff them out. I did not do a perfect job, I have three high spots that will need my attention later. The rest of the car was a breeze and I applied two coats as recommended followed by the supplied BOOSTER product that helps to cure the coating. The BOOSTER made the surface very slick, much more than the graphene coating alone.I applied it to all of my windows and mirrors as well.
I let it cure for much more time than the 24 hours they recommend before getting it wet. I actually let it sit in my garage for three days before I drove the car because I just didn't have anyplace to go. When I did take the car out, it looked amazing. I took some pictures and will attach them to this article.
Now for the big question... will the coating stick to the ceramic coating I already had on the car? Who cares? I know I have a great coating in either ceramic or graphene or both. The car looks great, dirt comes off easily, brake dust runs off the wheels and water doesn't cling to the glass. I can drive without windshield washers in a rain. DO NOT ATTEMPT THIS, USE YOUR WIPERS.
In the grand scheme of things, The car looks great, the shine gets me complements every time I go out in the car. It is my daily driver and I like the way it looks. It wasn't a lot of money or time to apply the product. Bottom line, I'm happy. I am not an expert. I am not a chemist (I am a biologist but that doesn't mean I know dick about the chemistry involved in this product). My advice is.. do what you want. If you have the time and the little money it takes, go ahead. It is far better than a wax and will help to keep chemical attacks off the car during the winter. It makes detailing the car easier and the shine is as good as any product I have seen.
Turtle wax graphene flex wax is new and currently the only true graphene spray wax out there.
Not to be confused with graphene oxide. It comes out clear and sprays on to your existing ceramic coating and rinses off with a pressure washer.
There is a few good YouTube videos about it.
I have personally purchased it and will use it on top of a more permanent coating when it gets here.
I just applied 303 Graphene on my dad's Ram. Application was easy. Removal was easy. Not nearly as finicky as coatings I've applied. I love GTechniq and have that on the Fiesta, GT4, and my mom's Odyssey. If the Ram is as easy to wash and dry as the vehicles with GTechniq then I'll apply it on the Gladiator. It's simple enough to do once a year and I'm just looking to make the washing/drying process easier.
As I indicated, I have installed the graphene flex on top of a ceramic. Both of which I installed myself...
The ceramic took about 6-7 hours and the graphene took about 45 minutes since it was spray on and wipe off and no buffing or hazing.
As I indicated, I have installed the graphene flex on top of a ceramic. Both of which I installed myself...
The ceramic took about 6-7 hours and the graphene took about 45 minutes since it was spray on and wipe off and no buffing or hazing.
This has to be the most well thought out, and informative post about graphene I have ever read that was not written by a scientist or someone trying to sell magic beans. I agree with every word! Well done!
I love this forum! The best way for car care manufactures to understand the real world impact of their products, and in some cases their misinformation, is to hear from its users. We need to expose snake oil and prop up extraordinary products. This forum will provide them, and their customers, with long term feedback while exposing any false, fake or. just plain stupid, advertising (flames on a car hood??? Really)
Please keep posting your results and the longevity of the products you used, I will. As mentioned in my original article, I initially used (following the correct application process using color correction) Avalon King Armor Shield XI and then over a year and a half later applied Glassparency Products Graphene coating and the Booster on top using their recommended application process. I am at the one year mark after applying the graphene product and there is no degradation that I can see. the car still shines and dirt does not "appear" to stick to it as much as before treatment.
I have taken my wheels off the car and completely cleaned and decontaminated them followed by a two coat application of Glassparency Products Graphene coating and the Booster. I can tell you that after several months, the brake dust adherence is less and cleaning is effortless. This was well worth it to me.
Keep those reports of your experience coming so that others can benefit from your data points.
10-08-2020, 02:40 AM
Graphene coating on top of ceramic coating possible?
