NXT Tech Wax 2.0

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

HI, I'm a new forum-er here, i bought my very first can of NXT techwax 2.0, and my initial impressions about it is that its good. Since its a paste, its a bit more difficult to remove then the liquid (umm.. mothers FX). Had the same initial impressions with both, the shine was at first not as impressive as what i was expecting. I guess it takes a bit of adjusting to these polymer waxes when most of your waxing life you used carnauba products..

However, i didnt find its supposed water beading (or hydrophobic properties) as beady as the crystal carnauba step 3 wax (i like the step 3 wax, easy to remove for a non synth wax). I was expecting more beading to be honest, since thats one of the main attributes of NXT 2.0.. I'm not bashing the NXT, i actually like it (unfortunately, i like it as much as mothers..sorry megiuars). Is NXT also supposed to sheet water in some conditions?

[Murr1525]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Yes, DC Wax or the Cleaner/Wax will bead much more.

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

ah, good. Just wanted to make sure. I noticed that the beads were in build up in big clumps then rolls of the hood and other horizontal panels. Its just that Nxt's label/packaging makes big claims on beading and there hydrophobic polymer technology. i guess theres more to the hydrophobic thing than just beading, which i think is a good thing. I actually find sheeting fascinating and unique..

I just waxed (NXT'd) our car late this afternoon. its a silver focus, so synthetic polymer wax is recommended for max pop. its a bit rainy here, kinda erratic. It can get hot and sunny in the first half of the day, and get heavy showers in the afternoon.. a good way to test the wax's durability and to observe that water beading or sheeting effect. Some videos in youtube show NXT 2.0 sheeting rather than beading, which is kinda contradictory to what NXT claims to be good at.

[Alfisti]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Beads that clump together and roll off are better than ones that sit on the surface and bake in the sun.

[Murr1525]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

can i use every time when i wash the car the NXT 2.0;or is better do use the guick wax;

You can use the NXt, but UQW will be quicker and easier to do quickly after washing.

[Murr1525]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

I just waxed (NXT'd) our car late this afternoon. its a silver focus, so synthetic polymer wax is recommended for max pop.

Did you use any clay, cleaner as well? Those will help with looks and durability.

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

I clayed it several weeks ago, and nope.. no cleaners.. the paint is in good condition, i enjoy keeping it that way. I wax regularly so i just washed the car. I applied a 2nd coat around 2 1/2 hours after applying the 1st coat of NXT just to ensure i maximize the wax.

yup, its actually a good thing for paint to bead in clumps since as it clumps up, the weight itself will make the water roll off horizontal panels. Extreme beading is good, but i find that it works best when there is constant downpour or if the car is moving against the wind.. i dunno how to say it, but i think you know what i mean..

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

On a well prepped surface, which will last longest? DC carnauba wax, gold class carnauba plus, or tech wax 2.0?

[BillyJack]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Personally, I like the look of the carnauba waxes, but you can't beat NXT for durability. Also, do two coats of NXT. IMO the second coat makes a difference. Some of the cars that I do look better with a wax over the NXT, some don't. Seems to depend on color and paint type.

Bill

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Yeah, i also use the competitors syn wax (quite similar to NXT). On silver it makes the paint bright, on black it looks glassy and reflective. We have an e39 bmw calypso red. Its on the dark side in terms of the shade. While a carnauba wax makes the paint rich and wet looking, i actually prefer the synth look. Why? because the bm we have doesn't have much chrome trim. Just the kidney grill.. so i need a product that would make the paint "alive" or bright or glossy. I needed something to liven up the bm's somewhat somber look..

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Its really difficult for me to stick to one brand of wax.. Oh man! I want both brands in my car detailing arsenal..

Maybe sometime soon i'll try the carnauba plus gold class. So many waxes i want to try..

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Ok, I just washed my NXT 2.0 treated focus. Remember my observation on the NXT's not to beady nature? I was expecting a bit more beading, but that was when i first applied NXt.. Its been a few days since i applied NXT again.

Like other synthetic waxes i used, it came real good after the next application. Now i saw that hydrophobic thing. On horizontal surfaces, the beading was tight but it has a tendency to clump a bit and fall of. On the door panels and other vertical panels, the beading was very nice.. Very Nice. The feel of the paint isn't slippy/slick, but the beads were tight.

I was about to get disappointed with the perceived lack of beading vs. carnauba. Until i washed the car tonight. When i treated the car with NXT, i applied on half of the roof with reflections top coat. Not much difference in beading too. I am checkin to see the difference in durability when a last step product is applied.

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Here are my observations between NXT and 476s:

The NXT 2.0 is a good wax. In my experience with this wax, it’s gives a good balance between gloss and depth as a result gives good results on both light and dark colored cars. I’ve been able to compare it collinite 476s paste wax. This particular wax is known for its durability and based on what I’ve read in other forums, 476s easily beats the NXT 2.0 wax. NXT 2.0 counters with its synthetic properties, which is said to give longer protection. Another thing is the NXT’s hydrophobic polymer technology, which should make it shed water and minimize water spots. How do these 2 compare?
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comShine/gloss/depth- The NXT 2.0 works surprisingly well on dark colored paint, the way it’s able to darken the paint. It’s more of a sealant look with a bit of that carnauba wax depth. It gets better when allowed to cure for 12 hours, since it’s a synthetic. The 476s is a carnauba based product, and it gives that richer look and it almost makes the paint glow yet it still is able to give a bit of that “glassy” look. 476s gives good depth and that wet look, while the NXT 2.0 gives a rich gloss but not as much depth. The nxt also give a thicker look vs. 476s which is quite a surprise to me.
<o:p></o:p>
Slickness- Maybe it’s just the way I applied the wax or whatever reason, but the NXT 2.0 has a slight edge over the 476s. the 476s is just able to maintain the slickness a tad better than NXT.
<o:p></o:p>
Water Beading- 476s has the edge over the NXT 2.0 wax. With the 476s, the water just falls off the panels. With the NXT 2.0, the beads aren’t as tight as the 476s but it is no less effective. It just beads a bit differently, and also sheets in certain panels. Take note this occurs when the paint is sprayed with water. The differences are a lot smaller when we’re talking rain showers, drizzles or when going through puddles. The beading lasts marginally longer in the 476s than the NXT 2.0, it turns into sheeting which in a way has its advantages. These differences are small, almost insignificant.
<o:p></o:p>
Durability- I’m happy to say that the NXT 2.0 is not easily beaten by the 476s. The 476s is supposedly known for its durability. The difference is negligible on a prepped surface and a well maintained finish. In-between-waxing and washing is extremely important, if not the most important thing to keep in mind to make the wax coating last. The differences are too small in my opinion. With proper paint maintenance steps, I’m able to get equally great results.
<o:p></o:p>
Ease of use- The liquid NXT 2.0 is easier in application and removal than the 476s. Its a lot more forgiving if you apply too much.. it still is quite easy to remove. The paste NXT is a bit more difficult to apply thinly even when compared to 476s. Its still easy to remove though. With the 476s, it can get tricky. If applied to thick or left to dry for too long, it can be a pain to remove.
<o:p></o:p>
In conclusion, both are good waxes. The NXT 2.0 was able to do things that I didn’t expect it was able to do. The 476s was very easy to use IF APPLIED properly, which is good since it’s known to be difficult to use. Durability of the 476s wasn’t what I was expecting.

[Murr1525]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

Sounds like a nice comparison.

[ffboy]

Re: NXT Tech Wax 2.0

My observations may not be accurate, but this is what I experienced in my initial stint with NXT 2.0 and 476s. The 476s claims to last 1 year, but experience with other waxes that also claim this prove that its not absolutely correct and same goes for the 476s. The nxt 2.0 claims superior protection with its polymer technology but never claimed to last a specific period of time. I actually did a side by side comparison on our car’s doors. After a certain time, I washed and QD’d the entire car. Virtually no difference in feel, gloss, even beading. It really comes down to paint care and maintenance in between waxing or washing.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o:p></o:p>
I’m really quite surprised on how the NXT 2.0 is able to darken some paint colors and how its able to easily compete with the 476s, even beat the 476s in certain areas. The NXT 2.0 gives a slightly (or relatively) thick plastic look versus the 476s thin but glassy look and added richness to the paint color. It’s quite difficult do describe. In my eyes, it actually resembles the gloss of the FX synwax but with more depth and richness to the color (think FX Synwax carnauba). However this doesn’t make the 476s the winner here.
<o:p></o:p>
Both waxes are good, actually use 476s on top of NXT since 476s is a pure wax, no polishing and cleaning things in the wax. The results I get are VERY NICE.
<o:p></o:p>
In conclusion, the NXT 2.0 is a good product. It’s not “The Best” but it’s not way behind or light years away from the more expensive waxes in many aspects. Maybe a few steps behind at most.