2011 Chrysler 200 in for a coat

parttimer

New member
Chrysler 200 in for Americoat and a one step polish. Car was in pretty good shape for 100k on the odo and being a 2011. I had previously performed the same work on their Expedition and scheduled this after their SUV was done. It was a full interior and exterior job. Grabbed a few before pictures, but they were at 5pm on a Friday in Ohio which means not much sun. My goal was to wash, decon and start with some correciton before the night came to a close. I finished up Saturday morning with the coating and let it bake in the sun during the afternoon. Since I ordered a PTG for OP removal on my 300 I decided to take some measurements before and after the coating was applied, and I must say I was shocked. Before we get to the PTG stuff, here is the before and after and process.

Wash was megs gold class, tires were cleaned with Tuff Shine twice and Zep 505, wells got 505 and wheels were first hit with acid to remove the bronze color, followed by Sonax FE to remove iron deposits. After the wash, ameririd and speedy prep in medium grade. Polish was a single step with Wolfgang TSR on a white hybrid. Tires picked up black pearl and the wells were sprayed with megs HD. Coating was applied after prepall, and coating was Americana Americoat, 2 coats.

On drop off:
















After polishing and coating, job is completed:




















Now for the coating information. I coated using Americana Americoat. I took PTG readings of the hood by the passenger side headlamp, in micros I saw 176, moving up toward the windshield and I had 134 microns. After coating the entire car, I did a second coat and took readings again. For the headlight area it went from 176 to 202 microns, the 134 micron measurement went up to 156 microns! I will be checking this again with a few other coatings, I have some UK as well as Kamakazi ISM and Miyabi waiting to go on my 300. I'll post information after I get that done. Which I hope to get done this week.
 
As mentioned on another forum that is a substantial increase in thickness. It could very well be a device error. I will try tonight to tape off a few squares on my trunk lid since the spoiler is removed. With the squares in place I will be better able to measure the exact location each time. I will try and post that tomorrow.
 
First off; Nice work!

Secondly; As you stated, there must be some type of error with the PTG readings somewhere. As "NO" coating on the market will add anywhere near this much measurable thickness, not even "Finest". From a physics standpoint alone, it's just not possible.
 
Last edited:
First off; Nice work!

Secondly; As you stated, there must be some type of error with the PTG readings somewhere. As "NO" coating on the market will add anywhere near this much measurable thickness, not even "Finest". From a physics standpoint alone, it's just not possible.


Exactly what Tad said ^ No coating on the market comes close to adding that kind of thickness. Wipe on coatings are still VERY thin "its all relative"

When we compare a wipe on coating to the thickness of a wax it becomes like a binder of paper compared to 2 pieces of paper so then looking at it from this close up perspective of the thickness of a piece of paper a binder of paper suddenly looks extremely thick.

Go back and compare the paint thickness to the wipe on coating thickness and suddenly the coating becomes very thin "relative" to paint.

To confuse it more there are now acrylic and other sealants out there that call themselves coatings and are actually barely thicker than a wax.
 
Back
Top