Ceramic film is a gimmick in real world situations

[vquestfilms.com]

The most durable of the 2 films wins

[3MFAN]

This idiot is telling customers that the ceramic blocks 90% of the heat.

[Ocala]

Isn't that the way 3M dealers are trained? I hear the same thing from potential clients that come into my shop all the time asking about what I have to offer after getting faulse info from the M&Ms.

[hoosierwindowtek]

I don't think he mentioned 3M at all in that video. 3M doesn't even make a ceramic auto film.

I think he meant to say 90% of IR which, although misleading, he may have a misunderstanding of what exactly is going on.

[EWF]

although misleading, he may have a misunderstanding of what exactly is going on.

 

Hello hoosierwindowtek,

I strongly agree with your statement.  That is the impression I got as well.   To my way of thinking, there is a difference between a man who is himself misinformed and a man that is genuinely trying to deceive someone.

To his credit, this fellow actually has a very nice way about him and I like his presentation style.  Just substituting the words "Total Solar Energy" instead of "heat" would have fixed that issue.

But I found two other questionable statements in the presentation.  Neither one was related to solar performance.

Anyone catch anything else?

-Howard

[Thirtyfive]

Telling her the ir lamp is what she feels everyday......

Comparing "national averages" then halving it?

I could think of about 10 things wrong with kt

[Thirtyfive]

Differences in vlts not matter in. ... sorry, shonk In my eyes

[twotint]

I have CTX on my vehicles and I can tell you it is worth having a nano ceramic. I have a heat light it had an IR bulb but switched it to a halogen bulb for actual heat. The AIR80 will out perform the CTX with the IR bulb. I used to use a hybrid film before ceramic and I thought that was the greatest film until Ceramic came about. I can tell you I have a black interior and I can touch everything and not burn my hand with the film on my truck. I have AIR80 on the windshield, rear doors back glass, CTX on the front doors a day roof. It is well worth the money in my opinion.

[rvpjr]

I made a video that might shed some light on the question.  Hope this helps or stimulates a good discussion.  Thanks

 

[EWF]

There are already perhaps 100+ posts on these boards explaining this, but it bears repeating:

Of 100% of the Solar Energy which reaches the earth's surface:

49% Is within the Visible Band
49% Is within the Infra-Red Band
2%  Is within the Ultra-Violet Band

ALL of this energy will heat the interior of a car, home, boat or office.

The single performance metric which encompasses this entire spectrum is the Total Solar Energy Rejected (TSER).  The film with the highest TSER is blocking the most Total Solar Energy.  

The IR bulbs emit energy only within a very narrow spectral range and therefore, should not be relied upon for making assessments of the "heat blocking" capability of any film.  The IWFA refers to such practices as confusing and misleading to customers, when TSER data is available.  The NFRC publishes SHGC, which is mathematically linked to TSER.

I though we were over these bulb demos but we are still beating that dead horse.  

As to the subject matter (the title of this thread):

Show me a man who thinks ceramic films are a "gimmick" and I will show you a man that does not understand luminous efficacy, which is the "holy grail" of window film design/engineering.  Ceramic films have given our industry the ability to selectively filter wavelengths, like never before.  They are not a gimmick.  They represent the greatest breakthrough for our industry in the last decade.

-Howard