Real world performance on Huper C40

[jh812]

18 hours ago, cleverchimp said:

 

Maybe doing the windshield will make a difference, what do you have on yours? I was thinking air blue 80 due to the cost, the dealer wanted me to try C50, but I might get trouble with the cop. The C70 appears to have issues, I have another guy test LLumar CTX (different shades then mine) on his Prius Prime and below is his results :

Day 1: 
outside temp: 91 F
Interior temp: 114 F (measured on the front cloth seat)

Day 2: (used sun shade for windshield as the only difference)
Outside Temp: 93 F
Interior temp: 111 F

Day 3: (used sunshade with front windows cracked)
Outside temp: 88 F
Interior temp: 98 F

Front windshield is tinted with the CTX at 80%.
Front windows are 50% CTX
Rear windows and hatch are 15% CTX.

 

His installer recommend LLumar over HO. 

You have to stop thinking of it keeping the car cooler when it sits outside all day. The only thing that will do that is a climate controlled garage. 

[cleverchimp]

14 hours ago, CaliTINT said:

I have 80 percent installed on my windshield. I think it will make a difference but I wouldn't be so worried about measuring temp in your car. Just the real world feeling and performance. To me its totally worth it. If you have the funds for the increased performance,  by all means I say do it

 

Yeah, probably will do it with 80 too. Wondering why LLumar dont offer 70, I would spend if it have value proposition to it but so far I have been dissatisfied with the value proposition for HO C40. There is absolutely no need to spend premium while you can get comparable performance with cheaper options.

[cleverchimp]

9 hours ago, jh812 said:

You have to stop thinking of it keeping the car cooler when it sits outside all day. The only thing that will do that is a climate controlled garage. 

 

I wast even thinking that way. I was trying to see why after going with high end tint my AC still working hard and why I still feels the hotness of the sun on my face like before the tint? There is improvement but not as much I would I expected. In my test HO40 performed almost identical with factory tinted privacy glass at 20% and compared to non tinted glass, it’s 10F cooler compared to car without tint....the dealer should tell me also that the ceramic tinted glass will be convecting heat, which will contribute to ambient temperature.

Edited June 8, 2019 by cleverchimp

[Roach]

9 hours ago, cleverchimp said:

I still feels the hotness of the sun on my face like before the tint

 

I'm not doubting you - since I don't have that film... but I have madico 60% ceramic on my truck, specifically the side windows. And I can def. feel a difference with the window up compared to the window down. 

 

You really don't feel a difference? 

 

 

[cleverchimp]

20 hours ago, Roach said:

 

I'm not doubting you - since I don't have that film... but I have madico 60% ceramic on my truck, specifically the side windows. And I can def. feel a difference with the window up compared to the window down. 

 

You really don't feel a difference? 

 

 

 

Yes there is a difference. I like to make it clear, even without a tint...if you roll the windows up and down, you will feel the difference (confirmed this with BTU meter) but with a windows tint you supposed to feel greater difference. I do not feel that much difference albeit there is a different with the tint, but I still feel uncomfortable and my HVAC system just might work a little bit better then before.

 

I would expect more from a high end tint. Looks like the best and easiest test would be the butter test. You see it on youtube (I believe they are official HO channels), they put butter inside the car for 20min. I will do that on my 3 cars and compare the result.

Edited June 9, 2019 by cleverchimp

[Roach]

Never heard of the butter test. 

 

Are you sure you got HO tint? Like the shop you went to is reputable? 

 

 

[Dentpusher]

I don't care WHAT the composition of the film is,  like someone else said, it's all about TSER,  PERIOD.  Whether it reflects or absorbs the heat, it's about the rejection OF heat.  What I will never understand is why people think HO is "great" for IGUs on flat glass.  An absorbing film, like ceramic,  can't convection cool because it's on an IGU so the heat will be radiated into the room.  Ceramic IS non-reflective BUT you still have 4 glass surfaces that relect the light anyway so what if the film adds 2-4% reflectivity?  No layman can tell a difference once installed. Heck, layman don't realize that lowE windows make the glass tinted and more reflective too...  Especially on flat glass, save your money and use hybrid/reflective, bonus, safer for the glass too. Ceramic is a gimmick, IMO.  However,  a profitable one.

[Tintguy1980]

On 6/9/2019 at 6:02 PM, cleverchimp said:

 

Tom explained it in a simple fashion. However, it is more complex than what is seen through simple experimentation. In other words, as long as the car is in motion you will benefit from a film's heat control aspect. When tested, all mannies utilize the same means of extracting the TSER of their film product. The published performance of film products are calculated using a wind speed across the glass of 7mph. Obviously, the faster the vehicle moves, the high the TSER because more absorbed energy is carried away and less will radiate inward to the cabin.

 

As stated before, 'ceramic' technology in window film relies mostly on absorption, which requires the glass be cooled by wind across its surface. This absorption will allow you to feel what might be radiating off film and glass while driving the car with the AC running.

 

The one film out there that 'reflects' near infrared (NIR) energy is 3M's Crystalline. Near infrared is the part of the sun's energy that we 'feel' in the immediate when sitting on the protected side of a glass/film barrier. This is because it (NIR) penetrates deeper into the skin, warming moisture surrounding nerve endings and leading the brain to say, warm/hot. Crystalline reflects a very large percentage of NIR (88-97%) in the most intense region of NIR (780- roughly 1200 nanometers). The entire NIR region of the solar spectrum encompasses 780-2500 nanometers.

 

NIR accounts for approximately 48+% of the sun's energy and visible light (VL) accounts for 49+%, leaving the remaining to ultraviolet (UV). Visible light and UV will create heat once it strikes a surface (such as skin) and is 'felt' at a much slower rate compared with NIR.

 

So, it's down to absorption versus reflection and it should be seen a slightly higher TSER values.

 

[TomTint]

1 hour ago, Tintguy1980 said:

Tom explained it in a simple fashion. However, it is more complex than what is seen through simple experimentation. In other words, as long as the car is in motion you will benefit from a film's heat control aspect. When tested, all mannies utilize the same means of extracting the TSER of their film product. The published performance of film products are calculated using a wind speed across the glass of 7mph. Obviously, the faster the vehicle moves, the high the TSER because more absorbed energy is carried away and less will radiate inward to the cabin.

 

As stated before, 'ceramic' technology in window film relies mostly on absorption, which requires the glass be cooled by wind across its surface. This absorption will allow you to feel what might be radiating off film and glass while driving the car with the AC running.

 

The one film out there that 'reflects' near infrared (NIR) energy is 3M's Crystalline. Near infrared is the part of the sun's energy that we 'feel' in the immediate when sitting on the protected side of a glass/film barrier. This is because it (NIR) penetrates deeper into the skin, warming moisture surrounding nerve endings and leading the brain to say, warm/hot. Crystalline reflects a very large percentage of NIR (88-97%) in the most intense region of NIR (780- roughly 1200 nanometers). The entire NIR region of the solar spectrum encompasses 780-2500 nanometers.

 

NIR accounts for approximately 48+% of the sun's energy and visible light (VL) accounts for 49+%, leaving the remaining to ultraviolet (UV). Visible light and UV will create heat once it strikes a surface (such as skin) and is 'felt' at a much slower rate compared with NIR.

 

So, it's down to absorption versus reflection and it should be seen a slightly higher TSER values.

 

  To put a visual to the NIR perspective of Crystiline .. imagine how wide 1" is on a ruler ..then imagine how wide 1/8" is ..now take 15% of that 1/8".. and that's how much Crystiline is actually measuring that really maters.. #irrelevant

Edited August 1, 2019 by TomTint

[Tintguy1980]

Yeah, I can see the loss point of bragging rights when one only has 1/8th inch compared to an inch.