Ceramic to avoid vehicle computer issues

Monarch · August 30

Thank you for your response. I actually agree with you regarding manufacturers profiting from "ceramic" when all film seem to work just as well without the cost.

We went ahead and took the non ceramic and have no issues.

Have a great day!

Tintguy1980 · August 30

The feel factor of NIR film products really depends on what wavelengths they absorb. Looking at a graph charting the intensity of each wavelength one will notice it has high and low points and everything in between. Take one particular mfr'er touting a very high reduction of NIR @950 nanometers, so what ... it's a wavelength that has one of the lowest energy intensities compared to surrounding wavelengths.

Take Crystalline as a non-ceramic product, yet it rejects NIR ... the product reflects NIR rather than absorbs, it stands to reason it would perform better than a NIR Ceramic product in regards to the 'feel'. Somebody I used to work with applied Stratos 80 on his pickup truck windshield and ended up removing it because the windshield became a radiator (of absorbed heat radiating into an air conditioned cab).

We all can banter to and fro about ceramics; the bottom line is they have higher absorption rates than the last popular marketing name used. And, at the end of a long day at work with your tinted car parked in the sun, no matter what product, it is still going to be blistering hot when you climb in.

DynamicATL · August 30

19 hours ago, Ryker said:

I would be over $600 if I doubled prices on cars. If I was in a bigger city I would offer more but as it is I get really good prices without paying for ceramic.

This is my exact point about location. If you were in a bigger city, you would definitely have to carry it; otherwise, a good portion of your potential customers would go to the next shop.

19 hours ago, Ryker said:

My opinion being what it is I think the manufacturers are making a lot more profit selling the "ceramic" films.

Absolutely! As the price increases on anything, so does the profit for the manufacturer. VW, Audi, and Porsche are all owned by the same company. I'm sure there is more profit in selling one Porsche versus one Volkswagen.

19 hours ago, Ryker said:

As for "My response was not for you" you were speaking about Global specifically and my points on it...

That is my bad. I did use Global as an example since it was brought up, but the post was not in response to yours.

19 hours ago, Ryker said:

I have people think that ceramic is something magic, indestructible, better in ways that it isn't. The crazy "its dark looking in but not looking out" misinformation crap.

That frustration is partially why you have the stance you do against it. The same way I see tinters bash on 3M, yet have either never installed it or haven't in the last decade. They're tired of hearing customers mention 3M. I fully understand, especially with the 5% Ceramic windshield you can perfectly see out of; never mind that what the camera picks up is not the same as your eyes. This is why we sell it as the same film quality, same warranty, just with more IR-specific heat rejection. We do not touch on optical clarity as it is too subjective.