I had satin PPF fitted to my E63S when I got it from new - it was black metallic before.
Anyway - we know PPF is expensive, but what made me question it (a year after I had it fitted lol - bit too late I know) is how cost effective is it really, compared to actually repainting damage.
So why do people fit PPF - to protect the car right. PPF is self healing so small scratches should go right out with hot water (Topaz' version does anyway). Now I got to admit - I never really had a small scratch or noticed one anyway, but today I saw this :
It does look like it really is just damaged PPF - I don't know what happened or where and neither the car sensors nor the dash cam recorded any impact so I clearly hit something just enough for the PPF to be damaged.
So why do I question it now.
Well you see .. when the car was in for PPF and despite being a new (ish) car (had 3k miles on) - there were scratches in the bumper I didn't see when picking up the car from the dealer. I was told that PPF couldn't be laid properly without respray.
They charged me £650+ VAT for the respray - and yea you can get it cheaper - not my point. Now the car goes back to have the bumper re-PPFd ... and I am being charged £495+ VAT for just the bumper.
Makes you wonder ... Unless you want to get for a complete change (like me metallic to satin) - isn't it cheaper to just have the paint fixed by an indie - assuming you have a standard colour ?
I am not talking about Designo Magno paint and other special colours that would be impossible to fix and blend properly. But if you got a 'standard' paint job - is protecting it from scratches really commercially logical (*) ?
Also, some scratches may go through the PPF anyway - so you may still end up respraying it.
What you guys think ?
(*) I mean yes in my case 495 is still cheaper than 650 but I am sure you get it a lot cheaper when shopping around.
Anyway - we know PPF is expensive, but what made me question it (a year after I had it fitted lol - bit too late I know) is how cost effective is it really, compared to actually repainting damage.
So why do people fit PPF - to protect the car right. PPF is self healing so small scratches should go right out with hot water (Topaz' version does anyway). Now I got to admit - I never really had a small scratch or noticed one anyway, but today I saw this :
It does look like it really is just damaged PPF - I don't know what happened or where and neither the car sensors nor the dash cam recorded any impact so I clearly hit something just enough for the PPF to be damaged.
So why do I question it now.
Well you see .. when the car was in for PPF and despite being a new (ish) car (had 3k miles on) - there were scratches in the bumper I didn't see when picking up the car from the dealer. I was told that PPF couldn't be laid properly without respray.
They charged me £650+ VAT for the respray - and yea you can get it cheaper - not my point. Now the car goes back to have the bumper re-PPFd ... and I am being charged £495+ VAT for just the bumper.
Makes you wonder ... Unless you want to get for a complete change (like me metallic to satin) - isn't it cheaper to just have the paint fixed by an indie - assuming you have a standard colour ?
I am not talking about Designo Magno paint and other special colours that would be impossible to fix and blend properly. But if you got a 'standard' paint job - is protecting it from scratches really commercially logical (*) ?
Also, some scratches may go through the PPF anyway - so you may still end up respraying it.
What you guys think ?
(*) I mean yes in my case 495 is still cheaper than 650 but I am sure you get it a lot cheaper when shopping around.
