Quote:
Originally Posted by clf
Then those with an interest in our cars can learn how not to make mistakes whilst running headlong into something. It is quite obvious some of us dont have the experience nor ability to find out for ourselves, even if we claim to.
The cling film you spoke of earlier, I wonder if that was someone trying to describe a clear film product? Whilst cling film would reduce some UV, it would likely blow off at speed, certainly would sag whilst wet, no use with headlight washers lol. |
I just had it in mind that the suggested German solution was just too expensive for two small aerosol cans. I take some serious persuading that it really contained something different.
The cling film was just something read about, to throw into the mix - really I wondered if anyone else had heard of such a suggestion.
One difference between attempt 1 and 2 was that I washed the lens in soapy water and sun dried it, after I had prepared it for spraying in 1. For 2 I gave it a final wipe with isopropyl. Despite that....
After getting it prepared in 1 - I could see like a slight feathering marking in the lens, similar to the marks in my own MII lenses. I assumed it was a peculiarity of the lens or marks on the inside of the lenses. The marks became even more obvious after I had sprayed the test lens, plus the misted, cracked lacquer surface.
With my more aggressive 'attempt 2' using 100 grit, those feathering marks had disappeared - so it was obviously original lens coating still in place.
I have done my MKII lenses a few times (without any lacquer), the first time sanded down, then polished up, then they have just needed the regular annual re-polishing up since then. Not knowing how thick the polycarbonate might be - I've been a bit wary of being too aggressive when sanding it back, but from my experiment, it seems to be essential it be done quite aggressively.
Another thought has occurred to me, because the old lacquer is so difficult to remove - might it actually be the original lacquer coating which deteriorates, rather than the actual surface of polycarbonate of the lens?