PPF over the front star
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
PPF over the front star
has anyone placed a PPF/clear bra over the front star, where the Distronic sensors are located? I didn't but i have serious doubts of not doing it since this looks like a chip and bug magnet.
#2
Senior Member
I thought about that but did not complete this when I went for full front ppf wrap.
I saw that the shop has covered corners' parking sensors with ppf and I don't have any problems. I assume there shouldn't be any issue with wrapped into ppf Distronic's sensor as well, but I can be wrong.
Better to find this out with local shop simply put a piece of ppf and see what's happened
I saw that the shop has covered corners' parking sensors with ppf and I don't have any problems. I assume there shouldn't be any issue with wrapped into ppf Distronic's sensor as well, but I can be wrong.
Better to find this out with local shop simply put a piece of ppf and see what's happened
#3
Super Member
The following users liked this post:
NewYorker555 (11-08-2019)
The following users liked this post:
NewYorker555 (11-08-2019)
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
thanks guys!
it protects the surface, in this case the big star, from small chips and bugs that will hit the car at higher speeds. and it makes it more easy to clean the surface
i think i will put the PPF and also cover it with ceramic coating. if the PPF doesn't mess with the sensors then the ceramic probably won't also
it protects the surface, in this case the big star, from small chips and bugs that will hit the car at higher speeds. and it makes it more easy to clean the surface
i think i will put the PPF and also cover it with ceramic coating. if the PPF doesn't mess with the sensors then the ceramic probably won't also
The following users liked this post:
NewYorker555 (11-08-2019)
Trending Topics
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,622
Received 555 Likes
on
381 Posts
2018 E63S AMG
I'd be surprised if the PPF bothers the radar that much unless it is tinted or a really thick film. But then again I don't have any experience at 70 GHz.
That said, I have gotten a message or two that the sensor needed cleaning before. Wiped off the bugs next time I filled up and all was OK again.
That said, I have gotten a message or two that the sensor needed cleaning before. Wiped off the bugs next time I filled up and all was OK again.
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,805
Received 401 Likes
on
279 Posts
W463 G550 / C190 GTC //prev: W204 C63 507 / R170
I just asked a very reputable firm and they said not to add PPF to the star. They said they tried it and it created problems.
They have no reason to lie, as I'm having both of my cars fully covered, so to add the star would be nothing.
They have no reason to lie, as I'm having both of my cars fully covered, so to add the star would be nothing.
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Just checked the EXPEL site and their kit does not have film to cover the star. There must be a valid reason?
https://www.xpel.com/Bumper-Kit-ULTIMATE-PLUS_2209
Everything else in the front is covered.
The following users liked this post:
Surge (10-15-2019)
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,622
Received 555 Likes
on
381 Posts
2018 E63S AMG
The film is pretty easy to remove, right?
Seems it would be a simple thing to apply a test patch of just the star then drive around a bit and try it out. If problems are encountered then remove it and proceed with doing the rest of the car without the star.
The radar wavelength is around 4.2 mm. 3M Scotchgard film is 0.2 mm thick with adhesive per one spec sheet I found. That's ~1/20 of a wavelength so not really a critical multiple. Don't know what effect the adhesive would have on the radio waves but suspect it is minimal. But any time there is a transition between two materials of different dielectric there is a potential for reflection - think light passing from air into water or visa versa. Could be a potential for reflection at the film but if properly applied I'll bet it's minimal.
Googled around on the topic and did see that some manufacturers do have warnings on the use of films over the emblems on cars with radar units behind them. I'll bet is is more CYA than actually a real problem for thin clear films. Tinted and thinker films I could see being an issue.
For example 5G companies trying to use mmwave bands around 28 GHz are struggling with window penetration for office buildings. Most office buildings have thermal tinting films in the dual or triple pane windows and that pretty much kills 28 GHz and even down to 12 GHz (can't put your DirecTV antenna behind an office window with good results).
Unfortunately, the only 3M film I have on hand is some really thick stuff for protecting swing arms or other similar surfaces. If I had some PPF film I'd happily apply it to my star and give it a test and report back.
Seems it would be a simple thing to apply a test patch of just the star then drive around a bit and try it out. If problems are encountered then remove it and proceed with doing the rest of the car without the star.
The radar wavelength is around 4.2 mm. 3M Scotchgard film is 0.2 mm thick with adhesive per one spec sheet I found. That's ~1/20 of a wavelength so not really a critical multiple. Don't know what effect the adhesive would have on the radio waves but suspect it is minimal. But any time there is a transition between two materials of different dielectric there is a potential for reflection - think light passing from air into water or visa versa. Could be a potential for reflection at the film but if properly applied I'll bet it's minimal.
Googled around on the topic and did see that some manufacturers do have warnings on the use of films over the emblems on cars with radar units behind them. I'll bet is is more CYA than actually a real problem for thin clear films. Tinted and thinker films I could see being an issue.
For example 5G companies trying to use mmwave bands around 28 GHz are struggling with window penetration for office buildings. Most office buildings have thermal tinting films in the dual or triple pane windows and that pretty much kills 28 GHz and even down to 12 GHz (can't put your DirecTV antenna behind an office window with good results).
Unfortunately, the only 3M film I have on hand is some really thick stuff for protecting swing arms or other similar surfaces. If I had some PPF film I'd happily apply it to my star and give it a test and report back.
The following 2 users liked this post by E634Me:
6G Schnell (10-15-2019),
Surge (10-15-2019)
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
The film is pretty easy to remove, right?
Seems it would be a simple thing to apply a test patch of just the star then drive around a bit and try it out. If problems are encountered then remove it and proceed with doing the rest of the car without the star.
The radar wavelength is around 4.2 mm. 3M Scotchgard film is 0.2 mm thick with adhesive per one spec sheet I found. That's ~1/20 of a wavelength so not really a critical multiple. Don't know what effect the adhesive would have on the radio waves but suspect it is minimal. But any time there is a transition between two materials of different dielectric there is a potential for reflection - think light passing from air into water or visa versa. Could be a potential for reflection at the film but if properly applied I'll bet it's minimal.
Googled around on the topic and did see that some manufacturers do have warnings on the use of films over the emblems on cars with radar units behind them. I'll bet is is more CYA than actually a real problem for thin clear films. Tinted and thinker films I could see being an issue.
For example 5G companies trying to use mmwave bands around 28 GHz are struggling with window penetration for office buildings. Most office buildings have thermal tinting films in the dual or triple pane windows and that pretty much kills 28 GHz and even down to 12 GHz (can't put your DirecTV antenna behind an office window with good results).
Unfortunately, the only 3M film I have on hand is some really thick stuff for protecting swing arms or other similar surfaces. If I had some PPF film I'd happily apply it to my star and give it a test and report back.
Seems it would be a simple thing to apply a test patch of just the star then drive around a bit and try it out. If problems are encountered then remove it and proceed with doing the rest of the car without the star.
The radar wavelength is around 4.2 mm. 3M Scotchgard film is 0.2 mm thick with adhesive per one spec sheet I found. That's ~1/20 of a wavelength so not really a critical multiple. Don't know what effect the adhesive would have on the radio waves but suspect it is minimal. But any time there is a transition between two materials of different dielectric there is a potential for reflection - think light passing from air into water or visa versa. Could be a potential for reflection at the film but if properly applied I'll bet it's minimal.
Googled around on the topic and did see that some manufacturers do have warnings on the use of films over the emblems on cars with radar units behind them. I'll bet is is more CYA than actually a real problem for thin clear films. Tinted and thinker films I could see being an issue.
For example 5G companies trying to use mmwave bands around 28 GHz are struggling with window penetration for office buildings. Most office buildings have thermal tinting films in the dual or triple pane windows and that pretty much kills 28 GHz and even down to 12 GHz (can't put your DirecTV antenna behind an office window with good results).
Unfortunately, the only 3M film I have on hand is some really thick stuff for protecting swing arms or other similar surfaces. If I had some PPF film I'd happily apply it to my star and give it a test and report back.
Let's take a look from the safety point of view: do we want to take chances?
Just recently experienced PRE_SAFE and Brake Assist: while driving on freeway was late to apply the brakes when cars in from of me suddenly stopped. There was a beep, next seat belt tightened, seat bolsters came out and car was already braking... felt really safe. The good news is car stopped safely and no accident.
My 2c: I would rather replace the star if it gets scratched &bugged, than end up in the hospital....
The following users liked this post:
Surge (10-15-2019)
#14
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,805
Received 401 Likes
on
279 Posts
W463 G550 / C190 GTC //prev: W204 C63 507 / R170
I had a similar experience with PRESAFE when a pedestrian wearing black ran across the highway at night! Belts tightened and car automatically hit the brakes. One of the craziest moments I’ve ever had in almost 30 years of driving.
Not to sound like a Mercedes ad but the car paid for itself in that moment!
I’d rather not risk the system being delayed or not functioning just to have the logo un-damaged by rocks, etc. It’s easy and inexpensive to replace the logo. The radar unit is separate.
Not to sound like a Mercedes ad but the car paid for itself in that moment!
I’d rather not risk the system being delayed or not functioning just to have the logo un-damaged by rocks, etc. It’s easy and inexpensive to replace the logo. The radar unit is separate.
The following 3 users liked this post by Surge:
#15
Super Member
...3-5mil clear plastic film doesn't block radio waves...there's already a couple mm of hard plastic Mercedes symbol on top of it. FWIW, mine's been wrapped for 18 months and the only thing that's messed with Distronic is when salt got caked on so thick it didn't work one day driving in the winter. It does self checks constantly, if it wasn't working you'd get an error message.
#16
Junior Member
The Distronic radar sits behind the star and the star is being used as a cover as I understand. Being a plastic piece it passes signals through without any interference. Adding a thin layer of aka plastic PPF film should not create any interference either.
Also I think the Pre-Safe sensors / cameras are in the windshield by the rear view mirror as I had a loaner car without Distronic but it still had Pre-Safe feature.
Also I think the Pre-Safe sensors / cameras are in the windshield by the rear view mirror as I had a loaner car without Distronic but it still had Pre-Safe feature.
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: The Palmetto State
Posts: 2,340
Received 442 Likes
on
306 Posts
19 E63s(wifeys) & a 21 GLE580
If it’s so easy to peel off, why not just do it and peel it off if it causes problems. I don’t see it being that expensive to add the small easy to reach round circle anyway.
The following users liked this post:
NewYorker555 (11-08-2019)
#21
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,805
Received 401 Likes
on
279 Posts
W463 G550 / C190 GTC //prev: W204 C63 507 / R170
#22
Member
I had XPEL applied to the front star as well as the black B and C pillars. My detailer, who is XPEL certified and works only on high end cars (currently has two Speedsters in his shop), told me no issues and he does it all the time.
#23
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,805
Received 401 Likes
on
279 Posts
W463 G550 / C190 GTC //prev: W204 C63 507 / R170
So is my installer. He has a Huge client base, including A-list celebs, and has zero reason not to cover the star. I had my G wagon and AMG GT fully wrapped. He refused to do the star, saying it was a bad idea. It can also affect Distronic and Collision Assist. I would not do it!