3M crystalline tint

[Alysashley79]

I read 3/4 if the "tint" thread and my question is directed ONLY at the people that have the crystalline tint. I know a lot of people have the photo sync and have been very happy with it. But I'm going to go with the 3M. Anyhow. My question is this...did you notice a huge difference in heat in the he car after vs before? Did you use less AC in the car after vs before? For those of you with kiddos in the he jump seats did your kids notice a huge difference aft you had the tint applied? Considering how much I've pad for this car and all the other mods I've made this is peanuts, but if it's really not going to make much of a difference then maybe I don't need it. I was mostly going to do it for my kids because they are always so hot in the jump seats and th sun shade just isn't cutting it....then secondarily for the savings in miles.

 

[dsm363]

Also wondering how invisible the 70% is. Do you or others even notice it's on the car? The 90% would be better than nothing but for the money think the extra 20% heat rejection of the 70 probably worth it.

 

[MyJoule]

I have the 3M film in my LEAF, and to tell you the truth, it doesn't block much IR(there for it's still pretty much hot in the car) - but it certainly blocks almost all of the UV- my photo gray glasses don't tint at all in the car. I am pretty sure I went with the 90 and you can barely tell that it's there. Highly considering the Photo sync for my Model S when it get's here next week. Not sure there is an installer in Tucson- I've asked my installer, Affordable Window Tint, to see if they can get photo sync.

 

[dsm363]

I have the 3M film in my LEAF, and to tell you the truth, it doesn't block much IR(there for it's still pretty much hot in the car) - but it certainly blocks almost all of the UV- my photo gray glasses don't tint at all in the car. I am pretty sure I went with the 90 and you can barely tell that it's there. Highly considering the Photo sync for my Model S when it get's here next week. Not sure there is an installer in Tucson- I've asked my installer, Affordable Window Tint, to see if they can get photo sync.

If you got the 90 maybe you can't tell much of a difference since it only rejects 30% or so of the heat?

 

[TexasEV]

I have 3M crystalline 70% on sides and rear. I did notice an improvement in interior heat after it was put on, but I don't know if the AC ran any less. I always precooled the car before getting in it last summer, so I wasn't there to know how much it ran. AC uses little electricity anyway so I wouldn't make that a determining factor. I also got it to protect the leather and plastic interior from UV damage over time. Sorry I don't have rear seats so can't help you there.

My installer recommended 70 over 90 as there is a barely noticeable difference in appearance and the 70 has better heat and UV rejection. Looking at my car I wouldn't know it was tinted unless another one was parked right next to it.

 

[dsm363]

Thanks. I'll likely go for the 70 if I do the 3M Crystalline. Still trying to decide that. I guess you really can't go wrong with either product really so maybe the decision should be on price.

 

[MikeC]

I have 70 on the front and 40 on the sides and rear. It definitely cuts down on heat and need for AC. I initially only had the sides and rear but then I got the windshield too because it was the biggest window and the heat coming through was very noticeable. It felt very exposed in the front. Kids in the back haven't complained about heat but I've only done short drives. When I drove a loaner without tint, I had the AC at least 3-4 degrees higher.

 

[Lump]

I have 70 on the front and 40 on the sides and rear. It definitely cuts down on heat and need for AC. I initially only had the sides and rear but then I got the windshield too because it was the biggest window and the heat coming through was very noticeable. It felt very exposed in the front. Kids in the back haven't complained about heat but I've only done short drives. When I drove a loaner without tint, I had the AC at least 3-4 degrees higher.

Same as MikeC, overall I am prety happy with mine, I would have preferred to go darker then 40 but tinting the fronts is illegal so 40 all around looks best IMO, the 70 windshield isn't noticeable. Photosync quote was 30% higher.

 

[yobigd20]

i'd personally recommend going with a different film. i had crystalline on mine and wasn't happy with it so I had it taken off (such as waste of money, should never have gone with crystalline in the first place) and had it replaced with a different film brand (madico charcool). very happy with the replacement film. mostly for aesthetic reasons (crystalline looks purple, so it looks like a really bad amateur tint job)

 

[PeterK]

I have had crystalline 50 on my trunk and sides for a year and it is great. Has definitely improved the jump seat temp, and the car overall. It is not very dark but cuts over 50% of heat. And while the trunk window looks a little reddish primarily when wet, it goes well with my blue and does not at all look like those cheap purple tints. I'm very happy with it.

 

[huntjo]

I have 3M crystalline on sides and back. It does make a noticeable difference in heat transmission. Unfortunately my installer "didn't feel comfortable" doing the front because that still lets heat through.
I have sig red, so the very slight purple tint still looks great. I think if you have a black car maybe consider a different tint but otherwise the purple that Yobigd is talking about is not ugly iS some make it out to be. Eye of the beholder and all that

 

[AmpedRealtor]

i'd personally recommend going with a different film. i had crystalline on mine and wasn't happy with it so I had it taken off (such as waste of money, should never have gone with crystalline in the first place) and had it replaced with a different film brand (madico charcool). very happy with the replacement film. mostly for aesthetic reasons (crystalline looks purple, so it looks like a really bad amateur tint job)

I had my tint done at Cactus Tint in Scottsdale. They showed me the 3M Crystalline and I have it on my windshield. It's not purple at all, in fact it tends toward the warmer, yellower side of the spectrum. According to Rick at Cactus Tint, you can tell it's true 3M Crystalline because there should be a little imprinted 3M in the corner. He showed me where mine is, and said to make sure to look for that because others are claiming to install 3M and charge the same high price, but are actually using different and cheaper films in the back room. I'm not saying this is the case in your situation, but I can say that the 3M Crystalline on my windshield matches up to the yellower color that I saw in the 3M display at the shop. Not purple at all.

Another way to tell that you have true 3M Crystalline or Spectra Photosync is by looking at your tint through polarized sunglasses. You should see a subtle rainbow pattern. If you don't, it's probably not Crystalline or Photosync. I have Spectra Photosync on all of my other windows. That particular brand of tint is very neutral in color.

 

[Caloncho]

While installing the MobilEye in my dark grey MS85, in Long Island NY, the guy showed me the 3M Crystalline and used a heat lamp to do a heat transmission/reflection demo comparing film percentages and other brands. I then had it installed (a week ago now) and looks/feels wonderful.

I had Photosync in my MB E55 and while it definitely helped keep the vehicle cooler, the 3M Crystalline film rejects the heat better.

The 3M Crystalline is also less noticeable for the front windshield.

The color of Crystalline is not at all purple in my opinion/experience. It is on the warmer spectrum, like another forum member expressed. Warmer and a bit on the very light brown shade. It has a few little 3M logos spread over the whole window and those little 3Ms can be eliminated after the second week by gently rubbing them with alcohol towelettes (the square ones they use in hospitals).

Front windshield 70%
Full panoramic glass roof 70%
Rear windshield 40%
Rear windows 40%
Front windows 60%

The car is instantly (way) cooler inside. The AC can be set 3 to 5 degrees higher and the cabin seems to hold the cooler air somewhat longer.

If you consider these advantages, then it is not 'too' expensive.

From the front (outside) you can not tell the front windshield has any film. Still have a few tiny bubbles that the installer says it's "moisture" (?) and I really wish they will go away in a week or two. Fortunately installation is satisfaction guaranteed. Film is guaranteed for life.

Then I had HushMat sound and thermal insulation applied in the wheel wells and other sound-conducting spaces. The car cabin became a lot quieter, a lot. The road noise was making me uncomfortable already. Even with the 19" wheels. May go back to do the doors and other minor areas just because I tend to overkill what bothers me.

To finish, let me state that I am very happy with the MobilEye 560, it already payed for itself. Wonderful invention.

Cal


Disclaimer: I have zero connections with the companies that own/distribute/install/promote the above mentioned products, nor I receive any benefit from recommending/disrecommending products (but maybe I should?).

 

[kjl]

I have Crystalline 70 on sides and back. Nothing on the pano and nothing on the windshield. I'd say the 70 is basically invisible. I mean, if I look the the side windows and compare it to the windshield, I guess I could tell it was darker, but when you look at the car your initial impression is that you don't notice the tint.

I think I have noticed that the AC usage has gone down. Before the tint, I would have the AC on auto, and the AC would frequently go up to fan speeds 9 or 10 and be just super, obnoxiously loud. I'd switch the climate to ECO mode, which caps the fan speed lower, but then the car would still feel pretty hot. After the tint, the fan likes to be around 4-5 most of the time and it's fine. It's hard to say for sure, though - It hasn't been really hot in awhile now...

 

[dsm363]

I have Crystalline 70 on sides and back. Nothing on the pano and nothing on the windshield. I'd say the 70 is basically invisible. I mean, if I look the the side windows and compare it to the windshield, I guess I could tell it was darker, but when you look at the car your initial impression is that you don't notice the tint.

I think I have noticed that the AC usage has gone down. Before the tint, I would have the AC on auto, and the AC would frequently go up to fan speeds 9 or 10 and be just super, obnoxiously loud. I'd switch the climate to ECO mode, which caps the fan speed lower, but then the car would still feel pretty hot. After the tint, the fan likes to be around 4-5 most of the time and it's fine. It's hard to say for sure, though - It hasn't been really hot in awhile now...

Thanks. That's the exact setup I am considering so helpful information.

 

[MikeC]

I do see a purplish shade sometimes but only on the rear window - I was told that is because of the glass used and other cars like Mercedes have the same effect. I don't notice any discoloration on the sides or front. The 70 is virtually invisible during the day but it does make things a bit darker at night. Not dangerously so, but it is noticeable to me.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I had Photosync in my MB E55 and while it definitely helped keep the vehicle cooler, the 3M Crystalline film rejects the heat better.

If you compare the actual specs you'll see that Photosync rejects more total solar energy as well as IR. At least on paper, the Photosync seems to be the superior product.

 

[Caloncho]

If you compare the actual specs you'll see that Photosync rejects more total solar energy as well as IR. At least on paper, the Photosync seems to be the superior product.

Exactly right. On paper! and both in the physical world are fine products, but my actual user experience is that the 3M Crystalline helps keep the car cooler.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Exactly right. On paper! and both in the physical world are fine products, but my actual user experience is that the 3M Crystalline helps keep the car cooler.

I respect your opinion, but to be fair there are uncountable variables in play when comparing one brand of tint in one particular vehicle with another brand of tint in a totally different vehicle. What I can say is that Photosync has reduced my energy consumption by 5-10 Wh/mi, and that's in temps 20 degrees higher than before tinting. I can drive in 110 degree heat with my AC set to 72 in range mode and I'm cool as a cucumber. According to Rick w/ Cactus Tint in Scottsdale who does a lot of Model S, the majority of owners have opted for Photosync due to its superior heat rejection properties when compared to 3M and others.

I think it's fair to say that you can't go wrong with either of these products.

 

[JKerensky]

I had mine done with 40 around, and 90 on the windshield.
First, it's a great product. Even the 90. Dramatic difference in the feeling of heat on my arms and face, and less eyestrain.

However, there were a couple of patches on the top right of the windshield that looked like streaks that they missed squeegeeing out. Sides look fine, defrost wires on the back distort headlights at night, which is similar to a previous car with a different tint. I waited two weeks for it to fully dry, but the streaks never got better. I had them replace it today. He told me they ended up with the same issue, so they pulled that and tried again. Now I've got a patch right in the lower center with that same streaky look like squeegee marks. The installer says it's because of the material and 200+ layers and different type of install process, etc. Basically blaming 3M for making a product that can't be installed on this specific car because of the way it stretches and shrinks during install. I'm going to give it another few weeks, but if it doesn't improve, I'm going to have to pull it even though it works so well. But I can't have it looking like that.

It looks like I'm not the only person to use the 90. Anyone else have similar issues? Is it the material or the installer?