3M Crystalline vs PINNACLE vs Suntek CIR vs LLumar CTX vs Wincos Tint

[gadgetfreaky]

*NOT MY POST - cut and pasted from another forum:

After visiting several tint shops in my area, I returned home very confused, having heard differing story lines from the sales people. So I took the time to research this issue. Thought I would share the comparative list I generated in the process.

• TSER stands for Total Solar Energy Rejected. TSER includes visible light, infrared radiation and ultraviolet energy. The higher the percentage, the higher the percentage of solar energy deflected. Some companies use Infra Red Rejection (IRR) as a guide to the level of heat rejection. However, IRR only covers a fraction of TSER. Internationally, TSER is used as a guide as it is a more accurate method of measurement.

• VLT is Visible Light Transmission. It is the amount of visible light that passes directly through filmed glass. The darker the tint, the lower the VLT.

• List sorted in descending order, most effective heat reduction technology at top. Ranking determined by comparing the spread or ratio between the TSER (Total Solar Energy Rejection) to VLT (Visible Light Transmitted).

Example : 3M Crystalline 90, (3M’s lightest tint shade) has a TSER of 34. You could find similar heat rejection in 3M’s cheaper film, 3M Color Stable Series of tints, but you’d have to go with the darkest (50 tint) in that series. Tinting laws vary by state, and the darker tints may not be legal in your area, or even desireable for that matter. Notice also that some of the lighter tint shades can do a much better job of blocking heat than even the darkest limo tints.


#1
VLT = 32 | TSER = 79 … TSER = Spectra Photosync SPH35
VLT = 44 | TSER = 71 … TSER = Spectra Photosync SPH45
VLT = 55 | TSER = 67 … TSER = Spectra Photosync SPH55
VLT = 66 | TSER = 64 … TSER = Spectra Photosync SPH65
VLT = 75 | TSER = 58 … TSER = Spectra Photosync SPH75
Composition : Solar Adaptive Nano Technology, Signal Safe
PhotoSync® - Prestige Film Technologies

#2
VLT = 39 | TSER = 60 … 3M Crystalline 40
VLT = 60 | TSER = 53 … 3M Crystalline 60
VLT = 69 | TSER = 50 … 3M Crystalline 70
VLT = 86 | TSER = 34 … 3M Crystalline 90
Composition : 200+ Nano Layers, Signal Safe
http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/6...s-brochure.pdf

#3
VLT = 06 | TSER = 75 … Huper Optik Ceramic 05
VLT = 15 | TSER = 73 … Huper Optik Ceramic 15
VLT = 21 | TSER = 68 … Huper Optik Ceramic 20
VLT = 30 | TSER = 63 … Huper Optik Ceramic 30
VLT = 34 | TSER = 61 … Huper Optik Ceramic 35
VLT = 40 | TSER = 55 … Huper Optik Ceramic 40
VLT = 52 | TSER = 50 … Huper Optik Ceramic 50
VLT = 60 | TSER = 43 … Huper Optik Ceramic 60
VLT = 71 | TSER = 48 … Huper Optik Ceramic 70
Composition : Nano Ceramic, Signal Safe
https://huperoptikusa.com/wp-content...s_Ceramics.pdf

#4
VLT = 05 | TSER = 65 … Formula One Pinnacle 05
VLT = 18 | TSER = 61 … Formula One Pinnacle 15
VLT = 33 | TSER = 57 … Formula One Pinnacle 30
VLT = 43 | TSER = 53 … Formula One Pinnacle 40
VLT = 54 | TSER = 49 … Formula One Pinnacle 50
Composition : Nano Ceramic, Signal Safe
Press Releases | News & Events | LLumar Window Films -

#5
VLT = 10 | TSER = 63 … Madico Wincos 10
VLT = 23 | TSER = 59 … Madico Wincos 20
VLT = 33 | TSER = 57 … Madico Wincos 30
VLT = 50 | TSER = 51 … Madico Wincos 45
VLT = 66 | TSER = 49 … Madico Wincos 60
VLT = 75 | TSER = 45 … Madico Wincos 70
VLT = 89 | TSER = 23 … Madico Wincos 90
Composition : Madico's website isn't clear, but does specify it is signal safe.
http://www.madico.com/wp-content/upl...Spec-Sheet.pdf

#6
VLT = 04 | TSER = 66 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 05
VLT = 18 | TSER = 62 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 20
VLT = 32 | TSER = 58 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 30
VLT = 38 | TSER = 56 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 38
VLT = 42 | TSER = 53 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 42
VLT = 46 | TSER = 52 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 46
VLT = 51 | TSER = 51 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 50
VLT = 70 | TSER = 49 … Global QDP Ceramic Charcoal 70
Composition : Nano Ceramic, Signal Safe
http://www.globalwindowfilms.com/pdf...ifications.pdf

#7
VLT = 06 | TSER = 59 … SunTek CarbonXP 5
VLT = 16 | TSER = 56 … SunTek CarbonXP 18
VLT = 33 | TSER = 53 … SunTek CarbonXP 35
VLT = 40 | TSER = 50 … SunTek CarbonXP 45
VLT = 53 | TSER = 48 … SunTek CarbonXP 55
VLT = 64 | TSER = 44 … SunTek CarbonXP 70
VLT = 80 | TSER = 44 … SunTek CarbonXP 80
Composition : Non Metallized Nano-Hybrid, Signal Safe
http://www.suntekfilms.com/files/Sun...-specsheet.pdf

#8
VLT = 17 | TSER = 54 … Johnson InsulatR 20
VLT = 33 | TSER = 50 … Johnson InsulatR 35
VLT = 43 | TSER = 46 … Johnson InsulatR 45
VLT = 65 | TSER = 50 … Johnson InsulatR 70
VLT = 76 | TSER = 42 … Johnson InsulatR 80
VLT = 82 | TSER = 18 … Johnson InsulatR 85
Composition : Nano Ceramic, Signal Safe
Insulatir - AUTOMOTIVE | Johnson Window Films

#9
VLT = 05 | TSER = 60 … Llumar Charcoal CTX 05
VLT = 18 | TSER = 55 … Llumar Charcoal CTX 15
VLT = 33 | TSER = 51 … Llumar Charcoal CTX 30
VLT = 38 | TSER = 50 … Llumar Charcoal CTX 35
VLT = 43 | TSER = 43 … Llumar Charcoal CTX 40
VLT = 54 | TSER = 40 … Llumar Charcoal CTX 50
Composition : Website Isn't Clear, But Is Described As Signal Safe
http://w3.llumar.com/pdf/en/LLumarAutoSpecsUS.pdf

#10
VLT = 18 | TSER = 64 … Sun-Gard GP Max 05
VLT = 40 | TSER = 44 … Sun-Gard GP Max 20
VLT = 47 | TSER = 40 … Sun-Gard GP Max 35
VLT = 68 | TSER = 24 … Sun-Gard GP Max 50
Composition : Website isn't clear
http://www.madico.com/wp-content/upl...Spec-Sheet.pdf


#11
VLT = 09 | TSER = 57 … 3M Color Stable 5
VLT = 19 | TSER = 51 … 3M Color Stable 20
VLT = 39 | TSER = 40 … 3M Color Stable 35
VLT = 52 | TSER = 35 … 3M Color Stable 50
Composition : Nano-Carbon Polyester, Signal Safe
http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/6...s-brochure.pdf

#12
VLT = 10 | TSER = 51 … Solar Guard Ultra Performace 10
VLT = 20 | TSER = 49 … Solar Guard Ultra Performace 20
VLT = 34 | TSER = 43 … Solar Guard Ultra Performace 30
VLT = 43 | TSER = 40 … Solar Guard Ultra Performace 40
VLT = 64 | TSER = 37 … Solar Guard Ultra Performace 60
VLT = 73 | TSER = 37 … Solar Guard Ultra Performace 70
VLT = 76 | TSER = 40 … Solar Guard Ultra Performace 75
Composition : Ceramic Nano Tech, Signal Safe
Ultra Performance - SolarGard

#13
VLT = 05 | TSER = 47 … Llumar Charcoal ATC 05
VLT = 18 | TSER = 44 … Llumar Charcoal ATC 15
VLT = 23 | TSER = 39 … Llumar Charcoal ATC 20
VLT = 38 | TSER = 35 … Llumar Charcoal ATC 35
VLT = 43 | TSER = 33 … Llumar Charcoal ATC 40
VLT = 59 | TSER = 26 … Llumar Charcoal ATC 50
Composition : Website Isn't Clear, Or I Missed it.
http://w3.llumar.com/pdf/en/LLumarAutoSpecsUS.pdf

#14
VLT = 08 | TSER = 46 … SunTek Standard Series 05
VLT = 20 | TSER = 40 … SunTek Standard Series 20
VLT = 38 | TSER = 38 … SunTek Standard Series 35
VLT = 41 | TSER = 34 … SunTek Standard Series 40
VLT = 50 | TSER = 29 … SunTek Standard Series 50
VLT = 70 | TSER = 26 … SunTek Standard Series 70
Composition : Dyed Construction. Website isn't declaring signal safe, but also isn't listed
as metallic, so I assume it is signal safe.
http://www.suntekfilms.com/files/ind_auto_Standard.pdf

Hope this is helpful

is this still the best chart? I'm trying to find a tint that has 65% for my front windshield, 15% fronts, 20% rears and 20% rooftop

 

[bro1999]

So I think I've decided to get my 3 tinted with Suntek. Question is which grade? I received a quote from a trusted tinter and they said $575 for CXP and $650 for CIR (windshield + everything else minus "sunroof" glass).

I looked up the specs for CXP vs CIR, and it seems I'm not really getting much for the $75 extra CIR costs (tiny bit better heat rejection numbers). Is there a physical difference aesthetic-wise between CXP and CIR? If not, seems like I'd rather just save $75.

 

[HodgJ]

So I think I've decided to get my 3 tinted with Suntek. Question is which grade? I received a quote from a trusted tinter and they said $575 for CXP and $650 for CIR (windshield + everything else minus "sunroof" glass).

I looked up the specs for CXP vs CIR, and it seems I'm not really getting much for the $75 extra CIR costs (tiny bit better heat rejection numbers). Is there a physical difference aesthetic-wise between CXP and CIR? If not, seems like I'd rather just save $75.

I've read quite a few people do CIR on sides and front windshield whilst electing for CXP on full rear as it supposedly matched up better over the stock tinted glass for a consistent look.

Personally I'd say spend the extra and go CIR for a lil bit better heat rejection.

What's 75 bucks over the years you spend with your car? If it was a couple hundred I say just go cxp.

But that's just one strangers opinion on the forum.

Similar situation I went with Llumar IRX over the CTX as I thought the lil extra was worth it for better heat rejection


Good luck!

 

[Kevy Baby]

What @HodgJ said above. I had CIR put on all of my glass (including the roof - the sign was just too bright coming through) and couldn't be happier.

 

[OROR]

Llumar CTX by the numbers is not as good as 3M crystalline. You're also paying $260 more for an arguably lesser tint (which also does NOT include the front windshield) at Signature Tint vs Rodz in the OC group buy you posted in earier in another thread. So you clearly have misgivings about the Rodz deal.

I've seen Rodz work up close in a coworkers car, who got all windows tinted incl the front, and it looks flawless. I spoke to Roger at Rodz (before he left) about potential front windshield/electronics issues, and he assured me they take precautions. I am aware of some of the posters saying they see some haziness in their front windshields on the other thread.

Numbers aside, I think the high end tints are all going to do an adequate job on heat rejection, with only a minor difference really between all of them. The rest of it is going to be subjective stuff, so you can feel fine going with what and who you like. I'm a firm believer in "you get what you pay for." The higher price you pay at a tint place is more for the quality of the tint job rather than the actual tint, but having seen their work up close, I'm pretty confident they will do an acceptable job. The numbers for me just don't add up enough to justify paying more somewhere else for tints that may not be as good at heat rejection, if that's what you say is the most important to you.

Did you go with Rodz or Signature tint?