Huper Optik vs 3M Crystalline

[Abnoidz]

Hi Guys! I have been debating on which tint would be better for my red M3. I have researched online and it seems that Huper Optik and 3M crystalline are my top choices (also have installers in my area). Which one would you guys recommend more? Heat rejection is the main reason for installing tint on all the glass areas of the car.

 

[gambit48]

Honestly, I think all the high end ones are great. Huper, Crystalline, Spectra Photosync, etc.

I've put Huper on two of my cars. Sold one, but still have the other. 10 years old. Tint still looks like it did when I first got it. Still blocks heat like crazy. Have Spectra Photosync on the 3 and I'm not sure it's appreciably better. Certainly not at the price. I don't regret getting Photosync, but now it doesn't feel as worth it in terms of price.

 

[Abnoidz]

Thanks @gambit48! I was leaning towards Huper because I have read that crystalline seems to have a purple hue. But they say that crystalline is better with heat rejection.

 

[gambit48]

Thanks @gambit48! I was leaning towards Huper because I have read that crystalline seems to have a purple hue. But they say that crystalline is better with heat rejection.

That's the thing. Photosync is supposed to have the most heat rejection of anything on the market. I can't feel that it's appreciably better though. Granted, this is just based on how my skin feels and on two different cars. I didn't take measurements or anything. They're all white pearl cars though so there's some similarity.

 

[lloyds]

Pre-tint on my Tesla, I had to blast my AC on full on a 95degree day. Nowadays I'm on L1 or L2 fan and temp set at 70 comfortably. I still have Huper on my BMW M3 and it works fine, but one thing I noticed very differently between the two cars is that Tesla has a lot more glass, so it does get hotter than other cars.

 

[Point 3]

I was leaning towards Huper because I have read that crystalline seems to have a purple hue.

I had this Crystalline done on Friday and I found quite the opposite.
To me it looks like it matches the roof more.

 

[Abnoidz]

I had this Crystalline done on Friday and I found quite the opposite.
To me it looks like it matches the roof more.

View attachment 321347

Very nice!!! it looks nice. can you tell me what level tint you did in your M3?

 

[Point 3]

Very nice!!! it looks nice. can you tell me what level tint you did in your M3?

Yes it is all 40

 

[Matt L]

I had this Crystalline done on Friday and I found quite the opposite.
To me it looks like it matches the roof more.

View attachment 321347

Did you do the roof also? Looks great

 

[Point 3]

Did you do the roof also? Looks great

No I didn’t do the roof or the windshield.
I wanted to see how I like it first.

I ordered the Tesla roof sunshade about 3 weeks ago and it still hasn’t shipped, but I want to see how much of a difference that makes, and I like that it is easily removable when the weather is cooler.

But I may be going back for the windshield if I can be sure the electronics behind the dash won’t be affected

 

[Roentgen]

I agree with all above assessments!

I have Photosync on my X, and HO on my other car.

The Photosync as someone has said touts that they have the best heat rejection. It's a very bold claim. Their numbers are much higher than competitors.

I would lump 3M, HO, Llumar/Suntek, and other ceramic-based tints in the next category. These tints are more similar in IR and overall heat rejection for degree of darkness (light transmission). 3M has a 40, then drops to 20 (no 30), whereas the others have 30, 35, 40... But even at 40, 3M crystalline still has superior heat rejection compared to the 30-35 of the other brands.

All this being said, I don't believe the Photosync is worth the extra money. As Gambit said above, I cant feel much/any difference between photosync and HO. And since there don't seem to be any 3rd party testing of Photosync, I'm a bit skeptical as to whether it's as good as they claim. I mean, just like Gambit, I'm not dissatisfied with it - I just don't think the value is there when it can be easily twice as much as the other options. So for me, I'm getting 3M on my 3.

I think people used to talk about 3M crystalline as having a purple hue to it, but I saw a 3 in person the other day (also with 40 all around), and didn't notice any purple at all.

 

[Abnoidz]

I agree with all above assessments!

I have Photosync on my X, and HO on my other car.

The Photosync as someone has said touts that they have the best heat rejection. It's a very bold claim. Their numbers are much higher than competitors.

I would lump 3M, HO, Llumar/Suntek, and other ceramic-based tints in the next category. These tints are more similar in IR and overall heat rejection for degree of darkness (light transmission). 3M has a 40, then drops to 20 (no 30), whereas the others have 30, 35, 40... But even at 40, 3M crystalline still has superior heat rejection compared to the 30-35 of the other brands.

All this being said, I don't believe the Photosync is worth the extra money. As Gambit said above, I cant feel much/any difference between photosync and HO. And since there don't seem to be any 3rd party testing of Photosync, I'm a bit skeptical as to whether it's as good as they claim. I mean, just like Gambit, I'm not dissatisfied with it - I just don't think the value is there when it can be easily twice as much as the other options. So for me, I'm getting 3M on my 3.

I think people used to talk about 3M crystalline as having a purple hue to it, but I saw a 3 in person the other day (also with 40 all around), and didn't notice any purple at all.

You have HO on your other car? just curious why you choose M3 crystalline over HO. This might help me decide..

 

[SoCalGuy]

Yes it is all 40

What made you choose Crystalline over the others?

Also, does the latest iteration of crystalline still have the purple hue?

 

[Red3]

Was XPEL Prime XR tint considered? It’a comparable to Crystalline and cheaper.

 

[Point 3]

What made you choose Crystalline over the others?

Also, does the latest iteration of crystalline still have the purple hue?

I saw it on another Tesla they had done and it was the look I wanted.

I wanted a lot of heat reduction and not a super dark look

 

[Point 3]

Hopefully this can help clear it up.

To me it has more of light amber hue, much like the glass roof appears at times.

But I guess some people could see that as purple

 

[Roentgen]

You have HO on your other car? just curious why you choose M3 crystalline over HO. This might help me decide..

I thought I was very clear; 3M has superior total heat rejection vs HO and ALL the rest of the ceramics. Reread my initial post.

You can google this for yourself - I found a chart that had all the specs comparing most of the brands. I tried a brief search to save you the time, but couldn't find it again. I googled extensively looking it all up, but I'm sure you can look each one up separately and do the comparison yourself too.

3M does NOT have a purple hue.

But if you're set on HO, stick with it! It's a great tint, and I've been very satisfied with it. The company I went with for HO back in the day never got back to me with an estimate. My buddy talked with them and I think they said they wouldn't do the roof or rear windshield.

 

[P85_DA]

Had crystalline on S and photosync now on X ..costs were roughly the same ..in terms of both vendors marketing I have real world..experience using the tints in 115+ temps ...they both feel the same

 

[dailo]

Anyone have thoughts on Llumar? I had it on my last car and it seemed fine, but curious if 3M is much better.

 

[P85_DA]

Anyone have thoughts on Llumar? I had it on my last car and it seemed fine, but curious if 3M is much better.

Hard to say without price differentials ...IMO the sweet spot for tint is <$600 ...anything higher is a waste ..the cars with glass roofs just get got ..