1

Does the 3M Crystalline tint provide more or less UV protection than the 3M Ceramic IR tint?

I am reading conflicting information:

3M™ Crystalline Automotive Window Films:

3M™ Automotive Window Film Ceramic IR Series:

It should be easy to see the difference with a UV meter. In terms of health impact, 99.9% protects around ten times more than 99%, since UV damage is cumulative.

Since several people have questions the usefulness of blocking UV-A, here are some motivations:

I have crossposted the question at:

|improve this question
  • It may be a typo, contact Crystalline, no way we could know. – Moab Feb 8 at 21:13
  • @Moab thanks, users could know with a UV meter. I'll contact contact Crystalline as well. – Franck Dernoncourt Feb 8 at 21:14
  • I don't see a big difference between 99% and 99.9% I doubt you can tell the difference after installing it. – Moab Feb 8 at 21:16
  • @Moab it should be easy to see the difference with a UV meter. In terms of health impact, 99.9% protects around ten times more than 99%, since UV damage is cumulative. – Franck Dernoncourt Feb 8 at 21:18
  • 1
    So you want one of us to have a calibrated accurate uv meter AND both the products available for test... how many beers? – Solar Mike Feb 8 at 21:45
1

I tested the level of UV protection myself with a Solarmeter® Model 5.7 Sensitive UVA+B Meter. I am aware that glass protects against >99% of UV-B radiations, so the usefulness of adding tint to a window from a UV mostly comes from reducing UV-A radiations.

enter image description here

Results:

  • 3M Crystalline Automotive Window Film 70% tint protects twice more compared to 3M Automotive Window Film Ceramic IR 70% tint (75 vs. 130 µW/cm² when pointing the UV meter directly toward the sun at 11 AM in California on 2020-02-13, with the film in-between). I don't know how many µW/cm² I would have obtained when pointing the UV meter directly toward the sun without any tint in-between: it is at least 2000 µW/cm² but I don't know how far from 2000 (my UV meter only goes up to 2000 as it is designed to be quite sensitive to UV radiations, more than the Solarmeter® Model 5.0 Standard UVA+B Meter).
  • 3M Crystalline Automotive Window Film 40% tint protects three times more compared to 3M Crystalline Automotive Window Film 70% tint (20 vs. 60 µW/cm² when pointing the UV meter directly toward the sun at 2 PM in California on 2020-02-13, with the tinted car window in-between). Note that with the same car window before tinting, the measurement is 950 µW/cm².

According to the 3M customer service:

  • Crystalline is nano-carbon type
  • IR and crystalline offer the same level of UV protection, which is 99.5% -> Incorrect information according to my measurements above.
  • The level of UV protection is independent from the tint level, because the UV protection comes from adhesive and not the film. -> Incorrect information according to my measurements above.
  • For both Crystalline and IR, the covered UV are from 320 to 380 nm. -> According to my measurements above, I think this is incorrect as it seems to cover between 380 nm and 400 nm to some extent as well (I would very much like to know to which extent).
|improve this answer
  • So, when you think about tints you need to think about safety first. These are tints, so they will block some natural light. This could be dangerous at night, which is a much higher risk than the residual UV-A rays. – GdD Feb 13 at 8:45
  • @GdD good point, one can use a very light tint, e.g. one of the 3M crystalline let 90% of the visible light go through. People typically don't even notice it. – Franck Dernoncourt Feb 13 at 8:47

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.