This historical AVP test compared protected and unprotected sections of a painted sample under contamination, light contact and sunlight.

Contamination: resin and dirty spray were easier to remove from the treated area. This is consistent with the easy-clean behaviour expected from a sound protection layer, although aggressive residue still needs prompt treatment.

Light contact: fabric and plant material did not leave visible marks in that sample. It does not prove scratch resistance; repeatable abrasion testing would require controlled force, material and measurement.

Weather exposure: the protected section appeared less weathered after several months outdoors. A stronger comparison would document identical panels, gloss readings, UV exposure and repeated samples.

The observations are useful workshop evidence, not a universal guarantee. Product, paint, preparation, application and maintenance all affect real-world performance.

AVP now recommends protection from the vehicle's condition and intended use, with durability described as an expected range rather than an absolute result.