Ok, I can admit when I am wrong and I might be in this case. However, the Zaino web site is confusing at best when it comes to the protection issue. The Z2 & Z3 description ramble on about polymer technologies, special flex-additives and optical clarity, whereas the Z5 description starts out mentioning that removing swirls can be costly and will remove some of your finish and then proceeds to describe the swirl removing capabilities of the Z5 and its UV protection and gloss enhancers and finishes with a statement about it being a base coat for darker cars and how it should be followed by Z2.
The application sections always talk about Z2 and Z5 being “100% compatible and interchangeable� but it always mentions the last coat should be Z2. I have always interpreted this to be a note on compatibility because as we know some products inhibit the bonding capabilities of the Z products (oils, fillers, etc.) and have always thought this statement was to inform users that they could switch back and forth between the products without effecting ability of the other to bond (basically like once you top zaino with a carnauba you have to remove the carnauba before anymore zaino layers can be applied). Based on the descriptions of the products and the always last coat being Z2 statements I formulated the basis that Z2 was more a protectant. Maybe this was wrong. After rereading everything with a critical eye towards Z2, Z3 and Z5 all being protectants I can understand that also.
Which leads me to a question.
Assuming Z2 and Z5 each offer equal protection, then what’s up with Z2 being the last coat? I know it says for optical clarity but this optical clarity argument seems flawed (unless I misinterpreting again

). It would seem logical that once a coat of a product (any product) that offered less optical clarity than another was applied then the total optical clarity of all applications would be limited by the clarity of the least optically clear product.
For example: Hypothetically if you have a perfect optically clear piece of glass and place a perfectly clear coating on it to protect the glass, you still have perfect optical clarity. Now take a perfectly clear piece of glass and place a less than perfectly clear optical coating on it, then place a perfectly clear coating on top that coating…the result would be optical clarity that is limited by clarity of the less than perfect coating. It would seem that once the optical clarity is compromised by a less than optically clear coating then no amount of an optically clear coating is going to improve optics unless it does something to modify, remover or improve the optical characteristics of the optically inferior coating. Shouldn’t the same principal apply to the Zaino process? In other words once Z5 is used the clarity and optics of all other layers are limited by the clarity optics of the Z5? It doesn’t makes sense that Z2 would be necessary if they have the same protection if the only difference is the optical clarity. Can any one explain this?
Oh by the way I am Zaino user and I don’t mean any of this to be a negative on the product.