Rayno Phantom Review: Nano Carbon Ceramic Tint Tested

Phantom is Rayno's automotive tint line built on what the company calls Nano Carbon Ceramic technology, a patented hybrid that combines nano-scale carbon particles for color stability with nano-encapsulated ceramic particles for heat rejection. Rayno markets it as the first film to combine both particle types at nanoscale, splitting the difference between a carbon film's dye-free color stability and a ceramic film's heat performance.

The series ships in three tiers, S5 (black) and S7 and S9 (both charcoal), each in seven VLT shades from 5% to 50%. The tier number does not just signal price; it tracks directly with how much infrared heat the film actually rejects, confirmed on Rayno's own specification sheet.

Rayno's own Phantom specification sheet lists IR rejection and TSER for every shade of all three tiers. S5 rejects 53% to 72% IR depending on shade, S7 rejects 70% to 81%, and S9 rejects 91% to 93%, its figure staying nearly flat across the entire shade range. TSER follows a similar hierarchy: S5 runs 41% to 66%, S7 runs 47% to 66%, and S9 runs 54% to 70%.

UV rejection is rated 99.99% across every tier and shade, among the highest published UV figures of the brands in this review series. Rayno's marketing materials separately claim the Phantom series "cuts harmful UV and infrared rays by nearly 99 percent" compared with other window film brands, a relative claim about outperforming competitors rather than an absolute rejection percentage, and it does not contradict the tier-specific IR numbers on the spec sheet itself.

The gap between S5 and S9 is large enough to change the buying decision, not just the price. At a comparable 20% VLT shade, S5 rejects 53% IR, S7 rejects 73%, and S9 rejects 93%. That is close to a 40 percentage point swing between the cheapest and most expensive Phantom tier at the same visible darkness, a bigger jump than most brands show between their entry and flagship ceramic films.

S7 is the practical middle ground for most buyers: it clears S5 by a wide margin on IR rejection without the full cost of S9. S9 is worth the extra spend specifically for a car that sits in direct sun most of the day or a climate where cabin heat is a real daily problem, not just a cosmetic preference.

Rayno does not publish retail pricing on its spec sheet, and installed cost depends on the shop, but all three Phantom tiers use ceramic-grade particle technology, which puts realistic installed pricing in Coateau's $450 to $700 ceramic tint tier for a standard sedan in 2026. S5 should land toward the bottom of that range, S9 toward the top, with S7 in between. SUVs run about 1.2 times the sedan price and large SUVs or trucks about 1.4 times, consistent with every Coateau tint tier.

Rayno backs Phantom with what it calls a lifetime warranty program, but the brochure is explicit that buyers must submit a completed warranty card to Rayno within 30 days of installation and that specific terms vary by region. That registration step is easy to skip and worth doing immediately after install, since an unregistered film may not be covered the same way if a defect shows up years later.

Rayno also sells Phantom II, described on the brand's site as a pure ceramic film and the most advanced in its lineup, positioned above the original Phantom series rather than as a direct replacement for it. Anyone cross-shopping Rayno specifically for maximum heat rejection should ask an installer whether Phantom II is available locally before settling on S9.

Against the bigger names, S9's 91% to 93% IR rejection is a genuinely strong number, competitive with flagship ceramic films from larger brands, though Rayno's smaller installer footprint means warranty support and resale recognition carry more uncertainty than with 3M, LLumar or XPEL.