2 Buffer Method..

D

Deep_Freeze

New member
Well, the concept probably isn't new to alot of you, but the reasoning might be so here we go. Back in my pre-autopia days, I bought one of those cheap buffers from Walmart. Quickly, once I used it a bit and found autopia, I found it useless especially with my purchase of a PC.



So as an engineer, I am naturally lazy, hate to waste things, and always looking to find an easier way to do things, lol. Of course, I like using my PC for hardcore prep work, applying waxes and sealants, and such, but it left me with all that arm work to do to remove the haze. So I thought, how about using my low powered buffer sitting in the corner, but how??



After I am properly hazed or ready to remove a product, I use my buffing towel under this cheap buffer. I don't even have to put a pad or cover on the cheap buffer, I just make sure that the towel is turned often on the surface as if I was taking it off by hand. With practice, this method has saved me a huge amount of time and energy. The haze is usually off in 1 or 2 passes, and I usually do a pass by hand just to get to the hard to reach spots if I need to.



Now, this method doesn't work as well with just a PC cause it either has the rough end of velcro showing or needs one of your good pads put on there. Meanwhile, with the cheap buffer, it already has a small foam pad there, just in case the something bad happens like no towel, which is easy to prevent.



I think it does add a little pop to my finished product also. It can make those hard to remove waxes and sealants easier to deal with, and actually make you not even worry as much about how easy/hard a particular product is to get off the car. Any suggestions are welcome, if anyone sees a problem with this method, thought I would just share what I was doing to get some opinions on it, lol. So if you have that cheap Walmart buffer laying around, put it to work!! ;)
 
Why not use the PC to remove the "haze"? There are microfiber bonnets available anyway. You will still end up having to go through the car by hand (with an MF, o'course) to make sure you didn't miss a spot :D
 
Yeah, merci, but the bonnets don't provide the surface area of a buffing towel. You just have that one small area to get the product off with, which I don't like. That small pad is filled with product way too quick and can cause marring and scratches. Using a buffing towel gives you the full area of the towel, and you can turn the towel easily under the buffer just like you would by hand. :cool:
 
Deep_Freeze said:
...So as an engineer, I am naturally lazy, hate to waste things, and always looking to find an easier way to do things, lol. ...
Click to expand...
These are hallmarks of a good engineer.



I would however caution that on any given task it's wise you to give all input parameters weighting factors appropriate to the process in question when comparing options.



I have on numerous occasions seen (and fought with) engineers who were eager to avoid "wasting" money on equipment and trying to implement processes that would benefit from different machines.



Nobody wants to throw away a $1000 instrument and buy a $5000 unit that does the same job. But if they're used in a process that adds $1000 in value to your product on every day of production and the more expensive tool is only 10% more efficient it will pay for itself in 50 days. That's an ROI of only ten workweeks. If the tool that was already lying around is used instead, "saving" $4000, in one years time you will have spent an extra $25,000 and you'd have 10% less product to show for it.



Those numbers may sound contrived but they're actually pretty conservative. I've seen many "expensive" tools pay for themselves in a couple of days.



Now that's all well and good for the industrial world but what the heck does it have to do with my garage? Truth is, it's exactly the same, only the numbers are different.



I agree that the cheap buffer/towel combo is more efficient than a towel alone. But I can do the same with my PC either with bonnets or towels. I also believe the PC is faster and easier. I have extra pads anyway, both as back ups and as washed&dried dedicated pads for less used products so that's not costing me anything.



In my garage the two most precious commodities are my time and storage space. I would be sacrificing both if I kept my cheap buffer around. I still found it hard to just toss it (yeah, I'm a cheap@&% engineer too) so I managed to lend it out to somebody. Luckily, they haven't tried to give it back.





PC.
 
LOL, that's cool PC. Yeah, you can use a PC of course, I was just making the point to prove that there is a use for that old cheap Walmart buffer. I find it real hard to toss anything, so finding a use for that buffer was right up my alley, lol.



The difference is, if you are trying to hold the towel along with a PC, it is kinda hard with the weight of the PC to hold them both correctly. Nothing wrong with using it though, the same goal can be accomplished. As for the bonnets, I don't like them only cause they fill with product too quickly, but to each is own of course.
 
Deep_Freeze said:
I find it real hard to toss anything, so finding a use for that buffer was right up my alley, lol.
Click to expand...



Ebay baby! Maybe you could get enough to cover some MF bonnets for your PC. :D :D
 
Yeah, I hear ya Deep_Freeze. If you can make the old orbital earn its keep thatâ€â„¢s great.



In my case the resources my old Waxmaster took up (not just in my garage but in my life in general) were better used for more MFs, pads, tools, etc.





PC.
 
the other pc,



You run into that stuff with training people, as well. I used to fight with my boss to get him to send me to ongoing training for my job. His reasoning was that it cost him $500 and three days of me off the job. My reasoning was that if I learned one thing that earned us $1000 one time, we were ahead of the game, and typically I would learn 3 or 4 things that would repeatedly pick up $1000 per week overall.



After a while I stopped arguing for it.
 
Sorry to hear about that Mosca. You're absolutely right; training is one of the highest returning investments a business can make. If your boss thinks training is expensive he should look at the cost of continually making the same mistakes other people have already learned to avoid. I'm fortunate that our company is pro-training.



We had an instructor who once told us that in a previous position she had made a mistake that caused a major deal to fall through. She told her boss that she'd be willing to resign so he wouldn't have to fire her. His reply, "fire you? I just spent $200,000 training you!"





PC.
 
the other pc said:
Nobody wants to throw away a $1000 instrument and buy a $5000 unit that does the same job. But if they're used in a process that adds $1000 in value to your product on every day of production and the more expensive tool is only 10% more efficient it will pay for itself in 50 days. That's an ROI of only ten workweeks. If the tool that was already lying around is used instead, "saving" $4000, in one years time you will have spent an extra $25,000 and you'd have 10% less product to show for it.
Click to expand...



Sorry to get off topic, but isn't this what's known as the sunk cost fallacy?
 
Jeff_M said:
Sorry to get off topic, but isn't this what's known as the sunk cost fallacy?
Click to expand...



[Accumulator spots conceptual/epistemilogical discussion and throws in his $0.02 and then some...]



Seems like if (maybe a pretty big *if* in this case :D ) you can still (rationally) find a use for the older RO then it's not really throwing good money after bad and thus not an example of the SCF. The Q is whether or not there's continued value to be derived from the RO as opposed to just using it for the sake of using it (which *would* be and example of the SCF).



Heh heh, don't expect *me* to comment on the worth RO as I use a pair of PCs and/or a pair of Cyclos for that sort of thing. But I certainly *do* subscribe the the "two polisher" method, one with foam to apply, one with MF bonnets to remove. No time wasted switching pads/etc., just set one machine down and grab the other.



So *if* the cheapie buffer lets Deep_Freeze do the two-buffer thing (and/or if he likes using it as opposed to the PC for whatever presumably rational reason), then it wouldn't be a waste to keep it in service.



But I *do* disagree with the "... the bonnets don't provide the surface area of a buffing towel. You just have that one small area to get the product off ... That small pad is filled with product way too quick and can cause marring and scratches..." I use the MF bonnets all the time, and even on very soft lacquer they'll work fine if you do things right. Can't use too much product and you have to swap out the bonnets from time to time. Perhaps *too* often for some people's taste, and then I can see using the towel instead.



The "towel under the buffer head" method has been used since forever; people were doing that with Cyclos in the '50s and probably even earlier.
 
Jeff_M said:
Sorry to get off topic, but isn't this what's known as the sunk cost fallacy?
Click to expand...
My little example certainly was.





Accumulator, I agree that if Deep_Freeze does find a truly beneficial use for the old RO that its is indeed efficient to keep it and not a case of SCF.



I just wanted to point out that beyond being merely beneficial it must also outperform all other available options to be considered the right choice.



In my case the A to your Q would be no, it wouldn't provide continued value greater than the resources it consumes. Of course everybody's situation is different.



I do like the idea of two polishers though. I agree that the reduction in setup/changeover would easily pay for itself in higher throughput. I think many people would balk at doubling the initial capital investment but I regularly see such minor costs absolutely swamped by returns in efficiency (I wish more managers would).



In my case though the setup/changeover speed/efficiency possible with hook&loop pads makes the margin relatively small and with the volume of work I do I have difficulty justifying the storage space and cost of a second PC (or a first Cyclo).





PC.
 
Really, I just meant that if you have the old buffer laying around, you could use it, not that you should go out and buy another specifically for this purpose.



And yes, it does save time for me. I can wax and buff off the haze on a car in like around an hour, lol.
 
I use the "trap a MF towel" method to remove haze & residue all the time. By using a 6" PC foam pad that's getting a bit fuzzy (it's pretty worn) it grabs the non-plush side of a MF towel like velcro.



Absolutely no chance of the towel falling off and/or flying off and, IMHO I believe this process will micro-burnish the surface & cause no marring if the towel is rotated to avoid residue build-up.



I've used this process when removing Collinite residue and the surface is as slick as a UPP'd or FMJ'd surface.
 
Sounds cool, utilize what you have, NYV6. The whole point to what i started this trend was for the posts on this site that I have read that complain about removal of various products. Well, if you haven't been doing this "trap the towel" method (like the sound of that, lol), then try it now cause it works.



As for my Wally world buffer, it keeps on going, still taking half the work off of my PC's shoulders. One thing is for sure, I actually use my wally world buffer more cause I like to apply my s100 lightly by hand alot instead of by PC.
 
It would be different if Deep_Freeze didn't have either buffer and was asking if he should buy both to use in this way, then the obvious answer would be No, just get the PC.



But since he already has both, and has found a process that works for him using both, then I say more power to him. I kind of view it as using a rotary then following up with a PC.
 
Deep_Freeze, I apologize for getting carried away with the discussion.



I didn't mean to disparage the 2 buffer suggestion. I totally agree that it's a good idea for you and I'm sure many others.



I just wanted to suggest that one may wish to consider all consequences and options.





PC.
 
deep freeze:



yeah, "trap the towel" sounds pretty weird but it works. Sure you can buy MF bonnets for your PC but consider this .... wouldn't you rather have your choice of quality MF's to use when removing residue? Maybe you'd like to use your favorite Pak-Shak's or a premium MF from AutoGeek, Excel, or Poorboy's?



Not to mention I bought the PC to save wear-n-tear on my arms, so why not use it (or some other OB) to do the grunt work especially when removing some products that are considered "tough" to take off.
 
PC, your posts weren't taken that way at all. After all, I was asking for constructive criticism, wanted to make sure I wasn't doing something totally nuts, lol. As engineers, we both can dig a little deep sometimes and get a little carried away, in our nature. This isn't a bad thing at all, thanks for your thoughts. Return on investment talk was just a bonus, my wally world buffer has earned its keep by now, lol.



NYV6, just using what I have available to me at the moment. Don't want to have to buy new stuff, not made of money, the Z takes all I have anyway.
 
Deep_Freeze said:
So as an engineer, I am naturally lazy, hate to waste things, and always looking to find an easier way to do things, lol.
Click to expand...



i'm an engineer too, but i resent the "naturally lazy" part. i like to think that i am "energy efficient" meaning i conserve my energy at work so i have enough to clean the car when i get home! :D just kidding! we engineers are hard workers even though it doesn't look like it. it's just we're thinking hard. ;)



great idea Deep Freeze. i also got one of the Waxmasters OB polishers (boy, i thought i was hardcore with that thing) before i've learned differently over here. that might be a good thing to try, maybe with those 6" MF bonnets i bought to try out. hmmmm, my Waxmaster was a 6" one, the bonnets are 6", i think that might just work. and i wouldn't have wasted anything!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top