3m Perfect It 3000 Ultrafina SE

S

smokinfastlegen

New member
I just picked up the polish and pad for my dewalt (was reluctant because of how much megs i have and the price comparison to Megs.) The guy at my local PBE told me its what my competition uses (gmblack3, surprisingly lives just down the road from me) so I bit the bullet since i had the spare cash from birthday money. OMG, i cant believe what i was missing. I like megs stuff dont get me wrong, but for me the ease of use compared to the megs on my car was like night and day. Whats all of your opinions on this stuff?
 
Scottwax said:
I always finish using Ultrafina when I use my rotary.
Click to expand...



TH0001 said:
good product with a lot of filling potential
Click to expand...



Both of you guys are well respected and I'm sure we all value your opinions.



I'm not trying to stir the pot but Scott, do you find that it fills?



Todd, do you use Ultrafina frequently or find that that it fills too much for your liking?
 
even if it does fill, it will have its place...if someone is not wanting to pay for a perfection detail like it seems Todd only does, then why not fill? 300 bucks for a full detail, or 1200...huge difference in the amount of time to be spent on a detail to get some desired results.
 
zaxjax said:
I'm not trying to stir the pot but Scott, do you find that it fills?
Click to expand...



I do know it absolutely does not fill spider swirls. Whatever is left after compounding does not go away after using UF. Does it fill rotary swirls? I don't see that when used as directed (removing LIGHT rotary swirls) that the swirls come back, even after a long period of time. I have seen where I have used it on deeper swirls (which is not recommended by 3M), very light tracers appear months later. I feel pretty confident that if you use it only to remove minimal holograming you are fine.
 
Scottwax said:
I do know it absolutely does not fill spider swirls. Whatever is left after compounding does not go away after using UF. Does it fill rotary swirls? I don't see that when used as directed (removing LIGHT rotary swirls) that the swirls come back, even after a long period of time. I have seen where I have used it on deeper swirls (which is not recommended by 3M), very light tracers appear months later. I feel pretty confident that if you use it only to remove minimal holograming you are fine.
Click to expand...





Thanks Scott!



I think that the removal of light marring or holograms is what Ultrafina is intended for and should be used as such. I have Ultrafina and only used it sparingly.
 
What I have found is it will fill if you try to jump from a compound with wool pad, to UF with the finishing pad. However, if you compound with wool, use a middle of the road polish like SIP, M83, etc...with a polishing pad, then finish with UF and the finishing pad, you are golden.
 
weekendwarrior said:
What I have found is it will fill if you try to jump from a compound with wool pad, to UF with the finishing pad. However, if you compound with wool, use a middle of the road polish like SIP, M83, etc...with a polishing pad, then finish with UF and the finishing pad, you are golden.
Click to expand...



Agreed, and that is exactly the way UF is intended to be used. :xyxthumbs
 
UF can fill, but I don't see it being any worse in that regard than a couple of my other favorites (106FF comes to mind). Experience has shown that going from a white foam pad to Ultrafina will always result in a perfect finish - but there is no guarantee with an orange or wool pad.
 
smoknfastlegend said:
I just picked up the polish and pad for my dewalt (was reluctant because of how much megs i have and the price comparison to Megs.) The guy at my local PBE told me its what my competition uses (gmblack3, surprisingly lives just down the road from me) so I bit the bullet since i had the spare cash from birthday money. OMG, i cant believe what i was missing. I like megs stuff dont get me wrong, but for me the ease of use compared to the megs on my car was like night and day. Whats all of your opinions on this stuff?
Click to expand...

What Meg's product are you comparing it to? I would think that M82 would be the most comparable product, and I think they are both incredibly easy to use. I just finished a detail today with Ultrafine....great stuff, but I don't find it any easier to use than M82.
 
Ive got: M86, M83, M82, M81, and M80 and compared to ultrafina, the Megs does not have near the working time. I tried M82 (swirl free polish) with Megs Black 7" Solo pad and with a w-9006 pad and its working time for me was considerably less then 3m's.
 
smoknfastlegend said:
Ive got: M86, M83, M82, M81, and M80 and compared to ultrafina, the Megs does not have near the working time. I tried M82 (swirl free polish) with Megs Black 7" Solo pad and with a w-9006 pad and its working time for me was considerably less then 3m's.
Click to expand...



The working time might be less, but the results (What matters?) are very close. Ultrafina has a longer working time due to a ridiculous amount of oil (notice the clear splatter when you go up to 1800 rpms?), which may or may not actually be truly beneficial. Sure isn't a time saver to have to go through a buffing cycle that long...



If you are wanting to essentially burnish the surface with close to the pad only- then yeah, I guess the Ultrafina would play a different role. :think2
 
i guess ultrafina has the work time of optimum huh? thats a no go for me...it would take 3 hours to polish a small sedan if I used OP until it broke down all the way. Which is why I stopped using optimum...great results, but takes too long. FPII seems to work better and faster anyway
 
Lumadar said:
The working time might be less, but the results (What matters?) are very close. Ultrafina has a longer working time due to a ridiculous amount of oil (notice the clear splatter when you go up to 1800 rpms?), which may or may not actually be truly beneficial. Sure isn't a time saver to have to go through a buffing cycle that long...



If you are wanting to essentially burnish the surface with close to the pad only- then yeah, I guess the Ultrafina would play a different role. :think2
Click to expand...



Are you doing a prepsol wipe down after polishing to get a true picture of whether the 82 or Ultrafina finish is better?
 
toyotaguy said:
i guess ultrafina has the work time of optimum huh? thats a no go for me...it would take 3 hours to polish a small sedan if I used OP until it broke down all the way. Which is why I stopped using optimum...great results, but takes too long. FPII seems to work better and faster anyway
Click to expand...



UF has a long work time but you don't have to work it forever if you don't want to.



A couple passes at 1000 rpm to spread, bump the speed to 1800-2000 rpm, put enough pressure on the rotary to lightly compress the pad, do 2-3 slow, 50% overlapping passes, drop the speed to 1000 rpm, lighten the pressure on the rotary and do two more 50% overlapping passes. Couple minutes per section max.



The new version of OP has a shorter working time and more cut. The original version is a great way to get a longer work time out of #105 without reducing cut too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top