#80 & 16 or #80, VM, & #16?

twopu

New member
Do you think there would be a noticable by adding a glaze (VM) between a polish (#80) and wax (#16)? I'm try to develop packages for customers and wonder if I should add VM and charge an extra $25 bucks. I won't add it if it's not worth the extra money to my customers.
 
twopu said:
Do you think there would be a noticable by adding a glaze (VM) between a polish (#80) and wax (#16)? I'm try to develop packages for customers and wonder if I should add VM and charge an extra $25 bucks. I won't add it if it's not worth the extra money to my customers.



I wouldn't do it, especially when detailing customers' cars for profit.



#80 leaves a "glaze effect" behind. When I did the black rent-a-suburban I went straight from #80 to #16 and it looked fine. I have VM and if I thought it would've improved anything I would've used it. But I figured it might've disturbed the #80's glaze effect and IMO VM doesn't hide imperfections all that well (while the #80 does).



If I wouldn't do it on a vehicle I was doing for myself I sure wouldn't do it on a vehicle I was doing for profit.
 
If you use FP over VM, then you'll strip the VM and its effect.



I use VM in nearly ALL the details I do and wouldn't have it any other way! It's probably one of my FAVORITE products. I love the wet, deep gloss it leaves behind.



However, $25 more for just that? I wouldn't charge it. If you have a "Deluxe Detail" package or somethig like that which includes multiples steps, then charge accordingly and use the VM if you like it.
 
VM will add a bit more pop but I think RMG compliments #80 more.



The Final Polish that Megan is talking about is an excellent sealant with light cleaners and abrasives (probably close to #9 or PBs SSR1) and has a clear wet look.
 
Scottwax said:
VM will add a bit more pop but I think RMG compliments #80 more...



RMG is certainly getting a lot of good press around here. Might have to give it a whirl one of these days.
 
Back
Top