are these TWO changing the face of detailing??

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/J2sLCoHsEoo"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/J2sLCoHsEoo" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>





Here's the video, found on detailersdomain, suggests that is how to use this product via pc. Anyone who feels this is proper breakdown procedure via pc needs a wake up call. You all need to realize this is the internet and not everything you see is the real deal, it's sad seeing a video like this on a site which has received as much attention as domain, I personally am definitely no longer a fan, they are obviously more interested in making money than bettering the industry.
 
Ask yourselves a few questions while watching...



Is he using too much product?



Does he sound like he knows what he's talking about? ( He kind of does actually that's a problem)



Is his technique and pc movement accurate with what it takes to correct paint via pc?



Did he break that product down completely, or even close???
 
With tons of pm's sent to me on this matter with pros having problems, I had done some serious testing. This was crucial testing.



106 is not agressive, but the "ultra fine" abrasives in it are sharp, fine, and strong. If not broken down proper, you will not get a great finish in weeks to come when the product outgases it's lubricants and lsp on it.



I test all my finishes for weeks in the hot sun with no lsp's on them and lots of IPA wipedowns. My tests concluded that if product not properly broken down will result in poor finish. The properly broken down sections lasted great. Soft paints did not last that long at all even when broken down proper. Rock hard paints lasted the best.



Finish pads made the biggest difference versus polish pads. Finish pads did not show any abrasions and polish pads showed abrasions on hard paint.



Most people here do not know what goes on after the polishing cause we are all crazy about topping and it locks everything in. Most LSP's are some type of silicone based or oil based and have slight hiding ability which WILL hide the ever so light trails.



So if you do not work the abrasives correctly and/or use the right pad you will not get the longest lasting perfect finish.
 
Ryan, I completely agree with your findings, I have not been as extensive as you, but I understand why you took it to such extreme measures.



You for one at least understand why I posted that video. It's been a while since I corrected paint via pc, but after seeing that video it made me wish I never had to. Simple truth, that was a bad representation of the break down stage. Sure overlapping passes were present, but that was a pc, and the movement was like a rotary or faster, this guy obviously doesn't know how a polish operates, and it sucks for those who watch it on that site thinking that's how it's done.



Thank you once again for you input on a matter I feel many of us have "tried" to cover many times, hopefully this thread will help us help others.
 
Invigor said:
The 3000 line was developed with bodyshops in mind, not weekend warrior hobby guys. Bodyshops are around to make money as fast a possible. The 3000 system, if you know how to use it, is a VERY fast system from sandpaper to high-gloss swirl free repair. It's unacceptable in a bodyshop to have a polish that requires a long time to work out swirl free.



I've also noticed a lot of people on this site expect the world from Ultrafina and a lot of them don't even know how to use it, or what it's intended for.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on everything.



3M did develop this system for bodyshops, but none of them will put in the polishing time and probably go back to a compound and glaze. My bodyshop guy goes around talking to them and they all want quick easy fixes and do not get paid extra for proper polishing. So it is a tough battle.



But 3M has developed a system that higher end detailers can use and with proper techniques, you can obtain a show stopping 100% swirl free finish that will last and last and last.



At first when I used UF the correct way I was more than impressed. The gloss is in the power of your hands. If one does not get perfect results from UF, then either the compounding/polishing stage were not complete or UF is not worked correctly. UF is used for removing ultra buffer trails, mild holograms, etc., without installing new ones. The extreme gloss will follow. The better the finish before UF, the better UF will work at making incredible flawless gloss.
 
VaSuperShine said:
Here's the video, found on detailersdomain, suggests that is how to use this product via pc. Anyone who feels this is proper breakdown procedure via pc needs a wake up call. You all need to realize this is the internet and not everything you see is the real deal, it's sad seeing a video like this on a site which has received as much attention as domain, I personally am definitely no longer a fan, they are obviously more interested in making money than bettering the industry.
Click to expand...



First, this is my video and yes the polish did break down completely. I set the metering/exposure on the camera to highlight the details of the polish working ...if I didn't you'd see nothing but black and two lights. And yes it only took about 2-3 mins for the polish to break down....I was working on about an 18"x18"' area, on a warm/dry afternoon so it didn't take too long to break down polish in that small of an area.



As far as speed of movement, contrary to what you believe, I've had no problem removing certain types of marring at that speed. If they are deeper I do slow the passes down...each vehicle and paint is different so you have to find the speed, pressure and movement that works best for the given situation.
 
Ok, I guess in San Fransisco you can break a polish down in less than two minutes via pc, I guess a rotary is no time saver to the pc, sorry to offend you, hopefully you will wipe that panel down and see what I mean.



With a pc, for the most part, it takes 3-5 minutes to properly break a polish down, sip just so happens to be one of those forgiving polishes that cover up defects when not used properly.



Also, you need around 15-20 lbs of pressure to properly remove defects with a pc, I did not see that in this video, I don't blame you for being defensive, but I stand by what was said, and hope others take note.
 
VaSuperShine said:
Ok, I guess in San Fransisco you can break a polish down in less than two minutes via pc, I guess a rotary is no time saver to the pc, sorry to offend you, hopefully you will wipe that panel down and see what I mean.



With a pc, for the most part, it takes 3-5 minutes to properly break a polish down, sip just so happens to be one of those forgiving polishes that cover up defects when not used properly.



Also, you need around 15-20 lbs of pressure to properly remove defects with a pc, I did not see that in this video, I don't blame you for being defensive, but I stand by what was said, and hope others take note.
Click to expand...



Trust me, you won't and didn't offend me.



I'm not dealing with deep imperfection here...these were normal washing and drying induced marring...not very deep. As far as how long it take a polish to break down, I disagree, there are a lot of variable that will determine the amount of time it takes to break down the polish.



Polishing is not an exact science...but yes, there is a set guide line when polishing but nothing is set in stone. I'm sorry that you think that your way is the only way. There are too many variables when polishing that everyone has to find their own method that works best for them. I have many different video showing different techniques, pressure, speed, etc. they are there to help the first time user find the one that works best for them and their situation. They are there to help people that are learning to detail to help take the guess work out of detailing...and I'm sorry they are not exactly the way you polish.
 
VaSuperShine said:
106 cuts like water pretty much, you were most likely given a false impression of the product due to improperly using it.
Click to expand...



D&D Auto Detail said:
Yep, you can take SIP or 106 just spread it at 700rpm and some imperfections will appear to be gone.
Click to expand...

106 is meant to cut like water according to VASuperShine ;)



106FF can remove alot of imperfections. 106FF definitely doesn't cut like water it can remove light swirls with ease. Again pad choice is an important factor here. But with any given pad 106FF has more corrective ability than many other finishing polishs.



Holograms are best removed by using the finest pad and polish. 106FF is fine but definitely not the finest on the market.



VaSuperShine said:
You for one at least understand why I posted that video.
Click to expand...

I cant understand why you posted that video. Both M105 and Ultrafina are designed for rotary use, yet you put up a pointless video of a PC buffer.



Ultrafina uses a fine soft pad and removes holograms. Use a fine soft pad and most other finishing polishs will remove holograms. If someone here has holograms on soft black paint they dont have to automatically go out and buy ultrafina SE and an ultrafina pad as if its their only option. They can remove holograms with meguiars and menzerna polish's and lake country pads just as easily.



3M has not reinvented the wheel. 3M ultrafina is not the only product that can remove holograms on soft paint.



A few people here have recently posted their sucess removing holograms with ultrafina and it now has become quite popular.



That clearly fits the definition of "flavour of the month"



I am only posting because the original poster made it out like 105 and ultrafina have "god like" properties and is the first true two step system. Dont get me wrong thought the products mentioned are exceptional.
 
gmblack3a said:
I really hate ultrafina too. :cry: :rofl
Click to expand...

Sorry for giving you bad product recomendations:bestwish :rofl



My studies and hands-on research are meaningless:secret



May I polish Pintos forever for the bad I have done:sadpace:
 
TTWAGN said:
106 is meant to cut like water according to VASuperShine ;)



106FF can remove alot of imperfections. 106FF definitely doesn't cut like water it can remove light swirls with ease. Again pad choice is an important factor here. But with any given pad 106FF has more corrective ability than many other finishing polishs.



Holograms are best removed by using the finest pad and polish. 106FF is fine but definitely not the finest on the market.





I cant understand why you posted that video. Both M105 and Ultrafina are designed for rotary use, yet you put up a pointless video of a PC buffer.



Ultrafina uses a fine soft pad and removes holograms. Use a fine soft pad and most other finishing polishs will remove holograms. If someone here has holograms on soft black paint they dont have to automatically go out and buy ultrafina SE and an ultrafina pad as if its their only option. They can remove holograms with meguiars and menzerna polish's and lake country pads just as easily.



3M has not reinvented the wheel. 3M ultrafina is not the only product that can remove holograms on soft paint.



A few people here have recently posted their sucess removing holograms with ultrafina and it now has become quite popular.



That clearly fits the definition of "flavour of the month"



I am only posting because the original poster made it out like 105 and ultrafina have "god like" properties and is the first true two step system. Dont get me wrong thought the products mentioned are exceptional.
Click to expand...





This thread isn't soley devoted to two products, it covers their counterparts as well. The number one combination used on this forum and others is sip 106. That's why the video was relevant, and that's why I brought it up. I hope you understand now. The fact that the previous two heavy hitters had the ability to represent a perfect finish without even being properly broken down, I hope you see the relevance.
 
rydawg said:
Sorry for giving you bad product recomendations:bestwish :rofl



My studies and hands-on research are meaningless:secret



May I polish Pintos forever for the bad I have done:sadpace:
Click to expand...



What will I do? :sadpace: :rofl



If I can't trust Ryan, I might as well sit on the sidelines and do this :tumblewee
 
Wow, what a crazy thread....



Is M105/UF-SE the ultimate two step?



Absolutely not, because there are so many variables that come into play. M105 is an aggressive compound, so you wouldn't want use it on paint that doesn't need it. Also, it does have gumming issues if not used properly. However it is the heaviest cutting, nicest finishing compound I have ever used, and nothing to date works faster. To the poster who suggested M86, I see your point, but the main advantage of M105 is the fact you can cut a seciton in 15 seconds or less.



Adding OP or using M86 negeats that advantage IMO, which takes away from the time saving aspect. I disagree with M105 being the flavor of the month however. It is a huge time saver when cutting is needed, and used properly. It also leaves an very nice finish for on many paints (if not worked to long) that MAY not require a third step in the goal for perfection.



SIP/106ff have extermely long working times, and require about 45 seconds (I am being very general in this statement) with a rotary polisher, to fully break down the sharp abbrasives and "flash" the product off. For best results several passes should be made at low rpm after flash to ensure that no minor abrasions could be present. 106ff espically has a lubricant carrier that is very hard to completely remove, and like Ryan (rydawg) I test all my products in the most extreme conditions.



Leaving paint in the sun unprotected, wipe downs with numerous products (prep-sol, APC, degreaser, dawn washes, 50/50 alochol wipes) etc... Infact Ryan and I discuss often, as well both feel with out this knowledge, we have no bussiness working on vehicle's for money. It is our job to ensure true perfection. As Brian stated, that PC video is completely wrong. The difficult to remove carrier in Menzerna 106ff will mask the pad abrasions that common with oscilatting motions of the PC and improper working of the polish. It really needs to be worked to "flash" then burinished, and this takes much longer by porter cable.



As far as UF being the best finishing polish? I suppose its a matter of debate. Saying 3M UF-SE is worse because of its background is no differant, IMO, than saying Menzerna is bad because it was developed for certain paints with high cermaic content (referring to SIP/106ff). In my experience, one can never have too many polishes, and everybody will have a favorite.



I prefer 106ff on harder paint systems (Corvette, M-B, Audi, etc) because the sharp abrasives finish the paint extremely well.



I prefer UF-SE on softer paints as it is less likely IMO to instill hologramming or "mask" pad abrasion. UF leaves a nice gloss and a perfect finish when used according to 3M's directions, and I have never found it to have excessive cut.



I also have used M09, M80, OP, SIP, FPII, FP, and many other polishes for finishing. Of those, I would rate UF-SE as good as any, but with the extreme ease of use and lack of defect hiding (in Ryan and I's torture tests) it tends to be the first finishing polish out of my bag.



Hopefully this discussion will stay informative and not turn into a war.
 
Great post Todd!



I know our tests were very extensive, but without these crucial tests we would not know exactly what went on between our sealants and waxes. I know we were both amazed at the outcome of the tests, but it has made us who we are. It was worth the hundreds of hours well spent analyzing carrier fluids and pad abrasions to it's fullest degree. We now know how to extend the life of our absolute perfect finishes before any waxes or sealants.



I am sure that we were the only two people to ever do a test on polishes like this. I know for sure we are the only ones that know what we are talking about from experience of our tests.



Some people say it's all in the end result.... I say it's all in the entire process which gives you the best end result
 
First I'm skeptical that a polishing pad on a PC can break down SIP. Aluminum Oxide has a rating of 9 on the Mohr scale with a diamond coming in at 10. I'm not sure that a rotary totally breaks down these abrasives. A PC may dull the sharp edge and then allow the particle to float over the surface in oil but total breakdown-I doubt it.
 
rydawg said:
Great post Todd!



I know our tests were very extensive, but without these crucial tests we would not know exactly what went on between our sealants and waxes. I know we were both amazed at the outcome of the tests, but it has made us who we are. It was worth the hundreds of hours well spent analyzing carrier fluids and pad abrasions to it's fullest degree. We now know how to extend the life of our absolute perfect finishes before any waxes or sealants.



I am sure that we were the only two people to ever do a test on polishes like this. I know for sure we are the only ones that know what we are talking about from experience of our tests.



Some people say it's all in the end result.... I say it's all in the entire process which gives you the best end result
Click to expand...



Its unfortunate that I know on my side I will never share the results of these tests because of the flak I recieved when I mentioned 106ff can fill. Unfortunately, while many people come on here to learn as much as possible, there are still those who find this site as a product loyalty debate. I have always tried to be open and share information, as well as learn everything I can. These tests have solidified in my mind that many people on here really don't know what they are doing because they have not exhausted themselves with the research.



Example, the gentleman whose video was posted of improperly using SIP/106ff. I would be grateful of the knowledge that was shared, and use it to improve my technique. Unfortunately, that type of polishing with SIP/106ff is going to greatly increase the chance that the defects where not completely removed, but instead temporarly "masked" by the carrier of 106. Now, on a portercable this isn't as necessary because there is no chance for buffer trails, so the carrier might be masking micro-pad abbrasions and microscopic marring from the unbroken down polish. However this marring (as you know) is so minor that it might not be precievable unless under the proper lighting, at the right angle, etc... With the "filling" of the carrier, it probably will not be picked up for months, at which point it is considered normal wear...
 
TH0001 said:
Its unfortunate that I know on my side I will never share the results of these tests because of the flak I recieved when I mentioned 106ff can fill. Unfortunately, while many people come on here to learn as much as possible, there are still those who find this site as a product loyalty debate. I have always tried to be open and share information, as well as learn everything I can. These tests have solidified in my mind that many people on here really don't know what they are doing because they have not exhausted themselves with the research.



Example, the gentleman whose video was posted of improperly using SIP/106ff. I would be grateful of the knowledge that was shared, and use it to improve my technique. Unfortunately, that type of polishing with SIP/106ff is going to greatly increase the chance that the defects where not completely removed, but instead temporarly "masked" by the carrier of 106. Now, on a portercable this isn't as necessary because there is no chance for buffer trails, so the carrier might be masking micro-pad abbrasions and microscopic marring from the unbroken down polish. However this marring (as you know) is so minor that it might not be precievable unless under the proper lighting, at the right angle, etc... With the "filling" of the carrier, it probably will not be picked up for months, at which point it is considered normal wear...
Click to expand...



People dont want to spend the extra time and effort to insure a perfect finish, thats why they refuse to believe it or even test it themselves. Thats why you see people claiming to polish out a car in less then 4 hours. To them, this is going the extra mile which isnt necessary. While for some of us, these are our standards and we wont do anything less.



I know how you feel about not wanting to share things you've found out. Its unfortunate so many people are so closed minded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top