Duragloss 101/105 and their pre polishing agent(s)

Big Leegr

Big Leegr

Swirls?!?! NNOOOOOOO!!!!!
I was wondering how using a bonding agent before something like 101 or 105 -cleaner and polish (sealant)- would be able to boost the durability. If the booster is not affected by the polish, then how would the polish clean the paint beneath the booster? And if you can see the paint has been cleaned (oxidized paint, perhaps?) wouldn't that mean the booster has been removed?

Originally, I had thought that maybe if it was still wet, it would mix with the polish, but I see that the instructions say to let it dry.



Just wondering. Thanks. :nixweiss
 
You would want to preclean before putting th ebonding agent on.

Wash then use P21s Paintwork cleansing lotion or Meg's deep crystal cleaner or some other hand cleaner that can be applid by hand then rewash apply bonding agent and 105.
 
The DG PBA is similar to Zaino's Z1, in that they act as a two part epoxy type system. Have you seen those superglues that come in two tubes, and once you mix them they are super strong? The PBA acts on the same principle, just like Z1. When the DG polish is applied over the PBA, the bond can be strengthened. Now, PBA is not necessary in order to get great durability from the 105 polish. I am using 105 without the PBA and it works just fine. To be honest, PBA has been around a long time, just like the 101 and 111 polishes. 101 and 111 are older formulas, that have also been around a long time. With the new 105 formulation, I personally do not think PBA is necessary.



You basically want to do all your swirl removal and polishing BEFORE applying PBA (if you're going to use it), and the DG polish, 101, 111, or the new 105.
 
mongo said:
You would want to preclean before putting th ebonding agent on.

Wash then use P21s Paintwork cleansing lotion or Meg's deep crystal cleaner or some other hand cleaner that can be applid by hand then rewash apply bonding agent and 105.
Click to expand...





the bonding agent is a pre cleaner also....it states on the bottle it will clean the surface of old wax and contaminents.....so no real need for another cleaner....it also acts as a catlyst reacting to the sealant to give a hard finish....but like Mike said..105 works fine without it...but a little better with it....



the PBA residue mixes with the polish to react with the polymers...setting it up...



AL
 
Ok, maybe a re-wording here... What's the point of a "cleaner and polish" product like 101 or 105 if you have to do the pre-cleaning before hand?



(By the way, thanks for the quick replies! :bigups )
 
101 is an AIO like product, with cleaners/abrasives. 105 has virtually no cleaners, by my testing.



If you are going to use PBA, using 101 is kinda pointless, as it will clean it off the surface. 105 or 111 would work much better with PBA, as neither has cleaners or abrasives, and can layer.
 
the cleaner in 105 is very mild...in so it will not do harm to itself when you layer it...it will work on dead sealant or wax or surface grime...but on a new hard shell i think it will not harm it...



also 101 has a strong cleaner...sorta lkke AIO..maybe better..does a good job...



111 and 105 are best suited for the PBA...



AL
 
I know what you mean. It is hard to imagine PBA being much a cleaner if you leave it on. In my case, I just used their Pre-Cleaner2 followed by PBA just as a bonding agent then 105. It came out great.
 
I have used Men. PO85RD to polish and remove old waxes and sealants then apply the PBA. Then the 105. Works for me. Just get that old wax and sealant off before applying new.
 
Maybe I'm not following this, but is the OP getting hung up on the term "polish" that DG and Zaino use for their LSP's, when generally Autopians consider a polish to be an abrasive of some sort? (Please don't start on me with non-abrasive polishes; that's not the point) I know TigerMike has pointed this out before as a source of confusion in the DG line.
 
The DG line of "polishes" is very misleading in my book. I wish they would revamp the labels. 111 even says it can remove tar and other contaminants. I have found it to be a pure sealant. As for 101, and 105, I still dont understand the differences thoroughly.
 
a.k.a. Patrick said:
The DG line of "polishes" is very misleading in my book. I wish they would revamp the labels. 111 even says it can remove tar and other contaminants. I have found it to be a pure sealant. As for 101, and 105, I still dont understand the differences thoroughly.
Click to expand...





105 is a new and improved product. 101 and 111 are older products.
 
The words "polish" and "sealant" have been the most abused and misunderstood words in the retail car care products. To use word "polish" gives action the product, like it will make a drastic change if you use it. DG's use is no different and is aimed also at retail !
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Maybe I'm not following this, but is the OP getting hung up on the term "polish" that DG and Zaino use for their LSP's, when generally Autopians consider a polish to be an abrasive of some sort? (Please don't start on me with non-abrasive polishes; that's not the point) I know TigerMike has pointed this out before as a source of confusion in the DG line.
Click to expand...

Nope. Sorry. My question was more along the lines of why have products which are, at least in my understanding, marketed with the intent of being 1 steppers- or being able to clean/remove contaminants etc. - but mention that it should/could be used with a bonding agent below.

(101 [cleaner and polish/sealant] and 105 [which says "Formulated to clean shine and protect..." and "Cleans and Polishes in 1 step"]) .

I don't have 105, but my bottle of 101 says on it "It removes oxidized paint, fine scratches, tree sap, bugs and tar." So, to me, it sounds likely to be fairly potent, thus, I thought it would likely remove the previously applied product.

The dried residue mixing statement helped. I guess I was thinking more of the SMR, which says "gives an ultra-high gloss and durable protection with one application." And "4. Allow to dry to a haze-remove with a 100% cotton cloth." Seemed to me that alot of their products could be cleaners and protectants, but I didn't see how they wouldn't remove whatever was applied first.

Thanks for all the replies!
 
Is it advisable to apply 105 after using JW Prime as a basecoat since many of you all claim that 105 does not have any cleaning properties.
 
Odyssey02 said:
Is it advisable to apply 105 after using JW Prime as a basecoat since many of you all claim that 105 does not have any cleaning properties.
Click to expand...





I have done it over AIO, therefore it should be good over prime.
 
I am going to bring up an old thread because I just got some DG 101 and AW. I did not really do any prep to the finish, other than a thorough wash, and I used 101 and AW. It looked great! I was very impressed at the finish I got from so little work!



My Next question is this: If I use #105, should I put the #601 on first even though I used #101? (too many damn numbers... lol ) Is it better off as a 3 step process?



Also, will #601 add to the look and durability of FMJ or Meg's #21?



Thanks!
 
With the 105 polish, you can use it either with the 601 or without. I have used 105 solely without the 601 and it still works beautifully. The 601 won't really add a whole lot to the looks, but it may help improve durability slightly. Without the 601, I was getting around 5-6 months on one coat of the 105 polish (car outside 24/7, never garaged)...so, with the 601 as a base, maybe you can go 6+.



FMJ and #21 use different chemicals than what DG uses in its polishes, and therefore the 601 probably won't offer much if used with them. Doesn't mean you can't try though if you'd like, as it certainly won't harm anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top