I have a friend that seriously underestimates the power of a PC...help me get my poin

Well, just to clarify I didn't mention wetsanding. I was just commenting on marring removal (per the OPs post). I didn't realize we were talking about removing wetsanding marks with a PC. Do I think it can be done in a small area, like chip removal or RID removal? Yes. Do I think it can be done to an entire car? I believe it is possible, but like Todd I have not seen it done to my satisfaction.



My original comments were just directed towards the OPs question about whether the PC can cut and remove swirls. I definitely agree that it can.
 
Kevin, do you have time to elaborate now? I would like to hear your thoughts on this. I ASSume a surface topo gauge is going to be involved.
 
Jason M said:
Kevin, do you have time to elaborate now? I would like to hear your thoughts on this. I ASSume a surface topo gauge is going to be involved.



Yessir, JasonM...



I'd like to use a gloss meter and a topography meter, so as to eliminate any subjectiveness. Those are two meters that I do not own, so I'll have to access them through my reps. That being said, it would be better if I just explain why I think the R/O actually does level a paint surface as good as or better than a rotary. Then I can get specific as to the pad/liquid/speed/downward pressure combos.



Most of the pros on the forum won't need all that info, but I want it to be there for all to see. After all, I am definitely in the minority on the subject. Why, just a little while ago, I would NEVER have made such a statement... I AM a rotary guy at heart!!!!



Right now, I am putting the finishing touches on a one-page paper I wrote describing how to get the best results when applying M105 and M86, as applied with a random-orbital and a foam pad. The thing is, it ended up being about 10 pages long by the time I wrapped it up! Well, okay- It became 23 pages long. But, I took a lot of the stuff out, so I'll be posting that separately (or who knows- maybe I'll just throw it on the end of the paper).



Anyway, in the process of writing the 'how to and why' paper, it started to go astray by throwing in comparisons of the R/O and the rotary. So, I figured I'd better not include that stuff because it would only make the application stuff confusing. Plus, not everyone wants to know what I think is the proper way to apply those specific liquids. Besides, M105 has been reformulated for use with an R/O now so a lot of the information will be outdated the second the new stuff hits the market.



I've started outlining my theory as to why it is possible that an R/O can outperform a rotary, and I know I'm gonna catch a lot of grief if I don't explain things in a manner that makes my reasonings obvious. So, sorry I'm not ready to lay it out there... Even though I made such an outrageous statement, I promise to back it up soon. :faint:
 
I somehow missed the posts about removing sanding scratches via PC..late contribution of my $0.02 follows:



I've removed 2K and finer scratches via PC on numerous occasions (including on my '04 GMC). I've inspected the results with magnification and I'm utterly satisfied that I did remove them. Yeah, it's a *lot* quicker by rotary (and Flex 3401), but it's possible by PC with the right approach (and lots of time). The 3.5" PFW wool pads are great for this, better than orange/yellow foam IME.



Heh heh, if I can cut *through* clear with a PC :o you can certainly remove enough clear to take out 2k scratches. 2K scratches are a lot less serious than the average RIDS, at least if you use the right sanding material. That last bit might be a wildcard...I've used 2K 3M paper that left really nasty tracers (no such problems with Nikken/Meg's or Mirka).



And anything that can be one on a small area (that's all I've tried) can be done on a larger area with the requisite time and care. Not that I'd *ever* want to try doing a whole car by PC after wetsanding it, but that's just me.



Not like people didn't get great results for centuries even *by hand*. Some old-school examples of hand-rubbed lacquer are simply astonishing (even under high magnification), you'd never imagine that the first step was aggressive sanding.
 
rydawg said:
Kevin, what compounds and pads are you using to level paint on the PC?



Jason M said:
Kevin, do you have time to elaborate now? I would like to hear your thoughts on this.





Using the Surbuf Pad with a random orbital for defect removal



No pictures of the procedure here.

I find it hard to capture the nuances of a surface properly leveled with a rotary compared to a surface leveled with this method.

Hopefully, one of the forum members will try this method and post some high quality shots of the process.





There are a few combinations that work well when using the random-orbital polisher to level paint. This particular combination uses products that are readily available. I am not suggesting that paint-polishing beginners attempt to wet sand their paint jobs and then polish away the scratches using this system! In fact, only those proficient with the use of a rotary buffer should attempt to use this method. This ensures that any remaining defects can easily be removed, should the listed procedure not work well with the vehicle’s paint type.





Here is the list of products I use for this particular system:





Meguiar's G110 Random Orbital Polisher

Meguiar's M105 Ultra-Cut Compound

Meguiar's Last Touch Detail Spray

Surbuf R Series Microfingers 6.5"� pad

Meguiar's W9006 Soft Buff Finishing Pad






This is not a one-step system, so plan on changing pads and possibly buffing liquid to remove any remaining defects. Since my best results have been achieved when using M105 as the buffing liquid, I recommend that you also use M105. This way, if some guidance or opinions are desired, it will be much easier to troubleshoot unsatisfactory or inconsistent results. There are a lot of highly skilled paint polishers that are members of this forum (and have already used M105), so their experience can also benefit us, should attempts to use this system deliver less than satisfactory results.





The Surbuf R Series Pad, and how I think it works most effectively





RSeries_Splash.jpg






A quick read of the comments posted on this forum about the Surbuf pad reveals varied opinions pertaining to overall pad performance. This is understandable, because the type of paint being polished, the choice of buffing liquid, the polishing procedure, and the pressure placed upon the pad can really affect defect removal and polishing results. While this is true with all other pads, the difference in performance when using the Surbuf pad can be dramatic.





One of the biggest complaints about the pad pertained to the fact that the microfingers would fall off the pad and lie upon the paint surface. Normally, this would be a huge problem; in the case of foam pads, a piece of contamination this size placed between the pad and paint surface would likely create some rather deep scratches. Since stray microfingers will not cause a problem with this particular paint leveling procedure, it is not critical to remove loose fibers from the paint surface during the leveling process.





The instruction sheet included with the pad recommends vacuuming the Surbuf pad prior to use. Vacuuming, a quick brush of the pad, or a burst of compressed air aimed at the microfingers will be sufficient for pad preparation.





The Surbuf's microfingers are attached to a foam pad, set in a vertical position. The literature claims that the microfingers are non-tufted. This means that the tiny fibers are not plugged into the pads in groups, nor are they long strands of material that have been woven through a backing. This is probably done to keep the fibers completely vertical to the foam portion of the pad, so that the fingers can effectively reach peaks and valleys when used for woodworking tasks.



For more information about the pad design, check out their website at Welcome to Surbuf.com.





Individually, the microfingers are thin, pliable, and bend rather easily. However, unlike wool or cotton, the microfingers do not collapse, compress, or squish into a pile. Instead, the fingers maintain their strand-shaped structure. Since they are made of a durable material, the microfingers do not break into smaller pieces as they are used.



When polishing paint with any type of pad, the face of the pad should be designed to efficiently use its surface area. In other words, if a foam pad has lines, squares, circles, or dimples cut out of (or pressed into) the pad face, less actual pad material contacts the paint surface. Certainly then, we hope these areas (devoid of foam) were designed to increase buffing performance or comfort of use, as they unfortunately decrease the amount of surface area in contact with the paint.





Another design parameter that determines how much surface area actually contacts the paint when using foam pads is the amount of pores per inch it features (commonly referred to as ppi). More pores, larger pores, thinner walls between the pores, or how stiff the walls are all affect how much foam contacts the paint during the buffing process.





In the case of the Surbuf pad, not a lot of surface area touches the paint when the pad is set upon it. As the downward pressure applied to the pad is increased, the microfingers start to bend, and the surface area of a finger contacting the paint increases. Ideally, we want as much of each individual microfinger to contact the paint as possible. Therefore, the fingers must be somewhat horizontal to the paint surface. If too much pressure is placed upon the pad, the microfingers bend so much that the tips of the fingers start to curl upwards towards the foam portion of the pad (like a fish hook, or the capital letter J). This happens because the fingers start to lie upon each other, tightly compressed and randomly bent. If even more pressure is added in an attempt to create a flatter pad surface, the fingers will intertwine with each other, and create an uneven surface that could easily scratch or scour the paint (think of the structure of a Scotch-Brite pad, and you will better understand the net effect of too much pressure). In addition, the fingers become packed with buffing liquid, and start sticking to the foam part of the pad. To ensure satisfactory defect removal, the buffing liquid should remain on the paint surface, and lightly coat the microfingers with its abrasive material.





To verify this theory, I placed a Surbuf pad on a table with the fingers facing up. Then, a 12" x 12"� piece of glass was set upon the fingers. As I pressed against the glass, I could see how the microfingers reacted to varied pressures. My suspicions were confirmed: for best results, I wanted the fingers to bend, but not so much that they curled or compressed.





On to the leveling procedure!





Professional users of the random orbital polisher seem to be pairing their machines with smaller pads more frequently. For general paint polishing, I also prefer pads that are 5"� to 6.5"� in diameter, and thinner in overall height rather than thicker. While there are some benefits to using larger and thicker pads, most of the time I use smaller pads for defect removal (as small as 3" in diameter).





With this in mind, I attached my 5" Surbuf pad to a Meguiar's W67DA backing plate (approximately 4.75" diameter). As I used this pad and backing plate combination, best leveling results were realized when the machine was adjusted to the highest speed setting (6,700 OPM). The more I used the pad, the more I found myself lifting up on the machine to minimize downward pressure.





To eliminate this necessity, I switched to a 6.5"� diameter pad and a bigger backing plate. The increased surface of the pad would better distribute the downward applied pressure created by the weight of the machine. Of course, the amount of microfingers working to level the paint was substantially increased (approximately 68%). This combination worked great; the fingers bent enough to really level the paint quickly, but left a bit of wiggle room so that if needed, I could tilt the machine now and then to better focus the downward applied pressure. A huge benefit of the Surbuf's unique design is airflow. Since the design of the pad allows plenty of fresh air to circulate between the fingers and across the paint surface, things stay pretty darned cool, even during heavy cutting.





To help keep the M105 buffing liquid where the work needed to be done, I kept the paint surface wet. A trigger bottle filled with a 50/50 mixture of Meguiar's Last Touch Detail Spray and water was used to occasionally mist the paint surface. This bit of added moisture would wet the microfingers as they rubbed across the paint, loosening a majority of the abrasive from the fibers. The inertia created by the machine would help to return the abrasive to the paint surface. While the abrasive was devoid of the buffing liquid's built-in lubrication due to evaporation caused by friction, the addition of Last Touch helped to keep the paint slippery.





The addition of Last Touch may decrease cutting ability a little, but it may actually increase leveling. Since less friction is created because lubrication is increased, the random rotation of the backing plate increases. In my experience, this means that the rotational speed can jump as much as 100% at the point where the buffing liquid's lubrication evaporates. I have seen my G110 rotate the pad very quickly; my best guess puts pad rotation at eight to ten turns per second, or 480-600 rpm. Anyone that has used the Flex 3401VRG knows the effect this kind of speed has on defect removal.





So... if our pad rotational speed increases but there is a notable drop in friction, how can the pad actually level paint to a more accurate degree? My best guess is this: as an individual fiber comes into contact with a high point on the paint surface (such as the top point of a sanding scratch), it will have less time to adjust positioning once it hits the point. This means that the fiber will remain in the same position longer, so it will cut through the edge of the first point, and only change direction via deflection a small amount before hitting the next point, and on and on.





Whether this is true or not does not really matter. What does matter is how well this combination works! Surbuf pads are relatively inexpensive, and last a reasonably long time. Since the fingers are applying a rather durable and hard abrasive material, I realize that the fingers will wear out quickly compared to using them with a non-abrasive polishing liquid (or a liquid that does not contain such hard abrasive particles). But hey- if this combination can create a very level surface using a random orbital, it is a small price to pay.





Once the paint has been leveled and all random defects have been eliminated, a final polishing will more than likely be required. Although the Surbuf pad levels paint quite well, it does seem to leave behind a small amount of curlicue scratches. While these marks are usually very fine, they are obvious. To remove them, simply change the pad to a traditional style foam finishing pad, and use a final polish as you normally would. If you are a skilled user of the random orbital polisher, very little distortion of the ultra-leveled surface should occur (if any).





I hope I have explained this process in an easy to understand manner. Good luck, and be patient when traveling through the learning curves!





Close-up pictures of the Surbuf Pad





I took some pics with a little 150x magnification USB camera. I wanted to show what the Surbuf microfingers look like when they are flattened a bit. For reference, I also took a shot of a Meguiar's W8006 SoftBuff Polishing Pad, a Meguiar's M9910 Ultimate Wipe, and a Mirka Abralon disc.





Funny thing is, my $12 Radio Shack Illuminated Microscope works way better! I can't figure out how to capture the shot with it, though. With it, I can tell if a sanding disc is a coarse or fine grit, and even if it is worn out.





In the pictures, the pointer is the lead tip of a Pentel .5mm pencil:





PentelP205.jpg






Shot of the Meguiar's W8006 SoftBuff Polishing Pad:





W80065mmlead.jpg






Shot of the Surbuf R Series Pad:





Surbuf5mmlead.jpg






Shot of a Meguiar's M9910 Ultimate Wipe (used and washed several times):





UltWipe5mmlead.jpg






Mirka Abralon 4000 grit Sanding Disc:





Abralon40005mmlead.jpg






It is interesting to see the structure of the foam pad, and easy to see why we potentially lose so much cut! Not a lot of surface area to force the particles into the paint as they're being moved about. This is why pressure changes to the machine make such a difference in cut with any foam pad.









Chris Dasher aka PorscheGuy997's post:





I have been messing around with DA wetsanding and using the Surbuf on the DA for a few weeks now. In the past, I have never tried removing wetsanding marks with the DA. The rotary does such a good job that I never tried it. But, I did take the suggestions from Kevin and gave the Surbuf pads a try.





The Surbuf pads are very different from the foam pads we normally use.





DSC_07521.JPG






DSC_0785.JPG






Because these pads are so different, they can remove defects that are simply unheard of.





Here's an example:





I DA sanded this scrap hood using a Mirka Abranet Soft 1500 disk.

DSC_05431.JPG






DSC_05631.JPG






Using a 5.5" Surbuf pad and the original formula M105 on the DA, I was able to remove the 1500 grit marks.

Although there is some deep etching, you can clearly see that the marks have been removed.





DSC_0574A.JPG






DSC_0578.JPG






The finish left by the Surbuf pad and M105 is a little hazed, but it can easily corrected with PO106FA or M205 on a polishing pad. So yes, a DA (with the right combination) can remove serious defects.





Notes about the Surbuf pad:

  • The amount of product is absolutely critical.

    If you apply too much product, it will not remove many defects.

    I found that it was best to prime the pad with product and then polish the area.

    If you find that there is too much product on the surface, wipe it off the area and then continue polishing without adding more product.

  • The amount of pressure used can also very important.

  • Follow Kevin's guidelines and you should be fine.

  • Surbuf offers many different sizes of pads.

    The 5.5" pads were perfect for my use, but you can choose whatever size you like.









The latest testing has revealed that a 7" pad is a very good choice. It delivers high rotation speed, serious defect removal, and user comfort. The large size distributes added downward pressure nicely (should the user have a desire to bear down on a particularly stubborn defect).





Use caution!

On fresh paint (or paint containing flex agent), there is enough applied force with this method that the paint could 'twist'. Paint twisting occurs when the heat and friction created by the machine, pad, buffing liquid, and applied pressure combine to alter the bond between the paint, primer, or substrate it is attached to.





What does this mean?

The result of paint twist resembles the sidewall of a drag slick leaving the line. I do not have a picture to show paint twist, because it is rather rare. Maybe the next time I work on a freshly painted test panel I can try to make a twist mark. Normally, it takes a pretty aggressive combination to twist paint. A rotary buffer and a wool pad (or a dense foam pad) teamed with a decent amount of pressure could do it. Buffing liquids containing strong solvents increase the risk of it, too. About ten years ago I twisted a small area of paint on a bumper cladding, but I was able to sand and polish the area, repairing the damage.





In an extreme case of paint twist... the paint can actually be torn off the panel! It is rare, but I have seen it happen. A few years ago I had spent about 50 hours sanding and polishing a paint job. Someone else decided to 'touch-up' buff an small area and within a few seconds managed to twist a quarter-size piece of paint right off.





So, as with most things, proceeding with caution and common sense is an asset.









End.
 
I took Kevin's suggestion and started using the Surbuf pads (5.5").



These things are truly amazing! When combined with M205 and the DA, you can get some serious correction. I will give details later, but it involves removing wet sanding marks.
 
Thanks for the post Kevin. I honestly enjoy working with my DA more than my rotary but end up using the rotary almost every time I polish for defect removal. I'll have to give these pads and process a try. Have you tried this with the new 105 yet? I'm just curious if you still need the Last Touch spritz.
 
Jason M said:
Thanks for the post Kevin. I honestly enjoy working with my DA more than my rotary but end up using the rotary almost every time I polish for defect removal. I'll have to give these pads and process a try. Have you tried this with the new 105 yet? I'm just curious if you still need the Last Touch spritz.



No, I haven't tried it with the new formula of M105. But I've used it with several different buffing liquids in the Meguiar's line, including M86 So1o Cut & Polish Cream, M85 Diamond Cut 2.0 and M83 Dual Action Cleaner Polish with pretty good results. But with the abrasive in M105 the pad really levels well.



The addition of Last Touch is not just to extend the buffing cycle...

It also keeps the fibers from packing with too much of the buffing liquid, and keeps a little lube between the fibers, too.



Since it is actually making things a bit slipperier, the random rotation of the pad can sometimes pick up a few revolutions per second.
 
bigdawgfoxx said:
What is the difference between a PC (porter cable) and a Rotary? Isnt a PC a rotary...



A lot of guys refer to the random-orbital polisher as a PC because the Porter Cable Random Orbital Polisher (part numbers 7424, 7335, and 7336). These were among the first machines to be used as a better alternative to the orbital polisher, and a safe alternative to the rotary polisher. They are still among the best available today.



Here are two very good articles about these types of machines.

These are must reads for you (if you wish to learn more about machine polishing):



-DA Polishing Guide by Dave KG

Machine Polishing by Dual Action Polisher - Full Guide - Detailing World



-Rotary Polishing Guide by Dave KG:

Machine Polishing by Rotary Polisher - Full Guide - Detailing World



You can also find lots of great articles here on autopia:

http://www.autopia.org/forum/car-detailing/108836-helpful-threads-newbies.html



and over at meguiarsonline:

How-To Articles - Car Care Forums: Meguiar's Online
 
slammin86 said:
I have a friend who started detailing cars a few months back. He always argues with me about the PC that I use and get great results with. Today he went over the edge with this statement.



"You can't cut scratches or remove swirls with a PC. You can hide them but not remove them."



I told him I was going to post this here and am going to direct him to this link.



Everyone chime in here.



The answer is simple: "Yes you can."



Due to his statement, it would imply he has a lack of skill and/or experience with the PC.



It's definitely not an efficient method of paint correction but it is possible to a certain extent.
 
I think the biggest issue that everybody on this thread is missing is the fact that the OP's friend believes that the PC hides/covers up swirls. I take that to mean that no matter what you can prove through 50/50 photo shots, or even in person, the OP's friend will remain a non believer because he will continue to mistakenly believe that the marring is being covered up, not removed.
 
I kind of agree with a lot of the posters here.



A PC can be used to remove defects, but it takes a lot more work.
 
Marring is removed through abrasion. Abrasion is abrasion no matter what machine (or hand ;) ) moves the abrasive media. People polished stuff just fine for a long, long time before there were electrical polishers of *any* type.
 
Accumulator said:
Marring is removed through abrasion. Abrasion is abrasion no matter what machine (or hand ;) ) moves the abrasive media. People polished stuff just fine for a long, long time before there were electrical polishers of *any* type.



That statement nutshells it all for me... Well said. :xyxthumbs





If I am not mistaken, first came the kite and key, then the light bulb (followed by the polishing machine!), and finally the DeLorean powered by 1.21 gigawatts... :spit:



YouTube - Giga-Giga-Watt-Watt
 
I have certainly removed swirls and scratches with a PC and it did not just "hide them". I used 4" orange pads with Menzerna IP and that is more then enough for most swirl/scratch/water spot defects.



There is even a tutorial or description of a DA or PC on this site or another detailing site that falsely says pretty much the same thing as your friend that a DA or PC7424 does not have the power to polish out and correct swirls/scratches on a finish and only hides them with fillers from the polish and then says only a rotary can permanantly correct defects or only a FLEX can perm correct which is not correct. A PC with 6.5 inch white pads and a mild polish most likely won't make much of a dent on many swirls scratches but with 4 inch orange pads and a polish like IP it is certainly going to remove most swirls and scratches as long as they are not too deep. I have also removed 1500-2000 grit sanding marks with a PC and a compound/IP as well as buffer trails and stubborn water spots. It will take a DA or PC longer to polish then a Rotary and there are some things a rotary can correct that a PC cannot or would have alot of trouble correcting but to say a PC cannot polish out and remove swirls and scratches and only hides them is completely wrong and I have first hand experience as proof. A PC may not get all the defects out of some cars but a rotary most likely would not get many of those deeper scratches out either without wetsanding or would remove to much clear coat to get them out.
 
Back
Top