Is there an Autopia "abrasive scale"?

beanbag said:
Considering the dearth of "hard facts" in the detailing world, I think giving something an abrasive rating based on user experience is a pretty good way to go about it
Click to expand...



Soooo..... you're suggesting a list based on guesses instead of accurate info?



How is that going to help people determine the abrasiveness of a particular product? Remember that the primary beneficiaries of a list like this are newbies who have little or no experience with paint polishes. How do they benefit from a list that's fundamentally inaccurate?
 
As it now stands, I don't see any egregious errors in the list. If anyone else DOES see any, let's hear about them.



Hey, nobody seems to mind Meguiar's abrasiveness scale, and it has some KNOWN errors in it. We make note of the errors, and as a general guide, the scale is useful. Even a company like Meg's makes a few mistakes, so I'll forgive *us* a few errors.



What's wrong with a list based on the first-hand observation, and resultant hypotheses, of knowledgeable Autopians? IMO, our "guesses" aren't gonna be that far off. Why NOT take our "expert knowledge", combined with our experience, and consider that to be sufficient evidence for a rudimentary guide?



Calling it a "guess" doesn't make it inaccurate ;) In the absence of evaluative tools not (practically) available to us, an educated guess, based on actual observation/experience is a good starting point and better than nothing.



I believe our observations could be useful to newbies. I can clearly discern how well a given product abrades my single stage lacquer. And I know plenty of other Autopians are at LEAST as qualified as I am to make such determinations. Am I guessing? Yeah, to some extent. But that doesn't make my observations inaccurate or my opinions worthless. If someone comes up with a different result/opinion, we can discuss it. We're not carving this list in stone ;)
 
Let's try another tack:



Instead of building a polish database on some arbitrary comparitive scale, why not develop a proven test methodolgy and criteria so that we have a logical, reasonable fact-based foundation to build a list on? IOW, instead of building a list on hypotheses and "expert knowledge", build it on a provable, repeatable foundation then add in observations and estimations.



Since evaluative tools are not available to us (which tools are they?), create some of our own. Instead of everyone using their own personal criteria, create one so everybody involved uses that.



Any legitmate test has to have some control to it otherwise its completely invalid. Anything less simply results in a compilation of opinions and we already have a method to express them, the Reviews section.



What I'm suggesting is to have a methodology that eliminates guesses and minimizes inaccuracies. At the very least there should be a clear and logical demarcation between the product classifications. Once that's done products can be compared within each class and ranked/rated.



We may not be casting this in stone but we should be trying to cast it in something firmer than Jello.
 
Bretfraz- Heh heh, you and I disagree from time to time, and this might be another one of 'em :cool:



I believe that the person who needs to know if PI-III RC is more/less aggressive than Diamond Cut might find the current list helpful, despite its conceivable shortcomings. IMO it's better than nothing. If, in YOUR opinion, it's WORSE than nothing, maybe you should petition a moderator to have it removed, lest it cause whatever problem you're concerned about. Or we could at least give it a "not endorsed by Bretfraz" disclaimer ;)



I don't *know* what methods/devices/etc. "should" be used to more objectively determine the abrasiveness of these products. Something that measures the gloss of a finish, the thickness of a coating? :nixweiss But I don't worry about it because I don't feel the need to employ them.



My methods are good enough for MY purposes. I understand if they're not good enough for you; you and I have different criteria when it comes to what constitutes validity here. Maybe my methods are, however, good enough for some other people; I hope someone can benefit from my observations and that I'm not wasting my time when I share my findings.



If you are willing and able to come up with a more objective means of determining abrasiveness, and then employ those means to test various products, more power to you; I'll be the first to applaud your efforts.



In the meantime, I hope newbies find the current version of the list useful and that any inaccuracies in it are brought to light and corrected.
 
Accumulator said:
Bretfraz- Heh heh, you and I disagree from time to time, and this might be another one of 'em :cool:



I believe that the person who needs to know if PI-III RC is more/less aggressive than Diamond Cut might find the current list helpful, despite its conceivable shortcomings. IMO it's better than nothing. If, in YOUR opinion, it's WORSE than nothing, maybe you should petition a moderator to have it removed, lest it cause whatever problem you're concerned about. Or we could at least give it a "not endorsed by Bretfraz" disclaimer ;)



I don't *know* what methods/devices/etc. "should" be used to more objectively determine the abrasiveness of these products. Something that measures the gloss of a finish, the thickness of a coating? :nixweiss But I don't worry about it because I don't feel the need to employ them.



My methods are good enough for MY purposes. I understand if they're not good enough for you; you and I have different criteria when it comes to what constitutes validity here. Maybe my methods are, however, good enough for some other people; I hope someone can benefit from my observations and that I'm not wasting my time when I share my findings.



If you are willing and able to come up with a more objective means of determining abrasiveness, and then employ those means to test various products, more power to you; I'll be the first to applaud your efforts.



In the meantime, I hope newbies find the current version of the list useful and that any inaccuracies in it are brought to light and corrected.
Click to expand...



Hmm..... I didn't realize this had become a point of personal disagreement between you and I. Have I misunderstood the meaning of this thread?



From my perspective it doesn't matter what my personal criteria is, or what your personal criteria is, but that there is some kind of criteria in place so that a logical comparison of products can take place. I'm thrilled to hear you've developed your own methods of comparison. It's unfortunate for all of us that you've decided not to share them here or participate in the development of a reasonable methodology. I guess we'll have to figure things out on our own.



Thanks for the tip about alerting the moderators - I hadn't considered it. No need to attach my name in anyway to that list but it was kind of you to offer.



Have a great week!!! :xyxthumbs
 
I see two mistakes in that list.



3M Finesse it II Machine Polish (39003) is rated a 5.

3M Finesse it II Finishing Material (05928) is rated a 3.

These are the same products but in different size containers. 3M will give the same products different PN'S for different sizes. 39003 is 16 oz, 05928 is 32 oz but they are the same product. Another example is Perfect it III Machine Glaze. The 16 oz and 32 oz bottles have different PN'S



3M Perfect it III Rubbing Compound (05933) is rated 6.

3M perfect it III Machine Glaze (05937) is rated 5.

I use and like both these products and I know that they are more than one level of abrasiveness in difference. Machine Glaze is very mild.
 
Bret,



Why don't you and GeekySteve do a Guru report on polishes then?



Stevet,



Your corrections are noted and appreciated.
 
Quote: How is that going to help people determine the abrasiveness of a particular product? Remember that the primary beneficiaries of a list like this are newbies who have little or no experience with paint polishes. How do they benefit from a list that's fundamentally inaccurate? End of quote



I can understand this response from someone with Bretfraz background in product testing (guru reports)



Quote:I believe our observations could be useful to newbies. I can clearly discern how well a given product abrades my single stage lacquer. And I know plenty of other Autopians are at LEAST as qualified as I am to make such determinations. Am I guessing? Yeah, to some extent. But that doesn't make my observations inaccurate or my opinions worthless. If someone comes up with a different result/opinion, we can discuss it. We're not carving this list in stone. End of quote



I think that both points are valid, but the testing Bretfraz indicates as necessary would be better undertaken by a group like guru reports.



IMO Accumulator’s idea of a list based on experience of the products would provide guidance to someone new to detailing and/or the products listed.
 
stevet said:
3M Perfect it III Rubbing Compound (05933) is rated 6.

3M perfect it III Machine Glaze (05937) is rated 5.

I use and like both these products and I know that they are more than one level of abrasiveness in difference. Machine Glaze is very mild.
Click to expand...



Yeah, it's sorta a big jump between those two categories, but I don't know if it's a huge jump between the two products. When I'm using 3M stuff, I go from the 05933 to the 05937. We might never TOTALLY agree on this stuff...I find 05933 to be pretty mild, and many abrasive products a lot milder than the 05937, but one man's "mild" is another guy's "aggressive". Heh heh that's the problem with "subjective" comparisons, huh?



Oh, and good observation about the same product in different sizes :xyxthumbs
 
bretfraz said:
Hmm..... I didn't realize this had become a point of personal disagreement between you and I [sic]...
Click to expand...



If you don't see why I would take some of your responses personally, then I see no point in explaining it to you. You have a real aptitude for taking the fun of out some threads, but I'm not going to let it bother me.



.. I'm thrilled to hear you've developed your own methods of comparison. It's unfortunate for all of us that you've decided not to share them...
Click to expand...



I thought I'd explained my methodology, sorry if I wasn't explicit enough. I try out different abrasive products on the single stage lacquer of my XJS. I use the same foam applicators/pads, the same machines at the same speeds (when not working by hand), and I check my work under magnification.
 
Accumulator said:
If you don't see why I would take some of your responses personally, then I see no point in explaining it to you. You have a real aptitude for taking the fun of out some threads, but I'm not going to let it bother me.
Click to expand...



I’ve got a wonderful idea, instead of evaluating each other’s aptitudes on the forum; how about we stick to the topic at hand? If this can’t be discussed in mature fashion, it won’t be discussed at all.
 
I have been reading this thread and also pondering on the issue of a universal Abrasive Scale. Of course trying to get multiple product lines is extremely hard, I've tried just doing a few brands and products used most on this board



Poorboy’s / Meguiars / Menzerna / Einzsett

(3) #81 Hand Polish

(3)SSR1

(3)#82 Swirl Free Polish / #9 Swirl Remover 2.0

Menzerna Final Polish – Very Light Abrasive –1Z Metallic Polish & Wax - Low

(4-5)SSR2

(4-5) Speed Glaze / Light Cut Cleaner

Menzerna Intensive Polish (2000 Grit, Swirls / Paint Defects)

1Z Paint Polish – Moderate

(6) SSR 2.5

(6) #83 Dual Action Cleaner Polish

Menzerna Power Gloss – (1000 – 1500 Grit, professional compound, Deep scratches / water spots)

Einszett Ultra Polish - High

(8-9)SSR 3

(9) Compound Power Cleaner



Einzsett / 3M

1Z Ultra

3M PI-II FCRC (39002)

3M PI-III RC (05933)

1Z PP

3M PI-III MG {05937}

1Z MP



Yes I did do searches on a few threads. Hope this helps, if not please dont flame!

:bounce
 
Accumulator said:
Originally posted by SilvaBimma

Einzsett / 3M

1Z Ultra

3M PI-II FCRC (39002)

3M PI-III RC (05933)

1Z PP

3M PI-III MG {05937}

1Z MP



That's exactly the way I'd rank those products :xyxthumbs
Click to expand...



So what numbers would you give 1Z ultra and 1Z MP? I'll add it to the list.
 
beanbag said:
So what numbers would you give 1Z ultra and 1Z MP? I'll add it to the list.
Click to expand...



I'd say the 1Z Ultra is a 7 and the 1Z MP is a 2 or a 3. See if anyone else feels strongly about where to rank the MP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top