It might be time to establish some terms regarding polishers

[imported_WhyteWizard]

I use the term rotary for any machine that has forced rotation only. The typical buffer is a rotary machine.



For the machines that have an orbit but let the pad float free I use the term random orbital.



For machines that have both forced rotation, the pad is driven by planetary gears as with the Makita BO6040, the Bosch dual action sander, etc. I use the term dual action.



That's how I use the language and I'm not trying to be the speech police here, but I think there needs to be a clear distinction between the three different actions. Calling a random orbital (free floating pad) a dual action (forced rotation) as if it is the same thing isn't accurate and creates a lot of confusion.







Robert

 

[togwt]

That's a good start to standardize machine terminology...

 

[imported_RZJZA80]

What i don't like is when any RO or DA is just referred to as a pc. A pc is a porter cable, as in the name brand. But I agree completely with the OP, calling the polisher by the right term would help save many from confusion.

 

[Ron Ketcham]

Porter Cable machines were the first ones that obtained volume used due to the concerns with the first Infiniti Q45's and their flourinated clears, in the late 80's. Mequiars was the leader on finding the use for the Porter Cable and broadened it's visability to the industry.

As a result, the term "pc" become part of the detailer lanquage, much as Kleenex, being the first highly advertised and marketed facial tissue, is the "term" still used by many when they request a facial tissue.

Other mass market products have attained similar status, however, no matter how much time/money and such are spent, it sometimes just doesn't happen.

Grumpy

 

[C. Charles Hahn]

Porter Cable machines were the first ones that obtained volume used due to the concerns with the first Infiniti Q45's and their flourinated clears, in the late 80's. Mequiars was the leader on finding the use for the Porter Cable and broadened it's visability to the industry.

As a result, the term "pc" become part of the detailer lanquage, much as Kleenex, being the first highly advertised and marketed facial tissue, is the "term" still used by many when they request a facial tissue.

Other mass market products have attained similar status, however, no matter how much time/money and such are spent, it sometimes just doesn't happen.

Grumpy

:werd: Old habits die hard.

 

[Legacy]

I don't use my PC (Griot) as much as my Flex.

Porter Cable machines were the first ones that obtained volume used due to the concerns with the first Infiniti Q45's and their flourinated clears, in the late 80's. Mequiars was the leader on finding the use for the Porter Cable and broadened it's visability to the industry.

As a result, the term "pc" become part of the detailer lanquage, much as Kleenex, being the first highly advertised and marketed facial tissue, is the "term" still used by many when they request a facial tissue.

Other mass market products have attained similar status, however, no matter how much time/money and such are spent, it sometimes just doesn't happen.

Grumpy

 

[Ron Ketcham]

Until the early to mid 70's, a "rotary buffer" was actually a grinder, most were one speed, 5,000 RPM, fixed and that is what we had to buff out color sanding, etc with, no foam pads, just twisted wool 4 ply yarn cutting pads and genuine lambs wool pelt pads for polishing.

Had a selection of maybe 5 or 6 compounds and 5 or 6 polishes, paste wax was the main final used.

That what the world was when I was first learning to run a buffer.

Grumpy

 

[imported_RZJZA80]

Until the early to mid 70's, a "rotary buffer" was actually a grinder, most were one speed, 5,000 RPM, fixed and that is what we had to buff out color sanding, etc with, no foam pads, just twisted wool 4 ply yarn cutting pads and genuine lambs wool pelt pads for polishing.

Had a selection of maybe 5 or 6 compounds and 5 or 6 polishes, paste wax was the main final used.

That what the world was when I was first learning to run a buffer.

Grumpy

wow, I think I understand why you are called grumpy lol

 

[Ron Ketcham]

An old painter taught me how to make a better "polish" for the final buff on a lacquer finish.

We took some DuPont #7, added some corn starch, some mineral or whatever oil was handy, a bit of water and went at it.

The DuPont #7 was ok for some things, as was some of the old Mequiar's back then, but on a fresh lacquer, a couple of days old, the "mix" worked better.

Grumpy

 

[Kevin Brown]

I use the term rotary for any machine that has forced rotation only... For the machines that have an orbit but let the pad float free I use the term random orbital... For machines that have both forced rotation... ...I use the term dual action.



That's how I use the language and I'm not trying to be the speech police here, but I think there needs to be a clear distinction between the three different actions.



Calling a random orbital a dual action as if it is the same thing isn't accurate and creates a lot of confusion.

Robert

I LOVE THIS TOPIC! Thanks Bob for bringing it up. Good to see you posting. I like an old pro's point of view.

That being said... I've listed my comment of disagreement and explanation below.

What i don't like is when any RO or DA is just referred to as a pc. A pc is a porter cable, as in the name brand. But I agree completely with the OP, calling the polisher by the right term would help save many from confusion.

Yeah, I really don't like it either.

Porter Cable machines were the first ones that obtained volume used due to the concerns with the first Infiniti Q45's and their flourinated clears, in the late 80's. Mequiars was the leader on finding the use for the Porter Cable and broadened it's visability to the industry. As a result, the term "pc" become part of the detailer lanquage, much as Kleenex, being the first highly advertised and marketed facial tissue, is the "term" still used by many when they request a facial tissue. Other mass market products have attained similar status, however, no matter how much time/money and such are spent, it sometimes just doesn't happen.

Grumpy

True. I recall reading about your introduction to the machine awhile back.

If I recall correctly, you were with a couple Meguiar's guys at the docks in Long Beach working on getting some cars squared away upon their arrival into the USA. Correct me if I'm wrong.



Back to WhyteWizard's point of the thread:



I disagree that the designation is not accurate. I count the random rotation as an action DEFINITELY, making the random orbital a true dual-action machine (orbital and random rotation created by centripetal force). Just because it's not belt, gear, or directly driven doesn't discount the motion. In fact, I think that if the random orbital did not exist in its current form (and nobody thought of building it using the common design), someone would be trying to figure out or would have figured out how to offer up random rotation, using some sort of mechanical slip-action device. It's simply too capable and desirable a feature.



In my eyes, claiming it's not a dual-action machine is akin to discounting the drive capability of a transmission that uses a torque converter (or fluid coupler) , versus one that uses a clutch and pressure plate.



I don't doubt that the original intent or use of the term dual-action was likely used in conjunction with a machine that featured a gear or direct drive of some sort. But, as time goes by, specific terms become slang, or used as a loose definition rather than a specific name of a machine. Just try and ask for the air-powered palm-style random orbital in a body shop! Everyone's in too big a hurry (or it's too loud to hear all those words), so the term DA identifies the machine just mentioned. If you want the BIG GUN, you ask for a "mud hog" (heavy duty, large stroke, Bondo® eating random orbital or forced rotation orbital).



I like to use the terms:



• Rotary

• Orbital

• Random Orbital

• Forced Rotation Orbital

• Dual Mode



Looking through recent manufacturers literature, it seems most are avoiding using the designation dual-action altogether, except interestingly, Meguiar's! Their G110v2 random orbital machine is actually named Professional Dual-Action Polisher. As Ron Ketcham mentioned, Meguiar's introduced it to the masses for use as a paint polishing tool. Even though I personally may have used the term DA in my writings perhaps 3 or 4 times over the past few years, I make every effort to use the proper term random orbital.



Here's some of the latest literature and images I could find online, and with exception of Meguiar's, the term dual action is not being used:



Meguiar's G110v2 is named the Professional Dual Action Polisher:

Flex uses the term Orbital Polisher to describe its XC 3401 VRG:

Rupes uses the term Planetary Sander to describe its EK 150AE:

Makita calls it's BO6040 (a favorite of the WhyteWizard) a Random Orbit Sander with switchable Forced Rotation:

Bosch says the 1250 DEVS features switchable Turbo driven eccentric orbit mode:

More to follow.

 

[Kevin Brown]

Sometime around 2009, I was in the midst of writing a paper about using M105 and M86 with a random orbital. Back then, the idea that a random orbital could equal or rival the rotary buffer for defect removal and final polishing was new (and a bit controversial).



The opening pages of the paper discussed the different types of polishing machines and the terminology used to describe the actions they created. Had WhyteWizard never broached this topic, I might not have drug the opening pages out of the mothball pit. Thanks, Bob.

Thanks for reading! :heelclick

 

[imported_WhyteWizard]

Kevin,



From your post back to me: "Back to WhyteWizard's point of the thread:



I disagree that the designation is not accurate. I count the random rotation as an action DEFINITELY, making the random orbital a true dual-action machine (orbital and random rotation created by centripetal force). Just because it's not belt, gear, or directly driven doesn't discount the motion. In fact, I think that if the random orbital did not exist in its current form (and nobody thought of building it using the common design), someone would be trying to figure out or would have figured out how to offer up random rotation, using some sort of mechanical slip-action device. It's simply too capable and desirable a feature.



In my eyes, claiming it's not a dual-action machine is akin to discounting the drive capability of a transmission that uses a torque converter (or fluid coupler) , versus one that uses a clutch and pressure plate.



I don't doubt that the original intent or use of the term dual-action was likely used in conjunction with a machine that featured a gear or direct drive of some sort. But, as time goes by, specific terms become slang, or used as a loose definition rather than a specific name of a machine. Just try and ask for the air-powered palm-style random orbital in a body shop! Everyone's in too big a hurry (or it's too loud to hear all those words), so the term DA identifies the machine just mentioned. If you want the BIG GUN, you ask for a "mud hog" (heavy duty, large stroke, Bondo® eating random orbital or forced rotation orbital)."





The reason I call any machine with a free floating backing plate random orbital is that the orbit is consistent but the rotation/spin isn't. That's something you pointed out as an advantage in your post. Whether its the old wax master or the most current machine, if it's got a free floating backing plate there's no transmission, or torque converter or belt or clutch to mechanically drive the pad so the rotation is random. There are no cars with random speed drive trains - variable yes - but only random if they're on their way to be repaired.



Like I said, I'm not trying to be the language police here, but there are problems associated with terms being thrown around without consistent meanings. When we get this settled maybe we can move on to: wax, glaze, filler, sealer, correction creme, etc. I say this by way of invitation, why don't you do it, I'm not all that interested, lol.



I'm am thinking seriously about doing a test of the various machines to show which ones get the most work done in the least time. I'm working out the protocol. I want to standardize the amount of pressure, the size and material used for the pad, the surface and the material used between the pad and the surface. I'm thinking just plain water misted onto the surface as consistently as possible is what I'll use but I've got the rest pretty much worked out. Now I just have to get some test panels painted and get it set up.



I expect to run the machines the same amount of time with the same pressure the same pad the same pad angle, against test panels that all start out at the same temperature then measure the temperature as the machines are pulled away. I'd be interested in your thoughts.



Robert

 

[Ron Ketcham]

Absolutely FANTASTIC, Kevin!

The post and the documented information really delves into the various machines, their actions, how they accomplish the work, etc.

Very, very wonderful and professional information.

Grumpy

 

[togwt]

I've always enjoyed and learned from informative machine polisher posts by either you or Zoran (think that's how he spelled his forum name) for the amount of detail they go into >>>

 

[Kevin Brown]

Absolutely FANTASTIC, Kevin! The post and the documented information really delves into the various machines, their actions, how they accomplish the work, etc. Very, very wonderful and professional information.

Grumpy

Thank you so much, Ron. I'm glad to hear this.

I've always enjoyed and learned from informative machine polisher posts by either you or Zoran (think that's how he spelled his forum name) for the amount of detail they go into >>>

Thanks, Jon. Interestingly, I used to chat with Zoran all the time. Then for some reason unknown to me... he decided not to interact with me, or perhaps we had a disagreement? Regardless, I enjoyed his posts, and he gave me some very nice pads (which I used while testing out HD Uno Advanced Cut (which I appreciated).

 

[Ron Ketcham]

You deserve the "good show", after all, you ain't "Homer".

LOL!

Grumpy

 

[Kevin Brown]

Kevin... The reason I call any machine with a free floating backing plate random orbital is that the orbit is consistent but the rotation/spin isn't. That's something you pointed out as an advantage in your post. Whether its the old wax master or the most current machine, if it's got a free floating backing plate there's no transmission, or torque converter or belt or clutch to mechanically drive the pad so the rotation is random.

Regarding mechanical action vs centripetal force, and how it deems the random orbital to be dual mode or not:



There is no denying that centripetal (center seeking) force is real and as powerful as a mechanical force. Some things we cannot see but the force is there; internal combustion engines pull oxygen-laden air into combustion chambers via a vacuum effect (relying upon the mechanical action of the pistons to create the vacuum). Jet engines create thrust by compressing air (relying upon mechanical action to create the thrust). In both cases, a tremendous force is created that accomplishes "work". I suppose that tornadoes are entities created by "invisible" forces, that in turn place massive centripetal force upon trees, buildings, and any other objects that lay close to its path.



Centripetal force is difficult to envision for most folks, so here is a diagram I made for the "paper" I never finished (it's not perfect in terms of analogy, but it should help to get the idea across:

... There are no cars with random speed drive trains - variable yes - but only random if they're on their way to be repaired.

What about this car? Uphill or down... on a windy day?:

And I'm thinking of selling these trikes in a kit form:

... I'm thinking seriously about doing a test of the various machines to show which ones get the most work done in the least time. I'm working out the protocol. I want to standardize the amount of pressure, the size and material used for the pad, the surface and the material used between the pad and the surface. I'm thinking just plain water misted onto the surface as consistently as possible is what I'll use but I've got the rest pretty much worked out. Now I just have to get some test panels painted and get it set up.



I expect to run the machines the same amount of time with the same pressure the same pad the same pad angle, against test panels that all start out at the same temperature then measure the temperature as the machines are pulled away. I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Thoughts? Holy smokes, man! I've already been typing all day, and now you're gonna prod me to type even more.



If you are going to run a test, I think it's only fair to set up each machine so that it is optimized to deliver maximum performance. Using the same set-up for all the machines either gives one machine an advantage or restricts the performance of all of them. Pads (diameter, height, type), interfaces (backing plates), buffing liquids, and applied pressure is critical to overall performance, and I wouldn't use a rotary in the same manner as I would a "dual action" machine.



It would be like trying to prove which car is the "best performing" between a dragster, an Indy car, or a rally racer. Using the same tire on all three would limit each car's performance. Know what I'm sayin'? :think2

 

[Ron Ketcham]

Like I posted on a thread today, sometimes Homer just pops in and there goes all sense of actuality or science.

Grumpy

 

[Junebug]

Ah M86, it seems to be the forgotten polish, along with M95 - who uses these? Well, I tried 95 years ago and didn't think it was all that, so I never tried 86, but I remember Todd Helme telling me he used 86 and it was very, very good. I should have bought some, back then I had more time, energy and money for detailing experimentation. These days, I will buy stuff only when I run out or trade for something. Honestly, I trust what Kevin, Thomas and others find and their research saves me time/money. The old Junebug is paying out the y-zoo to send his daughter to college, it's my goal that she graduates debt free. So, I am detailing with what I have on hand, ya'll keep those reviews and comparisons coming, I have a "wish" list for Christmas!



BTW-love to hear more exploits of that B06040 too

 

[C. Charles Hahn]

Well, I tried 95 years ago

How old are you exactly, anyway? :nana: