M105 vs Power Gloss, No way its a 12!

[imported_Ivan Rajic]

I just tried both with an 8 inch LC wool pad on my rotary and got very similar results. They must have toned down the new formula.

If it's more PC friendly I can assume they did, but have yet to try it... try them both on a finishing pad and see what results you get

 

[dan46n2]

If it's more PC friendly I can assume they did, but have yet to try it... try them both on a finishing pad and see what results you get

Why would I use it with a finishing pad, does anyone use M105 or Power Gloss with a finishing pad?

 

[imported_Ivan Rajic]

Why would I use it with a finishing pad, does anyone use M105 or Power Gloss with a finishing pad?

:think: :wavey



It's the best way to learn how a polish works, how much cut it has over a finishing polish(es) and also M105 and M95 finish down great with a finishing/light polishing pad... I'm not saying it's the be all end all method but it's something worth trying...

 

[Lumadar]

Why would I use it with a finishing pad, does anyone use M105 or Power Gloss with a finishing pad?

Many have posted how M105 on a finishing pad finished out better than normal polishes on some occasions. M105 is a unique product.



As for the original poster and the 1 other person who stated their conclusions based on a SINGLE TEST of 1 vehicle... how about more testing? It isn't very scientific to have 1 sample of data, is it? :wavey

 

[Jason M]

that's a bit odd. Here's why: Every time you use a product, you remove X amount of clear coat. Let's say one application of 105 removes .01u of clear. It will remove that much clear *every time*, regardless of whether another compound was used previously. Let's say that PG also removes .01u per application. That would mean that on the side you did with PG and 105, you have removed a total of .02u, which would mean that the defects on that side of the hood are pretty deep. Eventually, with repeated applications of *any* abrasive polish, you'll get to either the bottom of the defects, or the bottom of the clear coat, whichever occurs first.

Exactly what I was thinking. If you had defects remaining after using PG, then you polished again with M105 and had no change, that would mean that M105 has NO cut. But on the other side of the hood it did remove the defects equal to PG you said. Something doesn't add up. Not trying to argue or call BS. It's just an odd statement.



While I have not used PG I have read a lot of rave reviews on the entire Menz. line on here. So no, I'm not trying to discount you or Menzerna. Some of the best corrections I see on here are with Menz. I just think it's a bold statement after comparing 2 products on one paint system one time.

 

[dan46n2]

Exactly what I was thinking. If you had defects remaining after using PG, then you polished again with M105 and had no change, that would mean that M105 has NO cut. But on the other side of the hood it did remove the defects equal to PG you said. Something doesn't add up. Not trying to argue or call BS. It's just an odd statement.



While I have not used PG I have read a lot of rave reviews on the entire Menz. line on here. So no, I'm not trying to discount you or Menzerna. Some of the best corrections I see on here are with Menz. I just think it's a bold statement after comparing 2 products on one paint system one time.

The defects left over could not be removed by either, I'm sure there was cut but not enough to remove the defects. Basically they both removed defects of similar depth so they are equal in cut from my experience.

 

[imported_Ivan Rajic]

The defects left over could not be removed by either, I'm sure there was cut but not enough to remove the defects. Basically they both removed defects of similar depth so they are equal in cut from my experience.

Take a paint gauge and then test them out about 50 times on 4-5 different cars... that'll take you closer to real results

 

[Jason M]

Again, I'm not knocking you or your experience. But as lecchilo said. There is a more scientific way to test. If you are just wanting to test for amount of cut then his suggestion of using a paint gauge is a good one. 50 times on 4-5 different paint systems sounds like a good plan!

 

[Accumulator]

FWIW, my painter got a pre-release sample of M105 (not in the usual bottle). He compared it with PG and found that with aggressive wool pads (the only way he uses such products) the PG cut a *LOT* more aggressively. He was so unimpressed with the M105 that he's gonna give it to me if he can find it (gave it to his wife to use on their stove).



I can't help but wonder if *how* you use these products factors in in a huge way...his experiences with harsh wool pads might be completely different from somebody's experiences with foam finishing pads.

 

[imported_Ivan Rajic]

FWIW, my painter got a pre-release sample of M105 (not in the usual bottle). He compared it with PG and found that with aggressive wool pads (the only way he uses such products) the PG cut a *LOT* more aggressively. He was so unimpressed with the M105 that he's gonna give it to me if he can find it (gave it to his wife to use on their stove).



I can't help but wonder if *how* you use these products factors in in a huge way...his experiences with harsh wool pads might be completely different from somebody's experiences with foam finishing pads.

Might be.. I just ordered a paint gauge and I'll be doing some testing, along with other polishes, just to see how it all adds up and to help out with the aggressiveness chart hopefully... will post videos of the process as well and do it with the G110 and rotary

 

[imported_Jakerooni]

Well "How" you use it is defaintly going to effect the end results. Everyone has their own technique. So everyone will end up with different results. A person using the foam is going to have a completly different view than a person going to town with a cutting wool pad. Then is it a D/A or is it the Rotary? If you really want to judge a product you should use it in several different scenerio's and see if any works better. The whole one time one car approch is a quick way to loose out on some really great products out there.

 

[Accumulator]

lecchilo- That'll be interesting, I'll look forward to your results. There's such a YMMV element to this stuff that I only use those charts/etc. as the *roughest* of all possible guidelines.

... The whole one time one car approch is a quick way to loose out on some really great products out there.

Yeah, I thought the same thing, but I didn't want to :argue with him and besides, I want that sample of M105



And besides, I understand somebody being set in his ways and I sure don't want him using one of *my* cars for any learning curve with a new product Gotta admit he's really, really good with a rotary, especially with Menzerna's stuff.

 

[dan46n2]

The whole one time one car approch is a quick way to loose out on some really great products out there.

This is just a quick observation I made it's not the end all to M105, based on the chart that ranks PG as 8 and M105 as 12 I was expecting more cut, that's all.