M205, new M105, SIP and 106FA

R

RAG

New member
Received my M205, M95 and new M105 about a week ago and wanted to share my findings so far, as I've have had a chance to utilize and experiment with these products on 2 black vehicles so far - 1 aftermarket paint job and the other was a Range Rover (I always "judge" products on more telling black paints). My findings are with the rotary.



In sum, the new M105 might be a slight improvement, but it's basically the same animal. I did some wet sanding and found that M95 leveled the sanding scratches in about 30% less passes, but it also left more buffer swirls...so if one is planning on doing multiple compounding steps, M95 followed by M105 might be more efficient.



M205 has nice buffing characteristics as advertised...long work tim, minimal dust, and easy to wipe off. However, I was expecting a final finishing product akin to 106FA or Ultrafina...but this was not the case for me - on the aftermarket paint, 106FA finished down slightly better than M205, but on the Range Rover, it wasn't even close...the M205 left heavy halograms in the sun. In fact, I decided to switch over to SIP for the first step and follow with Ultrafina, and SIP it left less halograms than M205, and yet yet SIP produced more cut in my observation...so I don't know where that leaves M205...maybe a low dusting alternative to SIP.



Both 106FA and Ultrafina finished down better (halogram fee) than the M205 on both black vehicles, and I would guess that it had more cut (certainly more than Ultrafina), but I didn't experiment with the "cut" factor of these "final" product too much.



Surely some people might get different results, on different paints, with different buffers, and that's fine with me...just wanted to share my findings.
 
I used a Makita rotary. I experimented with both white (closed cell) and softer green (Propel II) pads.
 
When you were using the new M105 were you doing the whole "work it in, spritz with water then re-work" thing? Just curious. I've not done that, but some people have mentioned it's a good way to get more cut. I find M95 has more cut too, but significantly more holograms.



I think M205 has more cut than 1066ff/fa/ultrafina, and might have more than SIP (I haven't done a side by side either), but if that's so it might fill a gap in between say M105 and SIP for doing two-step work on cars with only moderate marring.
 
I too experience the same thing as you Ryan, on certain paint work I do get hologram when trying to finish down with M205 but 85RD took care of it.
 
Picus said:
When you were using the new M105 were you doing the whole "work it in, spritz with water then re-work" thing? Just curious. I've not done that, but some people have mentioned it's a good way to get more cut. I find M95 has more cut too, but significantly more holograms.



I think M205 has more cut than 1066ff/fa/ultrafina, and might have more than SIP (I haven't done a side by side either), but if that's so it might fill a gap in between say M105 and SIP for doing two-step work on cars with only moderate marring.
Click to expand...



No, I didn't do the water spritz routine.



If M205 did have more cut than SIP, that would be impressive. But I'm not sure, I'm leaning toward SIP having more cut at the moment...only more use will tell.
 
if 105 is supposed to finish down almost lsp ready and 205 has that much cut why not use it with the pc to follow your 105 rotary to get a sufficient 2step finish?



this is all just my 2cents cuz I havent tried any of the 3.
 
In my opinion, M205 has a lot more cut than the level indicated on the bottle. For example, I did a comparison between M83 and M205 with new W8207 polishing pads on the rotary - with Kevin Brown pad priming for M205. M205 removed way more defects than M83 and the surface was much finer.





When comparing M205 to Menzerna, I would say it cuts a little more than SIP, but finishes better than PO106FA.





Someday, I want to try M205 on a wool pad just to see the results. M105 and M86 finish okay with a rotary (with the expected holograms), but maybe M205 will leave the finish finer.
 
Why have a finishing polish who cuts more then SIP? What happend to "go for the least abrasive routine"?
 
If anyone finds a better fishing polish better than Menzerna PO85RD I would like to know. It is one of the best products that I have for detailing.
 
When you say SIP left less holograms then M205, did you aggressively wipe the paint with alcohol (2x4 times) after SIP? I love SIP but I find that the finish it leaves behind is rarely even close to how good it truly looks.



Also if you are getting holograms with M205, you might be over working the product (ie lots of slow, jeweling type passes). It has non-diminishig abrasives, so use meduim pressure for the first 2 passes, and no pressure for the last pass. Thats it, 3 passes over an area, then wipe clean.



However I have found it is 50/50 on if I get hologramming or not.



Try the KBM with a DA on M205 and you might be amazed at the amount of correction you can achieve and finish left behind.
 
porta said:
Why have a finishing polish who cuts more then SIP? What happend to "go for the least abrasive routine"?
Click to expand...



With non-diminshing abrasives, the cut is more or less aggressive depending on how long the product is worked. Work it for 10-15 passes on a rotary and M205 will cut far more into the paint then SIP. Work for 2 passes and it will remove very light defects. You dial in the cut by the number of working passes and pressure.
 
TH0001 said:
Also if you are getting holograms with M205, you might be over working the product (ie lots of slow, jeweling type passes). It has non-diminishig abrasives, so use meduim pressure for the first 2 passes, and no pressure for the last pass. Thats it, 3 passes over an area, then wipe clean.
Click to expand...



Todd, would you recommend this finishing technique with a D/A polisher, too?
 
TH0001 said:
When you say SIP left less holograms then M205, did you aggressively wipe the paint with alcohol (2x4 times) after SIP? I love SIP but I find that the finish it leaves behind is rarely even close to how good it truly looks.



Also if you are getting holograms with M205, you might be over working the product (ie lots of slow, jeweling type passes). It has non-diminishig abrasives, so use meduim pressure for the first 2 passes, and no pressure for the last pass. Thats it, 3 passes over an area, then wipe clean.



However I have found it is 50/50 on if I get hologramming or not.



Try the KBM with a DA on M205 and you might be amazed at the amount of correction you can achieve and finish left behind.
Click to expand...





Good points for sure...and I think the 2 medium passess followed by 2 light passes works to some extent with many polishes, even SIP. But with both these polishes, I doubt they will finish down perfectly/properly on any dark-colored "finicky" paints even though many DA users might not notice any hazing. I have now used M205 on la couple lighter colors with good results for a couple customers that only wanted to pay for a single polishing step.
 
Polished&Waxed said:
if 105 is supposed to finish down almost lsp ready and 205 has that much cut why not use it with the pc to follow your 105 rotary to get a sufficient 2step finish?



this is all just my 2cents cuz I havent tried any of the 3.
Click to expand...



When you are proficient at rotary use, it's always faster/more efficient to use a process that leaves the DA out of the mix...2 rotary steps will get it done better/faster than 1 rotary and then 1 DA step.
 
MDRX8 said:
If anyone finds a better fishing polish better than Menzerna PO85RD I would like to know. It is one of the best products that I have for detailing.
Click to expand...



Agreed here. Except after using both for a while, I found that 106FF (or now 106FA) finished down just as well; if I were maintaining my own cars, then PO85RD would be my prefered the tool, but given that most of the cars I detail are hammered pretty good, I always go with the strongest step(s) I can get away with without halograms...usually means finishing with 106FF FA.
 
TH0001 said:
When you say SIP left less holograms then M205, did you aggressively wipe the paint with alcohol (2x4 times) after SIP? I love SIP but I find that the finish it leaves behind is rarely even close to how good it truly looks.



Also if you are getting holograms with M205, you might be over working the product (ie lots of slow, jeweling type passes). It has non-diminishig abrasives, so use meduim pressure for the first 2 passes, and no pressure for the last pass. Thats it, 3 passes over an area, then wipe clean.



However I have found it is 50/50 on if I get hologramming or not.



Try the KBM with a DA on M205 and you might be amazed at the amount of correction you can achieve and finish left behind.
Click to expand...



Even after isa/water and prepwash I find SIP still finishes a little better than M205 on soft paint, but I've only used it on three black cars so far. I do agree with you about SIP's finish being very deceiving though. On some cars it'll look LSP ready, then you hit it with alcohol and there are halograms everywhere. I still like SIP, but I'd love to find a better alternative. So far 205 seems on par with it imo, but not markedly better. M105 vs PG though is like an F430 vs a Hummer. :D
 
I hate to say this... wait, no I don't... :)



I'm using M105 for everything but finishing now. Just vary the pad according to what I need to do. Double twisted wool when I need rocks-in-a-bottle correction, down to PFW and fewer passes/less pressure. M105 with gentle pressure and PFW gives equivalent results as SIP, and requires less time and effort (on most paints, at least. As always, there are exceptions). I'm getting lazy in my old age.



Edit: I prolly should clarify this lest I confuse Greg Nichols. :lol



Just a couple weeks ago, I was telling Greg that I no longer use any foam pad except for red (zero bite) edge wave foam. If I need more aggressiveness in my final polishing, I change polishes. So basically, I use red foam for finishing, then vary the polish according to the paint and it's condition. But for *correcting* work, I stay with the same polish (M105) and vary the pad.
 
RAG said:
When you are proficient at rotary use, it's always faster/more efficient to use a process that leaves the DA out of the mix...2 rotary steps will get it done better/faster than 1 rotary and then 1 DA step.
Click to expand...



But a 1 step with a DA will out do a 1 step with a rotary IME and some times 2 steps with a rotary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top