Megs 105/205 & Mez SIP

[OCDinPDX]

I have been reading great things about Meg's 105 and 205 polishes and of course, the Menzerna SIP for the super-hard German clearcoats. I have a Griot's Garage random orbital and their orange polishing pads. The system works okay but seems to struggle with the real deep swirls. The most abrasive polish leaves micro-marring that is nearly impossible to remove with the finer polishes.



I really like the machine but I'd like to see if the Meg's and Mez polishes are compatible with the Griot's pads. I doubt there will be any issues as from what I've heard the Griot's buffer is not too different from the Flex or the PC.



Any help or advice is greatly appreciated. :thx

 

[Jason M]

M105 and M205 also work great on Ceramiclear.



That being said, you can't go wrong with Menz. Many good detailers swear by their products.



M105 works great via DA style machines. It can be very aggressive with the right pad and some pressure. However it leaves an excellent finish that is easily cleaned up with M205 on a black finishing pad. I have not run into a paint system that I can't go from M105/orange to M205/black and finish out without any remaining M105 haze yet. And that's everything from Audi hard to SS black paint soft.

 

[OCDinPDX]

Thanks, Jason.



But hey...79 views and only ONE reply? :aww:

 

[slickwilly]

I believe the Griots buffer is similar to the G100/PC/UDM. I've used a PC with LC orange and Menz SIP with great results. I've also got some Megs 105 I'm going to try out too. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with Griots pads, just LC.



Sometimes all it takes is practice and trial and error...go to a scrapyard/junkyard and pick a couple hoods or trunk lids...that's how I'm starting out...:2thumbs:

 

[89gt-stanger]

I was able to completely remove very deep and plentiful swirls from a 2004 expedition in one pass with 105/orange/Meguiars PC. :bow

 

[OCDinPDX]

Thanks, guys...I'm going to bite the bullet and go for it.

 

[TSC17]

Just spend your money Andrew and move on!

 

[Thats Fresh]

i correct mostly bmws and the Menzerna line has worked great for me.

105/orange & 205/white would equate to SIP/orange & PO106/white. it seems to clean up real nice. and if followed up with PO85rd/blue its makes the paint POP.



but you can't go wrong with the 105/205 combo!

 

[Accumulator]

.. I'd like to see if the Meg's and Mez polishes are compatible with the Griot's pads. I doubt there will be any issues as from what I've heard the Griot's buffer is not too different from the Flex or the PC.



Any help or advice is greatly appreciated. :thx

I haven't used the Griot's machine but I have PCs and a Flex 3401. I like the Griot's orange pads- more aggressive than most regular polishing pads but milder than other manufacturers' orange light cut pads.



M105 and M205 work fine with the Griot's pads in my (somewhat limited) experience. The M205 is just a *little* gentle with that pad for some correction but finishes out very nicely.



BUT...they work best for me via Flex 3401. Via PC I get the "the pad's too big" effect where I can't put much pressure on the machine lest it merely "jiggle" and I dunno how the Griot's machine will behave in that regard.



FWIW, I never liked the Griot's Machine Polishes much though the MP3 did come in handy a few times when I needed something especially mild (never tried MP4). The MP2 worked a *LOT* better via Cyclo than it did via PC/~6" pad but would probably work OK via PC/4".



Those big pads just never work well for me on anything except a Flex 3401 or a rotary. But the Meguiar's polishes should work better for you than the Griot's ones.

 

[04yfz]

i correct mostly bmws and the Menzerna line has worked great for me.

105/orange & 205/white would equate to SIP/orange & PO106/white. it seems to clean up real nice. and if followed up with PO85rd/blue its makes the paint POP.



but you can't go wrong with the 105/205 combo!

I think M105 has quite a bit more cut than SIP, while I haven't used power gloss, I think that would be a more valid equivalent. What I don't like is the fact that SIP fills and a iso wipdown is a must to check defect removal.

 

[SuperBee364]

I think M105 has quite a bit more cut than SIP, while I haven't used power gloss, I think that would be a more valid equivalent. What I don't like is the fact that SIP fills and a iso wipdown is a must to check defect removal.

I've used Power Gloss quite a bit... 105 has even more bite to it than PG, so *quite* a bit more than SIP. However, you can use 105 as an SIP-category (medium weight) polish, too. Since it has non-diminishing abrasives, you can just do a gentle, short application of 105 to get an SIP type effect.

 

[Accumulator]

A "problem" (scare-quotes intentional) that I've been getting with M105 v2.0 is a light haze...sorta a pseudo-hologram effect...that seems to be caused by my wiping/buffing the product off. Yeah, "duh..it's a compound", but still. I'm even spritzing with #34 before buffing. It only shows up under *very* specific lighting conditions, the same ones that show holograms. It's usually easy enough to clear up, but on hard clear it takes a pad with a bit of cut to do it with M205.



I get sorta the same thing with M205 but that *appears* to be mainly a matter of polishing oils that don't play nice with certain paints.



In both these cases the paint appears perfect under 99% of the viewing angles/lighting conditions I'm using. It can take me many minutes of careful inspection to spot it (so gee, would it even matter to most people :nixweiss ).



And I'm still not sure yet, but I don't *think* M205 is finishing out quite as nicely as 1z HG does.

I've used Power Gloss quite a bit... 105 has even more bite to it than PG...

Which is the *exact* opposite opinion from that of my (good) painter :think:



Eh...good thing I'm happy enough with M105 or I'd have to get some PG and see how it works for me...experiences seem to vary with those two products.

 

[SuperBee364]

A "problem" (scare-quotes intentional) that I've been getting with M105 v2.0 is a light haze...sorta a pseudo-hologram effect...that seems to be caused by my wiping/buffing the product off. Yeah, "duh..it's a compound", but still. I'm even spritzing with #34 before buffing. It only shows up under *very* specific lighting conditions, the same ones that show holograms. It's usually easy enough to clear up, but on hard clear it takes a pad with a bit of cut to do it with M205.



I get sorta the same thing with M205 but that *appears* to be mainly a matter of polishing oils that don't play nice with certain paints.



In both these cases the paint appears perfect under 99% of the viewing angles/lighting conditions I'm using. It can take me many minutes of careful inspection to spot it (so gee, would it even matter to most people :nixweiss ).



And I'm still not sure yet, but I don't *think* M205 is finishing out quite as nicely as 1z HG does.









Which is the *exact* opposite opinion from that of my (good) painter :think:



Eh...good thing I'm happy enough with M105 or I'd have to get some PG and see how it works for me...experiences seem to vary with those two products.

That's really odd, Accumulator... I'd be willing to bet that if we did a poll among those that have used both PG and 105, they would all say that 105 (especially the original formula) has a ton more cut than PG. But again, it's all how you use it... you can use it very aggressively to get about as much cut as *any* rocks in a bottle compound out there. Or you can be gentle with it for SIP-class results. I wonder how jiggy your painter got with it?



I still wish Meg's hadn't taken the fangs out of 105 when they reformulated it.



OK, this has piqued my curiosity.. I'm gonna do a poll on this.

 

[Accumulator]

SuperBee364- My guy was using a pre-production sample of M105, I'd expect it to be like the v1.0. If he can find it (gave it to his wife to use on their stove or somesuch..) he's gonna let me have it and I'll see what it's like.



He woulda been using it via rotary/wool, if that makes any diff. And by the sound of it he didn't spend much time developing any M105-specific technique.



Eh...he's a self-decribed Menzerna fan anyhow But I *was* surprised how he simply dimissed M105 as an also-ran. In *his* case, I'm cool with his sticking with whatever works for him, don't want the learning curve of any new product taking place on one of *my* cars, that's for sure!

 

[Bullpup]

Just wanted to say that m105 is simply amazing. Even with my limited experience, I am already getting results which could be considered "last step ready" if you were short for time. I am using purple foamed wool on a PC, which is what worked best after trying LC yellow and orange pads on a test spot. I would have never thought this much correction was possible without a rotary, and especially that it would finish up this clean. I am practicing on a 1999 Expedition which has never been garaged in its lifetime, and has never seen a detailer. Can anyone tell me how *hard* this clearcoat is compared to other makes?

 

[SuperBee364]

Just wanted to say that m105 is simply amazing. Even with my limited experience, I am already getting results which could be considered "last step ready" if you were short for time. I am using purple foamed wool on a PC, which is what worked best after trying LC yellow and orange pads on a test spot. I would have never thought this much correction was possible without a rotary, and especially that it would finish up this clean. I am practicing on a 1999 Expedition which has never been garaged in its lifetime, and has never seen a detailer. Can anyone tell me how *hard* this clearcoat is compared to other makes?

Glad to hear it's working for you! Ford clear from back then isn't very hard.

 

[SuperBee364]

Accumulator, the more I think about the "which has more cut, PG or 105?" question, the more I think you and your painter are right.



I've been confusing two things: 1. Amount of cut vs. unit of time. 2. Amount of cut for one application.



For one application of PG vs 105, I'd give the nod to PG (against original formula 105), and I'd give PG a blue ribbon vs. new formula 105.



However, when compared to amount of cut vs. time, both 105's would beat PG soundly. IMO.

 

[Accumulator]

...[consider]... two things: 1. Amount of cut vs. unit of time. 2. Amount of cut for one application.



For one application of PG vs 105, I'd give the nod to PG (against original formula 105), and I'd give PG a blue ribbon vs. new formula 105.



However, when compared to amount of cut vs. time, both 105's would beat PG soundly. IMO.

Ah, that could be it! He's *very* old-school even by my standards (you wouldn't believe the ancient B&D rotary that's his fave!) and generally takes as long as it takes to do things *the way he does 'em*, if you know what I mean. Three half-minute tries with M105 vs. one longer try with PG....well, I know what he'd say about that.



While I for one *love* the short work times of the M105/M205 twins, others probably dislike them just as fervently and prefer products that work in a different manner. So the M105/PG question might be apples/oranges in ways that aren't immediately obvious.

 

[simplybao]

And I'm still not sure yet, but I don't *think* M205 is finishing out quite as nicely as 1z HG does.

My thoughts exactly. I just tried the Meg's line a few weeks ago and I must say, I like the 1z HG better. It seems to finish off better, maybe it's all in my head. I'll post up pics of my experience with the M105 and M205 combo later.

 

[Accumulator]

And I'm still not sure yet, but I don't *think* M205 is finishing out quite as nicely as 1z HG does.

-AND-

My thoughts exactly. I just tried the Meg's line a few weeks ago and I must say, I like the 1z HG better. It seems to finish off better, maybe it's all in my head..

You no sooner agree with me...and now I'm gonna change my tune! Well, maybe, sorta.



Noting that I have more experience with the 1Z HG, and that I'm comparing the results on different vehicles, and I'm switching from doing this via Cyclo to doing it via Flex, and that I don't do enough correction these days to, IMO, really have a decent knowledge base (gee, after all those qualifications what's my opinion even worth?!?)....



I tried a different burnishing routine with the M205- Flex/LC 7.5" black/speed "4", no real pressure after the first two motions across the area. Moderate arm/machine speed.



Turned out very nice and I'm sure not gonna bother trying to improve things by trying the 1Z HG. Nice and quick too, much quicker than the 1Z. Did use more pads and product though.



Eh...both are good but I'm sure finding the M205 to be a lot more time-efficient. I'm going from 6" *Griot's* orange to 7.5" LC black and getting a lot done with minimal work in a short period of time. So far so good...



Some day when I don't mind spending more time on this stuff (yeah, keep dreaming kid...) I do want to try burnishing with FPII. Guys like SuperBee364 have me convinced that it might make a little difference.