Meguiar's M105 Flashing Problems

When using 105, my own trick is to very lightly mist Megs Synthetic Detailer No135 onto the paint surface, apply a few drops of Swirl Free Polish onto the wool pad, and then start compounding using the wool pad. No problems with caking, drying and premature flashing.



But I hate having to wash the pad so often. It's a real drag. Sigh!
 
gigondaz said:
When using 105, my own trick is to very lightly mist Megs Synthetic Detailer No135 onto the paint surface, apply a few drops of Swirl Free Polish onto the wool pad, and then start compounding using the wool pad. No problems with caking, drying and premature flashing.
Click to expand...



Used a similar workaround..... when 105 started to dry out I *lightly* misted the Orange LC pad with some QD and it allowed more work time and finished nicely. Anything more than a light mist is too much and creates a sliging slurry. Don't ask how I know... :eek:
 
Accumulator said:
And M105 has pretty much replaced the 1Z because M105 is *so* much more effective.
Click to expand...



Are you planning to give M205 a try lighter polishing? Meguiars may just completely wean you of of 1Z polishes?:lol
 
bert31 said:
Are you planning to give M205 a try lighter polishing? Meguiars may just completely wean you of of 1Z polishes?:lol
Click to expand...



Heh heh, oh....I *might* consider the M205 when I resume work on the M3 and get to that point, but overall I'm OK with the 1Z and (old) 3M stuff that I already have.



M105 was one thing; I'd been spending *hours* with the rotaries and I simply needed something in-between the 3M extra cut and 1Z Pasta Intensiv. But for milder work I'm not eager to try fixing what's not broken. For *very* light work I dunno about anything replacing the 1Z Pro MP and WPS (maybe Menzerna FPII for some of my thin older paints).



Now if I didn't have gallons of products on hand, well, that'd be different.



Also, for, uhm...personal/philosophical reasons, I don't spend money with Meguiar's unless I really need to (might reconsider that now that 3M owns 'em). I thought long and hard about that case of #16 that I bought when the VOC regs were looming.
 
Accumulator said:
I simply needed something in-between the 3M extra cut and 1Z Pasta Intensiv.
Click to expand...



M105 falls between 3M Extra Cut and 1Z Pasta Intensiv? I thought it would have more cut than both. Which has more cut than M105?
 
But do not forget that sometimes the product itself maybe bad.



It happened to me some time ago that one bottle of #105 responded much differently than another 32 oz bottle of #105 that I had. I wrote to Meguiars CS about it and they said that perhaps I may have had a spoiled product and that they will exchange it free of charge The difference in behavior between the two products was like night and day with how it finished.
 
bert31 said:
M105 falls between 3M Extra Cut and 1Z Pasta Intensiv? I thought it would have more cut than both. Which has more cut than M105?
Click to expand...



I think that M105 is more aggressive in terms of paint removal, but sometimes doesn't have the aggressive re-leveling that something with a larger abrasive does. I don't know if this makes sense and I don't want to get 'called out' for this, it’s just my experience...



Aggressiveness or cut like anything can mean different things to different people. Is it the total paint removed? Is it the ability to cut and level out defects? Are they related?



Here is my little theory based only on my experiences and the little knowledge I have about engineering.



Is it possible to remove a lot of paint with out really leveling the paint? Yes, because there seems to be a difference between total paint removal and just the removal of the top of the scratches (this is what I call leveling. I'm sure it means the same and different to others: Removing more from the top and ending up with a flatter more level surface)



If we looked at paint from a cross section, it would resemble to stock market. Up and down, peaks and valleys, etc. Imagine we use a polish that removes exactly 1 mil from the tops and bottoms of the paint. We have removed a lot of paint but we have not leveled the paint.



Now looking at the same graph, imagine we use a polish acts like a blade and removes just the tops of peaks. The total paint removed is .5 mil, but now we have a perfectly flat surface.



On 'some' paints M105 will kind of work like the first example. I have worked on paint that I wet sanding with 2500 grit, easy to polish out, right? Even after 3-5 passes with M105 (on some paints) there appears to still be that kind of sanding texture, only very rounded out. The same with one pass of 3M Extra Cut completely removed any texture, no problem. Keep in mind that increasing the pressure with M105 seems to dramatically increase the leveling power the polish.



I would imagine that the ultra fine abrasives in M105 remove a lot of paint quickly, but on some paints they can lack that big boulder effect needed to knock down the peaks of some scratching. They travel in the scratches vs. cutting them directly. (Again it is just me overanalyzing things and I am being abstract to illustrate a point). The reason I say this because M105 appeared more aggressive by removing RID's more quickly then Extra Cut on the same paint. Perhaps the width of the scratching (at the microscopic level) directly effects in how each polish will be at actually leveling the paint. Larger, more traditional abrasives tend to work better on wider marring (like sanding scratch leveling, scratch blending, etch) while the super refined non-diminishing abrasives work better on thinner scratching (deep swirls, rids, etc) because of the way the abrasives travel over the paint.



At the end of the day M105 is seems more aggressive (removes more total paint) but on occasion it doesn't always translate to the best choice for leveling.
 
With regards to clearcoat levelling, perhaps we can use "orange-peel reduction" as an example.



IMO, no matter how you 105 a panel, the OP might still be there. Yes, deep scratches will be gone.



However, heaving cutting compounds such as Farecla G3, when used with the pad that looks like a corduroy/jeans material, will give tremendous levelling action that actually reduces OP!!!! To me, that's real cutting/levelling!!!

However, it also creates horrendous swirls that will need lots of additional compounding (with diff compounds) to correct.



Has anyone here compared 105 to G3?
 
Todd: great theory! I haven't found my "sweet spot" using 105. The dealer likes the Extra Cut and the Perfect-It 3000 because they can be worked completely through. He doesn't want to wipe anything until the final power wash.



I'm going to give it some more practice though. Maybe I'm using too much product because I get a lot of flashing.



Lately, I've been using a dual compound method: Extra Cut for defect removal and Perfect-It 3000 for producing a nice finish base.



Toto
 
TH0001- That's good thinking! And yeah, the 3M PI-III EC *does* deal with texture issues/sanding scratches very well.



Off-topic: do you have the same challenges removing 2000-2500 scratches when you use Meguiar's/Nikken/Mirka papers? I seem to be able to get those out *so* easily, even by *hand/PC*, and yeah, I inspect with magnification and they're *out*.



Back when I used 3M paper I *did* have all sorts of challenges getting things 100% smooth afterwards and I can't help but wonder if this might explain our differing experiences :nixweiss



bert31- Besides the way the bigger abrasives actually take off paint, the diffs that *I* appreciate between the M105 and the 3M PI-III EC aren't so much a matter of how much cut they have, but of how the two products work.



There's no way (IME) to be less than full-on-aggressive with the 3M; it's rocks-in-a-bottle and you're gonna be dealing with lots of abrasive dust, follow-ups plural, and it's rotary-only. It's very conventional in terms of work-time and, well, everything else.



The 1Z Pasta Intensiv can be used more broadly (application method/medium, etc.), finishes out a whole lot better (than the 3M) and still cuts pretty well, but sometimes it's simply not enough and I'm *not* in favor of doing a panel over and over and over if I can avoid it.



The M105 can be used very aggressively, rather *mildly*, and in-between the two. By hand, RO/DA or rotary. But it's very different behavior-wise and for somebody who can't do small areas at a time, clean the pads often, and otherwise mess around the way I can, it might be *too* different.



Somebody like Totoland Mach can probably do a whole *car* with the various steps that start with 3M EC in the same time I might spend doing a few panels with M105 and a single follow-up ;) But then I'm still working faster than I would with some other approaches.
 
Accumulator One of the big problems I encounter is the time it takes to do a car with Extra Cut, then Perfect-It 3000....it just takes a ton of time. I can easily put in 20+ hours in the exterior paint reconditioning.



I guess I'm going to work with 105 (followed by the new 205) as a sample process on the next Bimmer.
 
Totoland Mach said:
Accumulator One of the big problems I encounter is the time it takes to do a car with Extra Cut, then Perfect-It 3000....it just takes a ton of time. I can easily put in 20+ hours in the exterior paint reconditioning.



I guess I'm going to work with 105 (followed by the new 205) as a sample process on the next Bimmer.
Click to expand...



It was the (still ongoing) challenge of my '97 M3 that prompted me to try the M105, and I really did feel like I'd found the Grail.



For some reason, the only way I was getting timely results on that car's initial correction was with the PI-III EC 05933 and a Meg's 7006 (x many, many passes too, hours on end with the Metabo and Makita). Even my Edge wool pads and my LS PFW just didn't get the job done :nixweiss Then I tried the Flex 3401/orange foam/M105 and *bingo*, worked great. Even did OK using PC/4" yellow/M105 on some tight spots, utterly astounded me.



I'm pretty sure that once you get your technique sorted out (for me it's that "reactivate with water/QD and clean clean clean the pad" method) you're gonna be happy with the stuff.



Heh heh, 20+ hours go by *fast* when I'm working on that thing...sure wish I could just turn it over to somebody like you and get it done right in this lifetime :D
 
Lumadar said:
Try the new M105 or the current M95 if you find the original M105 too difficult to master. They both offer essentially identical cut, but much more traditional working time and feel.
Click to expand...



I actually just ordered the "new" 105 and 205 from ads. Will let you guys know how the new version works compared to the "old". I also wanted to try the 205 and just move to the glaze or lsp. Will let you guys know how it turns out.



I am thinking meguiars recommended the wrong pad for the old version of 105. Every post I have seen from them shows them using their new double sided wool pad. CS told me to use an 8000 pad? Even the back of the bottle says to use the wool.



Thanks again guys,
 
howareb said:
But do not forget that sometimes the product itself maybe bad.



It happened to me some time ago that one bottle of #105 responded much differently than another 32 oz bottle of #105 that I had. I wrote to Meguiars CS about it and they said that perhaps I may have had a spoiled product and that they will exchange it free of charge The difference in behavior between the two products was like night and day with how it finished.
Click to expand...



I am definitely going to contact meg's for this very same reason. I have used numerous products form them without any problems except for this 105 issue. Hopefully they will replace it for me as I am very disappointed with this batch.
 
Accumulator said:
TH0001- That's good thinking! And yeah, the 3M PI-III EC *does* deal with texture issues/sanding scratches very well.



Off-topic: do you have the same challenges removing 2000-2500 scratches when you use Meguiar's/Nikken/Mirka papers? I seem to be able to get those out *so* easily, even by *hand/PC*, and yeah, I inspect with magnification and they're *out*.



Back when I used 3M paper I *did* have all sorts of challenges getting things 100% smooth afterwards and I can't help but wonder if this might explain our differing experiences :nixweiss



bert31- Besides the way the bigger abrasives actually take off paint, the diffs that *I* appreciate between the M105 and the 3M PI-III EC aren't so much a matter of how much cut they have, but of how the two products work.



There's no way (IME) to be less than full-on-aggressive with the 3M; it's rocks-in-a-bottle and you're gonna be dealing with lots of abrasive dust, follow-ups plural, and it's rotary-only. It's very conventional in terms of work-time and, well, everything else.



The 1Z Pasta Intensiv can be used more broadly (application method/medium, etc.), finishes out a whole lot better (than the 3M) and still cuts pretty well, but sometimes it's simply not enough and I'm *not* in favor of doing a panel over and over and over if I can avoid it.



The M105 can be used very aggressively, rather *mildly*, and in-between the two. By hand, RO/DA or rotary. But it's very different behavior-wise and for somebody who can't do small areas at a time, clean the pads often, and otherwise mess around the way I can, it might be *too* different.



Somebody like Totoland Mach can probably do a whole *car* with the various steps that start with 3M EC in the same time I might spend doing a few panels with M105 and a single follow-up ;) But then I'm still working faster than I would with some other approaches.
Click to expand...



That whole post is very informative, but the bold part is really a great summary of 105. I find myself reaching for middle weight polishes less and less. It's just so much easier to always use the 105 for anything that a light weight polish couldn't handle. Just grab the 105 and the appropriate pad, and you're done! Yeah, yeah, "least aggressive method first", I know. But that's the great thing about 105: used with very little pressure and a gentle pad, and the stuff behaves like a medium polish. Got some killer RIDS and other deep defects? Grab a PFW (or an even more aggressive wool pad), put a little pressure on it, and you get rocks-in-a-bottle correction, with medium polish compounding marks left over. The stuff is hands down the most versatile polish I've ever used.



Todd's observations on how heavy compounds work makes alot of sense, and explains alot of the behavior I've seen, too. As wonderful as 105 is, there's sometimes when you just gotta have the rocks-in-a-bottle behavior of the larger sized abrasives.



Great stuff in this thread.
 
SuperBee364 said:
That whole post is very informative, but the bold part is really a great summary of 105. I find myself reaching for middle weight polishes less and less. It's just so much easier to always use the 105 for anything that a light weight polish couldn't handle. Just grab the 105 and the appropriate pad, and you're done! Yeah, yeah, "least aggressive method first", I know. But that's the great thing about 105: used with very little pressure and a gentle pad, and the stuff behaves like a medium polish. Got some killer RIDS and other deep defects? Grab a PFW (or an even more aggressive wool pad), put a little pressure on it, and you get rocks-in-a-bottle correction, with medium polish compounding marks left over. The stuff is hands down the most versatile polish I've ever used.

Todd's observations on how heavy compounds work makes alot of sense, and explains alot of the behavior I've seen, too. As wonderful as 105 is, there's sometimes when you just gotta have the rocks-in-a-bottle behavior of the larger sized abrasives.



Great stuff in this thread.
Click to expand...
Agree Completely
 
Try applying it via the rotary at slower speed, and work it in a bit longer. The super micro abrasives will continue cutting because they don't break down. The slower speed will allow you to work this product for a longer period of time before it "flashes."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top