My 3M Rant – Opportunists for failure

David Fermani

Forza Auto Salon
My 3M Rant – <span style="color:#ff0000;">Opportunists for failure


 


There are certain attributes & stereotypes that come to mind anytime the name 3M is mentioned in a detailing or body shop setting…


 


Some good (+)…..great abrasives & adhesives like Trizact & Scotch painters tape, purchasing of Meguiars & EDGE companies.


 


 


And some not so good (-)....Ultrafina aka the “durable fillerâ€�, terrible rocks in a bottle dusty compounds, buffer swirls, hand glaze and a lack luster line of wanna-be retail products that really haven’t made much headway into too many people’s arsenal.  (in my opinion of course)


 


 


Now, after years of sitting back watching other companies pioneer the technology of a single cutting/polishing product, they now decide to throw their hat into the ring with their new 3M Perfect–It 1 Finishing Material product. According to this product’s label, it’s designed to remove 3000 grit (or finer) scratches when used with a finishing foam pad and finish out perfectly. Boy, if that doesn’t have filler written all over it I don’t know what does? :rolleyes: Regardless, I find it intriguing that a company like 3M is following the path that other companies initially blazed in another failed attempt to try and devour up poor innocent body shop compound slingers into thinking this new product is god’s gift to the body shop industry like before.  It’s like all of a sudden they went into a warp drive going from their 3 product/3 pad Perfect It Paint Finishing System that pretty much every body shop still can’t seem to get right to a now 1 single product system that uses a foam finishing pad to cut through what use to require a cutting wool pad & heavy compound? If this doesn’t reek of failure I don’t know what does? This foreseeable failed effort might dig 3M deeper into the red with their body shop suppliers/distributors and weaken the low morale that painters, painters helpers & detailers already have in their current offerings. It will surely allow competing companies to gobble up even more lost market share that once was 3M’s feather in their hat.  :o


 


 


You would have figured that with 3M purchasing Meguiars that some of their technology would have trickled down to them by now, but it looks like they are keeping their trade secrets to themselves? I used to be a huge supporter of the Perfect It sanding/polishing system when it was 1<sup>st</sup> released. In fact not only did I coach several body shops how to use it, but I also promoted it quite a bit at the time when 3 buffing steps was the “inâ€� thing. http://www.autopia.org/forum/machine-polishing-amp-sanding/90894-3m-perfect-3000-training-class-pictures.html?hl=perfect   And I won’t hesitate to tell you that I still regularly use their Trizact 1500 & 3000 sanding discs. But, their paint correction technology is pre-historic by today’s standards and it’s sad to know that body shops are still struggling with the mastering of its finicky instructions which if not followed precisely will leave a huge void in the intended result. Being in the collision repair industry visiting body shops daily you would be amazed with the mess that I constantly see as a result of them not adhering to 3M’s strict instructions for their system. For example, I’ve seen people avoid using the 3000 grit refinement step and go right to compounding (leaving pigtails & sanding marks). I’ve seen people skip using the wool pad step and go right to medium foam/compound to attempt to remove the sand scratches (leaving sand scratches). I’ve seen countless technicians skip the middle polishing step and go right to Ultrafina thinking that the finish is good enough (only to have compounding swirls later appear). If there was a way to use this system wrong, trust me they would find it and still think that their final results are “good enoughâ€�! The sad thing is that 3M pretty much dominates the body shop industry and is more concerned with the meat & potatoe sales items in a body shop and fail miserably at the nickel & dime items like properly polishing paint. And if you’re a detail minded person like me, those little finishing details can make or break the overall quality of the job. How many times have you seen a car come from a body shop for repair and be riddled with buffer swirls? Truthfully it’s more of the rule then the exception. Chances are pretty great that those results were from a shop that used the 3M “systemâ€� (or lack of so to speak). So why are they trying to take such a huge leap forward without really having the ability to rectify the mess they have already created?  All in all, I wish 3M luck with getting their act together in the paint correction side of the business. Based on my opinion, with a company this large and focused on innovation we should expect great things from them. Time will only tell….. ;)


 


 
I'm guessing based on this that you've used this product, David? I'm kinda curious how it compares to Meguiar's SOLO liquid (granted, Meg's sells it with a variety of pads as a "system" like 3D did/does with UNO, and Norton does with their Liquid ICE system)....
 
Too bad they've gone down that road...I was a *huge* and of their older PI-III line and the orginal version of their ShowCar Wax, all of which worked very well for me.
 
3000 grit is lame, D300 could take that out. FWIW - I use M101,D300 or a mix of them to handle corrections. I've always thought 3M and their mult-step process was a fools errand. I don't know of any shop that spends that amount of time on cars. And as Ron White would say, "Thus the detailer is needed"


Hey - here's an idea, have the bodyshops contract out to detailers and let those that know do it. And it damn sure will be better for all!
 
David, I partially blame the insurance companies for body shops inability to stick to 3M's  strick 3 step system. Time is money and unitl the insurance companies adiquately pay shops to allow the technician to finish properly this is what you'll get IMO.
 
for sure chad!!!! 


 


I talked to a body shop owner a year ago and he told me they cant afford to pay me to clean up their cars (even though I demonstrated how much better it could/should be)because they get paid.....1.5 hours to detail a car, including the correction time after painting...
 
C. Charles Hahn said:
I'm guessing based on this that you've used this product, David? I'm kinda curious how it compares to Meguiar's SOLO liquid (granted, Meg's sells it with a variety of pads as a "system" like 3D did/does with UNO, and Norton does with their Liquid ICE system)....


 


<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">Sure have used it Charlie. In fact we played around with it at the SEMA booth a bunch of times. You wouldn't believe the terrible filling this stuff does. And, unlike Ultrafina, the eailiy oils remove with IA. I really can't believe this product even exists. It's that bad. It's like no R&D was put into the development of this. Plus, once you use it on a pad, kiss it goodbye until you degrease/wash all the crap out of it. I mistakenly used it with HD Polish and OMG, it was a pain to wipe off? It really threw me for a loop. 


 
Swanicyouth said:
People always seem to think "3M - that's good stuff". But, Ive never liked it. 


 


<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">Right. If Body Shops use it, it must be good stuff. Typical protocol. 


 
RaskyR1 said:
David, I partially blame the insurance companies for body shops inability to stick to 3M's  strick 3 step system. Time is money and unitl the insurance companies adiquately pay shops to allow the technician to finish properly this is what you'll get IMO.


 


 


<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">Chad - This isn't an insurance company issue at all! It's an Insurance company's duty to pay for what is owed to return a car to a prior condition. And it's the shop's responsibility to ask for and do it correctly.  If an insurance company refuses to pay for what is properly owed, they can get charged with a Bad Faith suit This duty includes granting shops adequate time to sand down new finishes to match existing panels (texture wise) when needed. This doesn't include denibbing, defects, dirt or other issues caused by the shop. Tons of shops are able to paint a panel and have it be fine for delivery on most applications. Most shops are dirty, don't clean their paint booth filters or have inexperienced painters and are the root of why we see so much crap being put out. Unfortunately, it's a vicious circle for these types of lower quality shops because they not only slouch in the  refinish process, but even more when they elect to take a buffer and compound to a car.   


<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">And for other shops, you could give them multiple hours to color sand & buff each panel(I have many times) and guess what? They still screw up the polishing job. So, it's not a matter of an insurance company not paying for something.


<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">I feel the blame should be placed not only the shop for their incompetence, but also with the support they are entitled to get from their local paint distributor/3M Rep. These people (as well as shop management) are supposed to train and monitor technicians and insure the shop is using their products correctly fixing any deviancies. 


 


<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">So, back to the original post. 3M's new 1 step paint correction system is going to screw cars up even further then before in an attempt to simplify things. I can say with certainty (in my opinion) there there was a lack of development as well because this product is behind the curve with what's currently out there. I guess we can just view this as job security?  
 
toyotaguy said:
for sure chad!!!! 


 


I talked to a body shop owner a year ago and he told me they cant afford to pay me to clean up their cars (even though I demonstrated how much better it could/should be)because they get paid.....1.5 hours to detail a car, including the correction time after painting...


 


1.5 hours is roughly $60 to wash, vacuum and wipe down the dust inside which isn't owed by the insurance company. If anything else is needed, it should be addressed and negotiated with the insurance company. If the Adjuster isn't in agreement with the time requested, you need to climb up the ladder. Shops in every part of the country do this every day. It's the shops that are afraid to push or don't know how that end up loosing. 
 
David Fermani said:
<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">Sure have used it Charlie. In fact we played around with it at the SEMA booth a bunch of times. You wouldn't believe the terrible filling this stuff does. And, unlike Ultrafina, the eailiy oils remove with IA. I really can't believe this product even exists. It's that bad. It's like no R&D was put into the development of this. Plus, once you use it on a pad, kiss it goodbye until you degrease/wash all the crap out of it. I mistakenly used it with HD Polish and OMG, it was a pain to wipe off? It really threw me for a loop. 


 



<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;">So, back to the original post. 3M's new 1 step paint correction system is going to screw cars up even further then before in an attempt to simplify things. I can say with certainty (in my opinion) there there was a lack of development as well because this product is behind the curve with what's currently out there. I guess we can just view this as job security?  


 


Job security maybe; unfortunately many in the general consumer public still won't know any better and will accept whatever they are given.
 
Don't get me started on 3m scotchguard ppf or what they did to Ventureshield ppf when they purchased it. Urgh. 3m has single handedly driven more people away from ppf than drive people to it.
 
<span style="font-family:'comic sans ms', cursive;">@ 129 A SHARE, 3M must have a couple of happy customers !


 


<span style="font-family:'comic sans ms', cursive;">Full Disclosure: we own the stock.
 
Yeah, no doubt, but in this case, the gloss isn't all that great either. Top that will fillers and it really leaves me scratching my head as to why it even was allowed to hit the market?
 
Hi David. Well said, I totally agree with what you said. To a body shop, sanding and especially Buffing a finished paint job is the last and least important part of their work, at least the ones I have spoken to. Whereas to us detailers it is everything.


I've written technical buffing articles for the largest paint and panel magazine in Australia and after reading the mag for a few years, it just proves to me just how far behind the detail industry (buffing wise) the crash industry is.

They are still wool and foam only based, mostly rotary based and continue to use clogged up dirty wool pads, old school compounds and such and within wool pads alone, there is a lot to the, and a lot to choose from. Knitted, electrified, 1ply, 4 ply, untwisted, twisted, australian, new Zealand type that is micron tested to be super fine quality (testing these right now), Turkish wool and Irish Merino, 1 inch to 2 inch pile heights, which on their own have an effect on results.the higher the pile height, there is more of a sweeping and polishing action thus a better finish than a 1 inch which is more scrubbing and cuts more and may or may not finish as good.


I'm not an expert on wool so if I am proved wrong by someone wiser then I accept that.


wool is hydrophilic so you need to keep the pad moist to get a foam like finish.


I bet their backing plates for the rotary are not that great either and i know this, that if you do not have the pad perfectly centred on that plate, swirl marks and more are going to be the end result.


As for the 3m liquids, the big problem I have had with them is the solvents and how dry and short working they can be. Cyclohexasiloxane and pentasiloxane were used in one or more of them at least for some time and whilst these are from the skin care industry and better than stoddard solvent and other cheap solvents, there is I believe a chance that they are carcinogenic.


I just read the msds sheet and some ingredients are not nice. Alcohol for one.

Innovations don't always come from the big brands,it's the little guys sometimes that innovate as they don't make products to fit or suit a market or knock a competitor out of a particular market like bodyshops and market/hype them up,they just make the best product there is, that is their goal. That's the case for my supplier/partners


3m and almost all manufacturers need to throw out their old formulations book and start again if they want to catch up too and overtakec the current leaders
 
David Fermani said:
Looks like Chip Foose is siding with marketing rather than results with this one: 


 


 


I've always wondered how his work looked in person when he was done with it. Not saying that this marketing video means his work is bad or anything like that; just derailing the topic out of genuine curiosity.  
 
David Fermani said:
Looks like Chip Foose is siding with marketing rather than results with this one: 


 


http://youtu.be/fq_oJ73htgA


 


Foose has always been heavy on the marketing, endorsements, and co-branding as a strategic play for his business... for years he and Overhaulin' were associated with Mothers, must be 3M is giving him a better deal now.


 


...and we all know that a production shop system like this (or any production system) will NOT give the level of finish quality required on some of his higher profile builds.
 
Back
Top