Optimum vs. Menzerna Polishes

Bence said:
OPS doesn't have glazing properties. It removes defects mechanically, cleans the paint and establishes a slick sealant layer.
Click to expand...



OPS may be closer to #80 vs. #7, but that's a moot point.



At the end of the day it's nothing more than a silicone filler with temporary good looks vs. a paint correction chemical or durable sealer/LSP.



Sorry, but I've used it, and that's about all that it does.
 
Scottwax said:
The correction of OPS does not diminish or wash off. What it removes, stays removed. I tend not to use it as an LSP but usually put either a carnauba or Acrylic Jett over it but on cars I have used it as a one step on, the defects stay gone and the car is protected for a few months.



Again, I am not sure why some of y'all seem to be taking this so personally. I like Menzerna polishes and for clarity, they cannot be matched. But I am willing to sacrifice a slight bit of clarity for more depth. That is why I liked 106FF even more when I adding in some RMG. I am not sure why this seems to be hard to understand. I just have a different preference. :wall



Wel



If it only looked great initially, I wouldn't use it on my own car, let alone customer's cars.
Click to expand...



Right on. Excellent post.
 
rydawg said:
What makes the new fa version better than the new ff? Is it true there is less dust?
Click to expand...



I have to check it again, but 106FF and 106FA are very close and is very difficult to me to say why 106FA is better. I always use the rotary and I've never had any problem with dusting using both polishes. Maybe, 106FA has more working time. When I use it again, I'll use also 106FF and I'll compare.

Very interesting the polishes from Presta. I was looking for Presta Ulra Cutting Creme Light as a replacement for RD3.01 (wich is superb, but I have to check every nice product :nervous2: ), but this Presta 1500 sounds very good also. Maybe it could be interesting adding Presta to the title and you guys who use Presta place a comparison with Menzerna and Optimum.

Regards !!
 
I'm thinking that comparing OPS and PO106FF isn't exactly a similar comparison..Shouldn't we be comparing OPS and One Step Acrylic Jacket?



By comparing a 1 step with a polish we're knocking the Menzerna for not leaving protection and we're opening up arguments that the OPS' protection is masking (whether true or not)



Regardless, these are 2 world class companies..and are producing awesome products...otherwise this would be 1 page thread saying Brand A is definitely better than Brand B
 
Also curious. IS Blackfire SRC FP the same as PO106FA? Since it's supposedly FF with extra workabiltiy blended in???
 
Comparing FPII in a side-by-side with OPS IS comparing apples with oranges.....they are 2 different products intended for 2 different purposes or goals. That's what I have been saying....or at least trying, as well as a few others.



OPS is designed as a true one step product and in that one can achieve *ALMOST* the same results in one-step what one can get in two steps with other products. It may not have the total correction abilities of say Menzerna IP nor the total finishing abilities of FPII but it does fall somewhere inbetween that spectrum, thus fulfilling its goal.



A better comparison would be OPS against AIO or perhaps the new Poorboys AIO type product or even OP against IP/FPII. OP also falls inbetween IP and FP in that it corrrects just as good if not better than IP and finishes out just slightly under FPII so again one step versus 2 steps.



This is not knocking Menzerna, as I have always felt and stated and recommended FPII (and also IP) to people looking for high standard products.



Anthony
 
mgm121499 said:
Can you compare Prime Strong to OPS (since we're mixing and matching products)?
Click to expand...



I haven't used Prime Strong. OPS is more similar in appearance to Prime Carnauba but definitely corrects better.
 
Opt. polish or PO85RD then adding a pure polish as Meguiar's #7 or 81 prior to the LSP. Is this a good idea. Seems to work for me.
 
Scottwax said:
Okay but that is my whole point. I get what I want in one step. It doesn't matter to me that the protective properties of OPS 'aid' it, especially when a gallon of OPS is $40 and a quart of 106FF is $50. Why would I want to remove the protective qualities to compare it that way if using OPS as is gives me what I consider an equal (though, agreed, not the same exact look) quality finish?
Click to expand...





In your case it doesn't matter. You get what you want out of it and that's great.



Personally, I wouldn't use OPS as a finishing polish following corrective work. I don't see it as a replacement for the finishing polishes that I use.



Past that I think Anthony O.'s comments about OPS echo what I think from the experience I have with it.
 
atticdog said:
anyone have a chance to compare 336NG to menzerna and optimum?
Click to expand...

I have and I was not completly satisfied. Had this wierd spitting action and not much of a cut also, Took a while to get a gloss, but it did it. Just had a weird learning curve. 106ff blows it away. Save your money. I still have almost a full bottle.
 
rydawg said:
What makes the new fa version better than the new ff? Is it true there is less dust?
Click to expand...



I have been in contact with Menzerna Germany and couple of months ago and asked about this and they told me



"PO106FA (less dust during application) is an improved version of our PO106FF."
 
porta said:
I have been in contact with Menzerna Germany and couple of months ago and asked about this and they told me



"PO106FA (less dust during application) is an improved version of our PO106FF."
Click to expand...



I agree mate, this is the only thing I noted, but the finish is the same, perfect. :drool:
 
I have a 8oz bottle of the PO106FA, but it´s at a friends place and he lives 80km from me...must go and get it :)
 
porta said:
I have a 8oz bottle of the PO106FA, but it´s at a friends place and he lives 80km from me...must go and get it :)
Click to expand...



My sample is 4oz I think. :nixweiss

Yes, you must go and make a comparison :waxing:
 
I notice earlier comments in this thread about IP and FPII being only for hardened clearcoat. I am planning to use them as prep for single stage paint followed by Zaino system. Are there any concerns with using IP and FPII on single-stage paint?
 
They are not only meant for hardened clears, they also work really on normal clears. I've heard however, that the single stage paints need more "oily" polishes/glazes to do better correction. Most everyone here will agree that Meg's 83/80 work well on a single stage paint.



I'd not use the Menzerna on a single stage paint. You might try Clearkote compound and vanilla moose as well.
 
Nimble said:
T Most everyone here will agree that Meg's 83/80 work well on a single stage paint.



I'd not use the Menzerna on a single stage paint. You might try Clearkote compound and vanilla moose as well.
Click to expand...



Agree on both points. #83/80 is a killer combo on single stage and Vanilla Moose eats oxidation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top