Pad face style?

DWPC

New member
Being a weekender only doing my own cars, I can't afford to experiment on all the pads I see advertised; flat, dimpled, waffle, and hex pattern. Is there really much difference in performance? Are the different pad patterns seriously different with a given grade of polish?
 
Being a weekender only doing my own cars, I can't afford to experiment on all the pads I see advertised; flat, dimpled, waffle, and hex pattern. Is there really much difference in performance? Are the different pad patterns seriously different with a given grade of polish?

I have tried the dimpled "CCS" type pads and eventually went back to flat ones. Generally, the more surface area contacting the paint, the more correction you get. I also ventured into the microfiber world but found that while you do get a lot of correction with them I just didn't like the way they finished down, at least on an aggressive single-step correction. My favorite foam pads are the RUPES and I even use them on my rotary and FLEX. The shape is just right, they don't chatter or skip, the velcro is very strong and they are extremely durable overall. Hope that helps.

- Patrick
 
I can work longer with a CCS pad, which I attribute to it soaking up less product. The 4" CCS pads work much better for me than the flats. That being said, pick one type and standardize on it, learn it, own it, and you'll get great results.
 
I first started off with CCS pads and that feels like ages ago. I honestly can't remember the last time I used them either. Everything I use now has a flat surface: Hydrotech, Hybrid, HD Orbital, Rupes. Most importantly, what machine are you working with? If you are working with a PC or Griots, I would start off with Hydrotech thin pads or the new Meguiar's thin pads. I have used the thicker Meguiar's soft buff 2.0 pads and if the new pads are similar to the old ones they are a win.
 
I have found CCS pads better for SMAT type products and flat pads for DAT stypes products.

To my mind, the advantage of the CCS pads for SMAT polishes is that you can re-introduce fresh polish to the working surface of the pad during your buffing cycle.... This is potentially an issue with a DAT product where you do not want to be re-introducing fresh polish mid-way through a buffing cycle as you then have abrasives that are 'big' where the rest of them have already been broken down and are 'small' - therefore leaving you with an inconsistent finish.

On a traditional 8mm throw DA (non-forced rotation) THIN pads are better whereas on something like the Flex 3401, this is less of an issue.
 
I have found CCS pads better for SMAT type products and flat pads for DAT stypes products..

That's interesting.

While it differs from my experience, I do appreciate hearing opinons/experiences from the other side of the fence. I suspect that technique factors in big time here.
 
That's interesting.

While it differs from my experience, I do appreciate hearing opinons/experiences from the other side of the fence. I suspect that technique factors in big time here.

Amen brother. You can't just watch a Junkman video and polish a turd into Tesla.

I can get better results today using a used Buff & Shine pad off eBay and a crusty bottle of UC than I could have gotten two years ago with a Cyclone and a Polish Angel endorsement.
 
I was on a lake CCS bandwagon for awhile but have begun replacing those with flat pads. For whatever reason the CCS pads seem to hold up much better that the flat. Even my newer Lake flat pads the backing is beginning to seperate.
 
I was on a lake CCS bandwagon for awhile but have begun replacing those with flat pads. For whatever reason the CCS pads seem to hold up much better that the flat. Even my newer Lake flat pads the backing is beginning to seperate.
I figure that the "dimples" on CCS pads are melted right thru to the pad backing and help reinforce the foam for more stability than on flat pads.
 
Back
Top