Relative abrasiveness of 3M SMR, cleaner wax, and FCRC

S

shaf

New member
Well, since this got zapped in the server outage, here it is again. I got more interested in 3M's cleaner wax after reading theveed's review of 3M Finish Restorer, and especially about how it removed some of his swirls. This is the surprisingly helpful reply I got from 3M about the abrasiveness of their One Step Medium Oxidation Remover Cleaner Wax, relative to their Swirl Mark Remover and Fine Cut Rubbing Compound (FCRC):

Brian - thanks for the question about 3M Car Care Products. It's difficult to give a perfect answer to your question because of the variety of tools and pads used to perform this function. They too can have an effect on the aggressiveness of the different products. But here is our best advice on the subject. I've identified both cut (how quickly it removes material - the higher the number the faster it cuts) and finish (how smooth the surface is after application - 0 being very high gloss). The perfect product would have a very high cut number and a very low finish number.



Swirl Mark Remover: 25 cut, 2 finish (this product contains no waxes or silicones - wax should be applied as a second step)



Medium Oxidation Remover: 45 cut, 2 finish (this product also has a wax in it which makes the finish look better) ...therefore Med. Ox. Remover should get rid of the scratches/oxidation/watermarks quicker and leave a very similar finish.



The next most aggressive product would be Perfect-it II Rubbing Compound, 39002: Cut=65, Finish=12. Typically a professional would use Perfect-it II to get rid of all imperfections, then Swirl mark remover to remove the minor scratches or swirlmarks left from the compounding stage and then a wax. When working by hand you can often go straight from 39002 to a wax/polish.



Hope this helps.



Bill Wheeler

3M Automotive Aftermarket Division
Click to expand...

The nice thing is it seems like they have a system to at least informally rate how agressive a product is.



I (finally) got a reply from Turtle Wax regarding their Color Back but I think the 5-year old handling their customer service took a while to read the back of a bottle. :rolleyes:



At the suggestion of another member, I tried a follow-up email to 3M about how aggressive the well-known FI2 is also, but they didn't respond :( I might try again later...
 
4DSC,



If you should e-mail the 3M rep again, please ask for info on their Perfect-It III Machine Glaze (which really isn't a glaze as we typically think about it around here . . . it's an abrasive swirl remover with no fillers). I used it this weekend, and it seems to have a little more bite than a swirl remover, but a little less agressive than FI-II (I'm basing that observation on very little experience, so make sure you have a grain or three of salt handy). I'd be interested to see where 3M places it in their informal cut/finish ratings . . .



Tort



P.S. If you have a chance to pick up some of the PIII Machine Glaze, I recommend it. It's much easier to work with than FI-II; it breaks down much more quickly, IMO, and the residue is very easy to remove. It leaves a slick surface behind rather than the squeaky clean feeling left by FI-II. The only downside was a good deal of dusting from the PIII.
 
for FI2 strength without any of the hassle, i suggest meguiars #83 Dual action cleaner polish. Geekysteve and bjwebster got me hooked on this stuff. Smells like amaretto coffee flavoring too!
 
AlBoston said:
for FI2 strength without any of the hassle, i suggest meguiars #83 Dual action cleaner polish. Geekysteve and bjwebster got me hooked on this stuff. Smells like amaretto coffee flavoring too!
Click to expand...



Al, I've read that DACP has oils and fillers in it as well. In the end, this makes life more difficult because you have to strip the oils after each app to see how many swirls you have actually removed.



I agree that FI isn't the easiest polish to work with, but it's not that bad.



I wouldn't recco DACP as an alternative to FI. FI is one of the most versatile polishes on the market. There is no substitute.
 
Brian:



Thanks for the info. BTW, I got my response from 3M regarding FI-2 and whether or not it truly contained little-to-no oils/fillers (thus being the perfect pre-wax cleaner for SG/Zaino) and all they did was fax me a MSDS for the product. It's not exactly the answer I was looking for and it doesn't really answer my question, but if anyone wants it, let me know and I'll e-mail it in PDF form.



Tort:



Have you ever tried PI-3 MG by hand? Also, is 32 ounces the smallest size 3M offers?



Thanks.
 
AlBoston said:
for FI2 strength without any of the hassle, i suggest meguiars #83 Dual action cleaner polish. Geekysteve and bjwebster got me hooked on this stuff. Smells like amaretto coffee flavoring too!
Click to expand...
Al,



Unfortunately, I had terrible luck with the DACP (so much so that i returned it to the paint shop) . . . I don't know what the problem was; I used pretty much the same technique I would use with FI-II. The DACP didn't make a dent in the existing swirls on the car, and left a haze of its own on top of that. Perhaps I got a bad bottle of the DACP? :nixweiss



Intermezzo:



I've not tried the Machine Glaze by hand (only PC + yellow "cutting" pad, and it left an excellent gloss once broken down and buffed out), and I've only seen quart sizes at my paint shop . . .



Tort
 
Tort,



I think as far as the Meguiars body shop line goes a quart is the smallest quantity available. I bought a quart each of DACP, Swirl Free Polish, and Machine Glaze.
 
I bought an older car a couple of years ago for a song. The only real problem was that the hood was covered with water spots that wouldn't come out even though I tried the following: 3 brands of wax and tar removers, window cleaner, vinegar, 3 glazes, 2 swirl removers, and a fine cut cleaner. In desparation, I contacted 3M and they recommended the Cleaner Wax Medium Oxidation Remover.



32 OZ was the smallest size available. I stripped off all of the existing wax and then tried it on a test spot. It actually removed those etched water spots.



I broke out the buffer and after a couple of hours and at least 4 passes on each section I was able to clean up the waterspots. Now the wax was brilliant initially. Every bit as clear and deep as P21S, but as expected since it's a cleaner wax, it doesn't last very long. Pretty well gone after 4 weeks.



Not a problem because I didn't buy it for wax durability. And, by the way, it got rid of all swirl marks in the process. The hood, which has troubled me for months, now has a clear deep shine like the rest of the car.



Highly recommended for waterspots on a clear coat paint. :xyxthumbs
 
TortoiseAWD said:
Al,



Unfortunately, I had terrible luck with the DACP (so much so that i returned it to the paint shop) . . . I don't know what the problem was; I used pretty much the same technique I would use with FI-II. The DACP didn't make a dent in the existing swirls on the car, and left a haze of its own on top of that. Perhaps I got a bad bottle of the DACP? :nixweiss



Tort
Click to expand...



DACP + 26



http://www.pbase.com/theveed/first_time_full_2_step_detail
 
I agree that FI isn't the easiest polish to work with, but it's not that bad.
Click to expand...



For you guys having a hard time with FI... Why dont you try 3M FCRC? Ive found it to be pretty close to FI in terms of cutting strength, but Ive found it much easier to remove!
 
Someone mentioned the "dusting" from the Perfect It compound, I believe that stuff is silica particulate, which is not very good for the lungs. When I started using the PI II RC I picked up a particulate matter respirator for protection, 30 CDN got me a good silicone mask and filters.



Many of you may already know this, but I thought it good to mention for any people that may be thinking of using products that breadk down into harmful dust.



Darcy
 
Well, it took longer than I expected, but I finally got my second reply from 3M! Now with even more juicy info! :)

Dear Brian,





We have provided this type of information to a number of our customers in

the form of counter cards or point-of-purchase cards that they display with

the products. Not everyone displays the information or takes the time to

keep the information available. I'll look at the possibility of adding it

to the information we have on the internet (3M web site - under the US and

Automotive/Marine/Aerospace group).



Regarding the products you inquired about: Using the same index:

39003 Finesse-It Finishing Material: cut 25, finish 4

39006 One Step Cleaner Wax, Light Oxidation remover: cut 15, finish 1



.....and just to give you more information than you need, once you move to

products with waxes in them (like 39006) we have a durability index. This

one is pretty simple. All the products have 0 except the following:

Hand Glaze - 1

Gloss Enhancer - 2-4

One Step Product - light oxidation = 5-8

One Step Product - med. oxidation = 3=5

3M Liquid Wax - 10-15

3M Paste Wax - 15-20



The higher the number, the better the durability - sort of like the number

of hand car washes it will stand before another waxing is required. So once

you get the car looking great with the abrasive products, we highly

recommend using the 3M Paste Wax. Then if you are a fanatic, use the Gloss

Enhancer everytime you wash the car.



Good luck and thanks for the inquiries.



Bill Wheeler

Automotive Aftermarkets

3M Canada Company
Click to expand...

This last bit of info about durability is really interesting too (and surprising that they even have it!). It highlights 2 things: 1) Longevity of both the light and medium oxidation waxes is poor, as expected. 2) The paste wax is more durable than the liquid wax.



Both these observations don't mean that this is necessarily true as a blanket statement, but it is consistent with what has been said by many before.



I really hope they DO offer this info on their website. It's interesting to note that FI2 has the same cut rate as SMR, but no fillers I suppose. It's also neat that he gave a durability index for Hand Glaze, which must be IHG.
 
Guys, theres some thing wrong here. 3M guys says Finesse it is rated at 25, the same as he rates SMR! Now, dont we all know that FI is more agressive than SMR? Of course it is. Then, he compounds the error by rating Moderate Strength Cleaner Wax as stronger yet at 45! HIs highest cut rating 65 goes to FCRC, which is about the Only one Id agree with. Do we want to accept this convoluted rating as gospel? I think we need to question it.
 
Very interesting information! You PM'd me right before the server trouble, and I never got to read it. If it was important, please resend...



Paul- I believe I've read that FI II was similar to SMR excepting that it lacked whatever fillers the SMR contains. I am surprised (still) at the finish ranking of the FCRC vs. that of FI II; I thought the finish resulting from the FCRC was really nice!



Again, thanks loads for the follow up, Brian.



Robert
 
paul e said:
Guys, theres some thing wrong here. 3M guys says Finesse it is rated at 25, the same as he rates SMR! Now, dont we all know that FI is more agressive than SMR? Of course it is. Then, he compounds the error by rating Moderate Strength Cleaner Wax as stronger yet at 45! HIs highest cut rating 65 goes to FCRC, which is about the Only one Id agree with. Do we want to accept this convoluted rating as gospel? I think we need to question it.
Click to expand...



I was told a different system by 3m Tech support.



3M Cleaner Wax Light Oxidation was listed at 1200



3M Cleaner Wax Medium Oxidatation remover was the next highest with a 1100.



The next highest was the super duty rubbing compound at 1000.



I couldn't find a rating for SMR.
 
mrdetailer said:
I was told a different system by 3m Tech support.



3M Cleaner Wax Light Oxidation was listed at 1200



3M Cleaner Wax Medium Oxidatation remover was the next highest with a 1100.



The next highest was the super duty rubbing compound at 1000.



I couldn't find a rating for SMR.
Click to expand...
Hmm, that's a bit strange... I haven't used anything but SMR, but I find it hard to believe there'd be only a 20% difference between the Light Oxidation wax and the Super Duty compound! From 3M's site, it says this about the Super Duty: "Aggressive compound. Remains wet on the job with little or no mess. Maintains high rate of cut with constant pressure." and also "Heavy cutting, machine-applied rubbing compound that effectively removes grade 1000 sand scratches, other coarse scratches and severe oxidation." for their 16oz one, which strangely seems to be different than the quart-sized one. Also, what do those numbers mean? :nixweiss



As for the strength of the moderate cleaner wax, I (personally) don't see why not. If the finish is so bad and neglected that it has "moderate" oxidation, it probably could also use a good polishing at the same time. I bet this is what 3M had in mind. Just go over a neglected finish with the Medium Oxidation wax once and be done everything.



No problem Porterdog.... but I can't remember what I PM'd you... probably was just telling you I emailed 3M back, that's all. :)





EDIT: Sorry TortoiseAWD, I didn't get any info about PI3 Machine Glaze because he was responding to an email I'd sent before the server outage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top