Seeking additions/corrections to abrasives list

a.k.a. Patrick said:
Dennis, it basically works via chemical process than by abrasive attrition. Polishes either work by chemically removing oxidation, it breaks down the dead paint for safe removal, or they work by abrading (Abrasives) away dead paint, vertical edges on swirls and scratches.....
Click to expand...



Thanks. I was kind of hoping for a different explanation.
 
Eliot Ness said:
Where would Vanilla Moose fall into this scheme? It's listed as a glaze and light polish. Does anyone know if it polishes with chemicals or abrasives and does it contain fillers?
Click to expand...



It would be a "2". As best I can tell (having used it on b/c and a few different SSs), it has *very* mild abrasives and some fillers. I't slightly more abrasive than P21S GEPC and the VM leaves more behind filler/wax-wise.



I dunno about chemical cleaners though...when a product has some abrasives in it I can't tell much about whether it cleans chemically. If somebody has used it on oxidized paint maybe they can answer that one.



Dennis H. - I take it you were looking for confirmation/agreement that abrasion is a mechanical process, and that some words (like "chemical" and "abrasive") don't really go together in certain contexts, right? ;)



Beanbag- OK on the "need at least two". I have no problem with requiring some kind of consensus before you go changing things.



Now somebody agree/not on the VM so we can get that widely used product on the list :D
 
The process of polishing is strictly mechanical. There is no such activity as "chemical" polishing....that would be cleaning.



Polishing and in particular, fine polishing is the process of removing scratches that the eye can see, and replacing them with very minute scratches that are imperceptible to the human eye. This is done with polishing compounds also known as abrasives.



The removal of a substance with chemicals through solvency or chelating or some other type of reaction falls under the realm of cleaning.
 
a.k.a. Patrick said:
...maybe we should push MW up to 4 then. There really nowhere near each other in ability.
Click to expand...



I haven't tried it, but I thought it was a chemical cleaner and not an abrasive. If so, I wouldn't want to muddy the waters and have somebody complain that a "4" didn't remove their scratches. If it *is* abrasive, then I'll stand corrected...
 
Accumulator said:
I haven't tried it, but I thought it was a chemical cleaner and not an abrasive. If so, I wouldn't want to muddy the waters and have somebody complain that a "4" didn't remove their scratches. If it *is* abrasive, then I'll stand corrected...
Click to expand...



I clarified the purpose of the list, which is a ranking of scratch removal ability, not filling or "oxidation removal". I hope this will clear up some disputes. Medallion and AIO are ranked at 2, despite how well they "clean". If something has strong "cleaning" abilities, it gets a little (c) next to it. If it fills well, it gets a (f).
 
a.k.a. Patrick said:
Im with you Accum...,but maybe we should push MW up to 4 then. There really nowhere near each other in ability.
Click to expand...



So MW has more abrasives than VM? From their product descriptions I'd think VM would be a step before MW (and hence have more abrasives), but maybe I don't understand what each product is meant to do.
 
I would put FP to at least a 3, and not in the same category as Deep Crystal system and other products that rely on fillers. It's definitly more abrasive then #9. Probably the equivalent of SSR1
 
Eliot Ness said:
So MW has more abrasives than VM? From their product descriptions I'd think VM would be a step before MW (and hence have more abrasives), but maybe I don't understand what each product is meant to do.
Click to expand...



Heh heh, this is what I'm waiting for somebody to clarify. VM is a *very* mild product abrasion-wise, but I *think* MW is basically nonabrasive. But I'm starting to feel uneasy about commenting so much about a product I haven't tried :o



Patrick- I get the oxidation/cleaning ability difference, but is MW something that will remove marring/scratches from "healthy" paint? I bet you know more about that stuff than I do by far.



Beanbag- OK, cool. Saying "scratch removal" cuts to the chase :xyxthumbs
 
sw20_og said:
So...any backers and second opinions about this very underrated product?
Click to expand...



I dug up an old email from Anthony Orosco where he said it was more aggressive than Menzerna Final Polish. So I put it at 4. I personally used it and probably got a bad batch coz it caused scratching.
 
Accumulator said:
Heh heh, this is what I'm waiting for somebody to clarify. VM is a *very* mild product abrasion-wise, but I *think* MW is basically nonabrasive. But I'm starting to feel uneasy about commenting so much about a product I haven't tried :o



Patrick- I get the oxidation/cleaning ability difference, but is MW something that will remove marring/scratches from "healthy" paint? I bet you know more about that stuff than I do by far.



Beanbag- OK, cool. Saying "scratch removal" cuts to the chase :xyxthumbs
Click to expand...



Ok a little clarification...MW does have abrasives in it, you can even feel them with your fingers, very light, but it has some. It gets an additional punch through chemical cleaning. This is what makes it such a good product, a jab, then an upper cut! Vanilla Moose, has very very very little abrasive qualities. I'd be comfortable giving MW a 3(c), and VM a 2. (It has some, so it really cant be a 1) Im going to need to speak with Everette on this one also......
 
Maybe newbie mistake here to revive an old and controversial thread, but you can add the following to the list:



Transtar Technologies, Plus Kut Compound: 8-9

9 with wool pad (up to 1000 grit), 8 with a foam cutting pad.... swirl installer with a milder pad :D



Transtar Technologies, Tri-Cut: 3 to 6

6 with cutting pad, 4 with a polishing pad. It can even be used with a finish pad (2 or 3) Versatile product, decent performance.



Transtar technologies, Final Finish: 1-2

2 with polishing pad, 1 with finish pad





Alex
 
Has anyone tried Hi Temp Medium and Heavy Cut? They seem extraordinarily inexpensive for what they are!
 
Lore said:
Has anyone tried Hi Temp Medium and Heavy Cut? They seem extraordinarily inexpensive for what they are!
Click to expand...



I have them both.



Heavy Cut is ...well pretty heavy in the cutting area. It is not a product you can use then just go directly to a wax. It needs to be smoothed over, depending on what pad is used with it, with something like IP or Med. cut. Persoanlly I would not use a PC or Cyclo with the heavy cut, rotary only in my opinion.



Medium Cut is perhaps not as aggressive as PG and yet not as mild as IP.



Hi-Temp delivers quality professional products at great prices. They do not seek to have fancy packaging or labels so this saves them in production cost.



Lastly, it is difficult to pin down a universal meaning for "polish" and "cleaning" that all detailers would agree on. Personally I see "polishing" as the removal of marring, swirls, scratches and to then achieve a highly reflective finish.



To "clean" would then mean to remove oxidation and paint contaminates.



Others may agree, others disagree.....hey, it's just wax:D



Anthony
 
nosed_b18b said:
so I'm assuming that this list is pretty accurate??
Click to expand...

Itâ€â„¢s a good guide for reference. Some may rate a product a grade above or below how it is listed here, but I donâ€â„¢t think there is anything that is classed way out of line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top