Swirls came back, what did I do wrong? Gonna try again this weekend.
- Thread starter leecm
- Start date
Accumulator
Well-known member
leecm- t's hard to say what's going wrong...but it appears you're working the whole hood instead of a little test area. Note that I hardly ever work the "two foot square" area that so many people talk about; I prefer smaller areas than that. And I still think you should get your process dialed in before you tackle an entire panel.
Don't judge your work under the fluorescents, they might be sooo bad for this that you can't tell when something's not working out properly. Good lighting can be essential; you simply *must* be able to accurately evaluate how things are going. (Sorry if this is after-the-fact advice.)
Is the hazing *from* the UC/orange? If so, and if the SwirlX/white isn't fixing it, then maybe you need an intermediate step, something like UC/white or SwirlX/orange (I'd probably lean towards the former rather than the latter).
What does the hazing appear to be from- from working the product with the PC? Or from wiping it off (I somehow suspect this might be it)? OR from something that was there before you started that's not getting fixed?
Maybe you need to IPA wipe/Dawn wash the area after you polish it so you can more clearly see the actual condition of the paint.
I'd pick a small area and see if you can sort out the problem by carefully using the UC followed by IPA wipes.
Don't judge your work under the fluorescents, they might be sooo bad for this that you can't tell when something's not working out properly. Good lighting can be essential; you simply *must* be able to accurately evaluate how things are going. (Sorry if this is after-the-fact advice.)
Is the hazing *from* the UC/orange? If so, and if the SwirlX/white isn't fixing it, then maybe you need an intermediate step, something like UC/white or SwirlX/orange (I'd probably lean towards the former rather than the latter).
What does the hazing appear to be from- from working the product with the PC? Or from wiping it off (I somehow suspect this might be it)? OR from something that was there before you started that's not getting fixed?
Maybe you need to IPA wipe/Dawn wash the area after you polish it so you can more clearly see the actual condition of the paint.
I'd pick a small area and see if you can sort out the problem by carefully using the UC followed by IPA wipes.
Accumulator
Well-known member
leecm said:
I wouldn't use UC on your only white pad.
Take a small area and wipe it clean with IPA. Inspect and gain a full understanding of its current condition. Try either of the combos. Rewipe with IPA. Inspect and see what the diff is. You have to figure out what's going on before you can decide what to do differently.
Do all this inspecting under light that allows you to see what's going on.
Note that if you do the SwirlX/white enough times, you should finally get the spot cleared up. "Enough times" might be a lot more than you'd like, but if the UC/orange is making thins worse instead of better, then that appears to be your only option.
Note that some of us have spent *many* hours correcting a single panel via PC. That was more common with the older model PCs and products that are less effective than today's stuff, but still...I don't want you to rule out having to spend a lot more time on this than you might ever imagine necessary.
Are you still using 6.5" pads? IF so, you might be simply wasting your time. I don't mean to kick a guy when he's already having trouble, but you're not making this easy on yourself- IMO you need some better lighting and some smaller pads. I'd want to use Meguiar's #34 when buffing off the UC, and I'd want to IPA wipe (or better yet, use TOL's PrepWash) as needed to clear up any polishing oils.
First off, I really appreciate all of your input. Don't worry about offending me or hurting my feelings. Yes, I'm having trouble and it's nerve racking, but I do want to get this figured out, one way or another.
I know that 6.5" pads are less effective than the smaller pads but it doesn't make sense that they be making the paint even worse than it was before, does it? I mean, I washed, clayed and even used some quick detail in some areas before I started using the PC.
I'm honestly kicking myself for doing more than just the test area. One my first try, a month or so ago, I did a test area using just swirlx and the orange pad, followed by the Megs DCP and everything looked great. I definitely jumped the gun this time, expecting everything to go smoothly. Needless to say, I'll have to chalk that up as a lesson learned the hard way.
I know I need to get better lighting and more pads of each color but I'm wondering - am I at the point where I need to get a professional to fix what I've messed up? I'd hate to just keep plugging along, trying to clear up the imperfections and end up burning through my clear coat. All while I could have saved the money I would have spent on the lighting/pads and just hired someone one time to get me out of this mess.
I'm not the type of person to take the easy way out, and I definitely like to be able to accomplish something myself. I'm just trying to do the wisest thing at this point.
I know that 6.5" pads are less effective than the smaller pads but it doesn't make sense that they be making the paint even worse than it was before, does it? I mean, I washed, clayed and even used some quick detail in some areas before I started using the PC.
I'm honestly kicking myself for doing more than just the test area. One my first try, a month or so ago, I did a test area using just swirlx and the orange pad, followed by the Megs DCP and everything looked great. I definitely jumped the gun this time, expecting everything to go smoothly. Needless to say, I'll have to chalk that up as a lesson learned the hard way.
I know I need to get better lighting and more pads of each color but I'm wondering - am I at the point where I need to get a professional to fix what I've messed up? I'd hate to just keep plugging along, trying to clear up the imperfections and end up burning through my clear coat. All while I could have saved the money I would have spent on the lighting/pads and just hired someone one time to get me out of this mess.
I'm not the type of person to take the easy way out, and I definitely like to be able to accomplish something myself. I'm just trying to do the wisest thing at this point.
Accumulator
Well-known member
OK, glad I'm not coming across badly.
Since the UC doesn't really "break down", the large pads shouldn't be causing the sort of truly awful problems that they could with other products. But they might not be allowing the products to work very well.
Especially, they might be making the SwirlX SOOOO ineffective that it just can't correct what the UC leaves. But I'm a little :think: about why the UC is leaving things so messed up. Maybe it's just not the right product for that particular job (the car, you, lots of things factor in and every product won't work optimally in every case...just the way it works out some times).
I don't think so. Worst case: you conceal the issues with the DC#2 while you wait for new pads (products too?). Then you tackle it bit-by-bit until you have it all sorted out.
I'm pretty confident that the problem is more a matter of *not* taking off clearcoat (i.e., not doing the abrasion required to correct the problem) and that you're not even close to overdoing it.
Take a *small* area, you could even make it so small you gotta work by hand, and see if doing the SwirlX many times (say...six or so) makes a diff. Inspect with the flashlight after each try; see if you can observe what's happening. Working by hand, you could try doing all the strokes in one direction (against/across/etc. the existing problems so you can see if its affecting them) and then looking to see if a) things simply get better or remain unchanged, b) there are new marks in the direction you were working.
Here's what I'm thinking: you have marring, maybe from the UC. The SwirlX is pretty gentle, but it *is* an abrasive, so it oughta fix said marring unless it's somehow causing new marring of its own. Figuring out "does SwirlX make a difference? Is that difference good or bad?" would be my suggestion.
But then, once it needed done again, all that money would be gone, rather than invested in stuff you can keep on using. I really do think you can get this all sorted out; it sometimes takes *anybody* a while to find the right approach for a given vehicle. Hey, last time I did an unknown-quantity car (a pal's Jag that I'd never touched before) I had to try a zillion different combos before I found the one that was just right. I had the luxury of a shop full of pads and products (and a fair bit of experience
), but it *still* took me a while to get my approach dialed-in.
Anyhow, the same lighting that's good for detailing can be handy for other stuff as well. I'm a nut about good lighting....
leecm said:
Since the UC doesn't really "break down", the large pads shouldn't be causing the sort of truly awful problems that they could with other products. But they might not be allowing the products to work very well.
Especially, they might be making the SwirlX SOOOO ineffective that it just can't correct what the UC leaves. But I'm a little :think: about why the UC is leaving things so messed up. Maybe it's just not the right product for that particular job (the car, you, lots of things factor in and every product won't work optimally in every case...just the way it works out some times).
I don't think so. Worst case: you conceal the issues with the DC#2 while you wait for new pads (products too?). Then you tackle it bit-by-bit until you have it all sorted out.
I'm pretty confident that the problem is more a matter of *not* taking off clearcoat (i.e., not doing the abrasion required to correct the problem) and that you're not even close to overdoing it.
Take a *small* area, you could even make it so small you gotta work by hand, and see if doing the SwirlX many times (say...six or so) makes a diff. Inspect with the flashlight after each try; see if you can observe what's happening. Working by hand, you could try doing all the strokes in one direction (against/across/etc. the existing problems so you can see if its affecting them) and then looking to see if a) things simply get better or remain unchanged, b) there are new marks in the direction you were working.
Here's what I'm thinking: you have marring, maybe from the UC. The SwirlX is pretty gentle, but it *is* an abrasive, so it oughta fix said marring unless it's somehow causing new marring of its own. Figuring out "does SwirlX make a difference? Is that difference good or bad?" would be my suggestion.
But then, once it needed done again, all that money would be gone, rather than invested in stuff you can keep on using. I really do think you can get this all sorted out; it sometimes takes *anybody* a while to find the right approach for a given vehicle. Hey, last time I did an unknown-quantity car (a pal's Jag that I'd never touched before) I had to try a zillion different combos before I found the one that was just right. I had the luxury of a shop full of pads and products (and a fair bit of experience
), but it *still* took me a while to get my approach dialed-in.Anyhow, the same lighting that's good for detailing can be handy for other stuff as well. I'm a nut about good lighting....
The last combination I tried yesterday before quitting was swirlx/orange and it seemed like it may have corrected the finish some. The marring was still there (if not reduced slightly) when I shined a flashlight on it. The cloudiness I could see before with my naked eye seemed to be gone for the most part.
I'm thinking about starting back up here in a little while with the same combo and see how things turn out. I'll do a little spot like you suggested. Before I do, I'll get out a MF hand applicator pad and apply some swirl x repeatedly in different directions with each application and check to see how it effects the paint.
Should my UC be a runnier consistency than the swirlx? My swirlx is quite thick, while the UC is, I don't want to say watery, but it's definitely easier to squeeze out on to the pads. It seems like it should be the other way around.
I'm thinking about starting back up here in a little while with the same combo and see how things turn out. I'll do a little spot like you suggested. Before I do, I'll get out a MF hand applicator pad and apply some swirl x repeatedly in different directions with each application and check to see how it effects the paint.
Should my UC be a runnier consistency than the swirlx? My swirlx is quite thick, while the UC is, I don't want to say watery, but it's definitely easier to squeeze out on to the pads. It seems like it should be the other way around.
What size pads should I buy?
I'm thinking about ordering this
CCS Spot Buffs 4 Inch Foam Pad Kit Free Bonus!
I'm thinking about ordering this
CCS Spot Buffs 4 Inch Foam Pad Kit Free Bonus!
Accumulator
Well-known member
leecm said:
OK, that's informative. It sounds like the UC is leaving some residual (deeper) marring while causing some light marring/hazing of its own. Sounds like repeated use of SwirlX can take care of the latter.
So you'd use the UC until you've had enough or the problem is solved, and then clear up its micromarring with the SwirlX. Then I'd probably do one final pass with the SwirlX and the white pad.
That should help you determine whether what I surmised above is *really* what's going on.
Sorry, I can't say as I've never used either product. I wonder if you could get Mike Phillips's input. He'd be a lot more helpful than I'm being.
That's the right size, but I don't like those dimpled pads. I'd look for flat 4" pads instead, maybe the cyan (cutting) and tangerine (polishing) Hydrotech pads from LC. Note that those have to be clean and dry to work properly, so you'll need a few of them since drying pads out after you wash them is easier said than done.
mirrormirror
New member
leecm said:
I've used both, and I can attest that UC is pretty thin (pretty close to M205), while SwirlX is so thick it is almost difficult to squeeze out. So, it sounds like the product is of the right consistency. Surprised to hear about the problems with UC, as it worked very well for me (used Meguiars SoftBuff 2.0 Yellow Polish pads), but like Accumulator said, every car and combination is different. I'd continue to follow the good advice....sounds like you are making a little progress now. Good luck.
Accumulator said:
I ended up taking your advice and purchased these 4" pads. 6 of each color. I also went ahead and purchased 32oz of m105 and m205. I'm hoping these agree with my paint better than the dimpled 6.5" CCS pads and UC/swirlx I was using.
Like I said in a previous post, the Swirlx/orange pad did seem like it was making a difference so I tried that yesterday. I used several applications in the test area with 4 to 6 section passes each time. I quickly spread the polish at speed 3, turned the PC off, then worked it in at speed 5, applying enough pressure to slow the spinning of the pad for the first few section passes, then lightened the pressure for the last couple.
The weird thing is, the finish would look like it improved after one application, then after I went again to try to improve it further, it would end up looking like I degraded the progress I had just previously made. I just can't figure out why this is happening. The only thing I can think of is that there is an inconsistency in my technique that is making the results change so drastically (from good to bad, back to good) after each application.
I know that I'm going to be a lot more careful with the 4" pads, because they have a stronger cut than the 6.5". My concern is that my test area has been worked so much (like I said, several applications of 4 to 6 section passes each time) that I'll end up damaging the paint if I keep trying in this same area. I know I probably sound like a broken record in regards to my worries, it's just that I'm inexperienced, have never burnt through cc, and don't know how much leeway I have before I end up doing so.
Accumulator
Well-known member
leecm said:
OK. The M105 can leave some fairly significant hazing (worse than the UC, I'd bet) and you really oughta use some of that M34 Final Inspection to help buff its residue off. That's cut down on the hazing.
The M205 can leave a *LOT* of oils behind. IF that's an issue, try IPA or a Dawn wash (I use TOL's PrepWash).
Heh heh, a quart of each oughta last a good long time!
Remember that you need to keep the pads *CLEAN* with M105. Clumps of dried product can lead to major not-so-micro marring issues.
[Repeat small area test-spot, etc. lecture
]Ah-ha! Don't spread the product first. With these, you want to a) prime the pad properly so it's evenly distributed in all the pad's pores but not *clogging* those pores, b) blot off any excess product if you applied too much, and c) place the machine on the panel and turn it on at speed 6 and start working. Zero spreading, no ramping up the speed, none of that. Just prime/place/polish.
It does sound like you did something inconsistent :think: (Well, "duh!" huh, since trying to do the same process yielded very different results
) Maybe the pad was different (product on it, a need for cleaning) ,or the MF (perhaps loaded with polish residue/cut-off paint), or your technique (who knows what you might've done).But you're *thinking* about it the right way now.
I still doubt you're even close to trouble, but you can pick another spot for use with the new setup (and/or any other further experimentation).
Accumulator said:
OK. The M105 can leave some fairly significant hazing (worse than the UC, I'd bet) and you really oughta use some of that M34 Final Inspection to help buff its residue off. That's cut down on the hazing.
The M205 can leave a *LOT* of oils behind. IF that's an issue, try IPA or a Dawn wash (I use TOL's PrepWash).
Heh heh, a quart of each oughta last a good long time!
Remember that you need to keep the pads *CLEAN* with M105. Clumps of dried product can lead to major not-so-micro marring issues.
[Repeat small area test-spot, etc. lecture
The final inspection would be sprayed on the surface and wiped off by hand, correct? Would I be able to use Megs Quik Detailer as an alternative or are the products too different to substitute for one another?
I have a spray bottle with IPA (50/50 isopropyl/water) so I'll try that for now.
When you say that I need to keep the pads clean, are you referring to inspecting them between applications? If so, how would I go about cleaning them aside from washing them with dawn and water? Just pick the dried clumps off by hand? I'm asking because, from what I gather, if I do wash a pad with dawn and water, it's out of commission until it dries completely. Am I correct in assuming that?
I wonder why I've seen so many people recommend spreading the polish/compound out before working it in. Mike Phillips, for example, says to do it on one of his videos. This makes using the search function a tough thing to do sometimes, because it will often yield totally different answers with each thread you click on. I'm not trying to blame you or anyone, I'm just trying to give you insight in to why I may be confused about some things or may be doing things improperly.
Forgive me for asking, but when you say prime, what exactly do you mean? I've searched this previously and have had a hard time finding results. I've seen people refer to priming a pad and it seems like they're referring to different things. On one hand, it seems like they're referring to spraying water or QD spray on the pad prior to putting polish on it. On the other hand, it seems like they're referring to spreading an even layer of polish onto a pad before placing it on a panel. I don't want to sound like I haven't done my own research, it's just that my search didn't yield satisfactory results and I really do want to fully understand this process.
Speed 6 seemed really fast for the swirlx/orange pad combo. It seemed like almost immediately, the pad was flinging dried up pieces of swirlx everywhere. Maybe I was applying too much pressure?
It does sound like you did something inconsistent :think: (Well, "duh!" huh, since trying to do the same process yielded very different results
But you're *thinking* about it the right way now.
I'm really going to focus on consistency next go around.
Accumulator
Well-known member
leecm said:
Yeah, think of it as a solvent/wash to help get the M105 residue (which remains abrasive) off the paint with as little marring as possible.
They're sufficiently different that I'd want to use #34. Sorry to keep suggesting that you spend your money on more new stuff
OK, just note that IPA doesn't offer much in the way of lubrication and encapsulation.
Yeah. The dry polish residue and the cut-off paint can cause problems. You can spritz some #34 on a towel and scrub the pad with that. Sooner or later that's not sufficient and you need to wash out the pads or use a new/fresh one.
And yeah, pads like the hydrotechs need to be dry, with nothing on them except the product you're using.
It depends on the product. With nondiminishing abrasives like we're discussing here, you have to do things a little differently. With other products, spreading is the way to go (and priming the pads isn't nearly as big a deal with those other products either).
I sympathize about how hard it is to find the right info for specific situations.
I do it the way Kevin Brown does, at least with M105/M205. That's the even application across the pad method where the pores are "loaded" with product but not to the point where they're "clogged". You want it to look uniform and not have so much product that you get sling or excess all over the panel.
No, I do *NOT* spray anything on the pads when using this type of machine. Period. Never.
It takes some getting used to..the speed that is. Working with smaller pads, on smaller areas, and remembering that these products do their thing *fast* should help. It's not like you work each application for a whole minute or anything like that.
I really wish Mike would chime in as he's the training guy, I feel a little out of my depth here. I know what works best for *me*, on the cars *I* have, but it's sometimes challenging to sort out somebody else's problems. Not that I mind; I like being of assistance, I just wonder how much headway I'm making.
It's not so much the buying of the products that I hate, it's the paying for the shipping! :lol If only I could find this stuff locally... I'll get some though. Thanks for the suggestion.
Using the #34 on the towel method to clean the pads would still be fine though, right?
Thank you for clarifying that.
You've been very helpful and I appreciate your advice. I'm sorry that this thread turned in to such a beast.:lol It was not my intention. I now have a better understanding of how to tackle this problem in the future. I'll try not to bother you too much until after I get the products and am able to work with them.
Accumulator
Well-known member
leecm said:
Check the phone book for autobody/paint supply stores. They often have stuff OTC. I learned about that approach from my *mother* of all people, many decades ago.
Right.
No, no..this is all good. I just wish I had a magic-bullet answer. There's a lot to cover and some of the M105/M205/etc.-specific stuff can be significant. I mentioned Mike because a) he worked for Meguiar's as a product-application expert for ages and hence b) he's coached a zillion people and seen most everything there is to see (and figured out how to fix it).
Mike_Phillips
Administrator
leecm said:
SwirlX is very thick, this is normal. UC should be more like a skin lotion, not watery.
Accumulator said:
Thanks for the kind words, I've been very fortunate in that I've been able to work with a lot of people and a their cars over the years... it's been a lot of fun and with the new studio and classroom it's even more fun.
To leecm,
You like many others and myself have learned the value in doing what's called a Test Spot. Simply put, make sure your products and process can make one small area look GREAT before going over the entire car or even an entire panel.
Test Spot - The story behind the story...
Watch both of these below videos, the first on is on what a Section Pass is and it's important.
http://www.autopia.org/forum/autogeek-net/127932-video-how-do-section-pass-when-machine-buffing.html
This next one is fairly exhaustive and shows how to do a Test Spot to one area on a car. The thing is, when using a DA Polisher, doing the entire car is basically repeating the Test Spot over and over again, so once you dial in a successful system that works in your Test Spot, then you just repeat the test spot by breaking the car's panels up into smaller sections.
http://www.autopia.org/forum/autoge...swirls-scratches-water-spots-da-polisher.html
p.s.
Most of my articles I post here on Atuopia...
http://www.autopia.org/forum/autogeek-net/
My sig line also has a link to the most current list of article and vidoes...
Accumulator said:
How long should each application last? In the Mike Phillips videos (which I had already actually watched and based my technique off of), each one of Mike's applications (4-6 section passes each) lasted around a minute.
Also, I never applied an LSP after working with the PC on Fri and Sat. :doh Hopefully my paint will be ok by the time my stuff gets here. It's all supposed to arrive tomorrow so hopefully I can get started soon after that.
Accumulator
Well-known member
leecm said:
The work time is *VERY* product-dependent. The M105 (and to a considerable lesser extent, the M205) is a very short-work-time product. By the time I move the polisher back and forth across the (small) area of operation maybe 6-8 times it's done.
The abrasives in M105/M205 don't break down. What happens is that the carrying agents (the liquid stuff that the abrasives are mixed in with) dries out. So if you stop "too soon" it shouldn't be a big deal, and that's even a feature because you can stop without worrying about whether the abrasives have broken down enough.
SO...*IMO*, it might be better to err on the side of "stopping too soon" than to risk overworking the product.
Eh, today's paint is pretty tough stuff. Since you're repolishing anyhow, it'll be fine.
Ok, so I primed the pad with m105, as described in This thread on the cyan pad and started on my test area. The first application, I noticed that it is hard to slow the spinning of the pad down at speed 6! Also, after on the second application, dried polish flakes started shooting out as soon as I turned the PC on. I think this is because I added 4 extra pea sized dots of m105 to the pad. Should I only use the prime on the pad? Here's what the pad looks like. Am I added too much when I prime it? Note that the right side of the pad looks bare, I think that is just the lighting making it look like that.
I noticed that the pad and the paint get quite warm. Am I working the pad for too long each time? I'm doing about 4 section passes each time. The paint is looking better, but I'm still seeing a lighter look to the finish, where you can see the back and forth motion I'm using in my section passes. Should I keep working the cyan and m105 or will the tangerine/205 take those marks out?
I noticed that the pad and the paint get quite warm. Am I working the pad for too long each time? I'm doing about 4 section passes each time. The paint is looking better, but I'm still seeing a lighter look to the finish, where you can see the back and forth motion I'm using in my section passes. Should I keep working the cyan and m105 or will the tangerine/205 take those marks out?