The Rupes BIGFOOT LHR 21E is heading to the USA!!!

[CEE DOG]

Last I experienced Kevin Brown from Buffdaddy is the most reputable vendor I have conducted business with. No one and I repeat no one has shared more knowledge about polishing paint then Kevin. Kevin has already figured out how to turn the rupes bigfoot into a better performing machine, nobody including those at the walmart of auto detailing supplies is going to put the time and effort into providing you with a better and more efficient polishing experience.



Those that know will use Kevin and those that don't will keep on the path they choose.

Bravo!!! :clap: very well stated.... "walgmart" or a class act business that knows and cares about what they sell you.... The choice is yours

 

[autoconcierge]

ROFL!! Sorry Kevin! I appreciate the response. I did miss that and will read through it a couple more times and reply shortly.

I didn't miss your other response to the majority of my questions earlier though! Very well thought and appreciated. I have to say there just wasn't much for me to add to a reply, lol

Kevin's 40 paragraph retort was liken to "Shock & Awe"........................ "Overwatch goin hot" ...................boom................

 

[CEE DOG]

"Keep pads cleaner (particularly foam pads), as they do not have an ability to become tied or knotted or clumped together the way fibrous pads might (wool, microfinger, microfiber, felt, etc.)"



No, you make sense... I bullet-pointed a lot of things.







Imagine that you are hand sanding a painted panel using a sheet of sandpaper. If you were to only marginally move the hand pad back and forth 1-inch forward and backward, any paint that was scrubbed from the surface would for the most part linger under the paper, stuck between it and the paint surface. Eventually,the paper would clog with abraded paint residue, ceasing to sanding cleanly or efficiently. Certainly, the use of water to help rinse paint residue away would keep the surface and sandpaper mostly debris-free. If instead you went ahead and moved the hand pad back and forth 1-foot (using the same amount of strokes in the same amount of time), the abraded paint residue would be more apt to clear the area between the sandpaper and paint surface. Lots of motion means there's a better chance that any residue stuck on or stuck under the sandpaper will clear away.



A similar thing happens with large stroke machines when we buff paint using a foam pad and compound. Not only that, but with a larger stroke (all other things being equal) comes an increase in centripetal force (the force that causes the backing plate to rotate). The increase in stroke size and backing plate rotation makes it more difficult for debris to remain on the surface of the foam pad. This is particularly true when we're comparing residue build-up on foam pads versus pads that use strings (wool, microfiber, microfingers, cotton, etc.) With string-type pads, the individual string can trap the residue, the residue can clump the strings together, the string effectively become thicker, and voila!- We're seeing scour marks across the paint surface.



With foam, there's only so much that can be loaded into the pores immediately below the face of the pad or on top of the face structure of the pad. Sure, any particular foam pad might hold onto compound and residue more easily than another pad, but eventually, the thick layer of debris is going to break away from the foam, regardless its design. The debris will either be scuttled away via the pad's edge (effectively squeegeeing aside), or it will dust away, or it will be wiped away.



It's why many of us using the smaller Rupes LHR75 3" Air-Powered Mini Random Orbital just cannot believe that the paint surface is not hazed or scoured after we've polished using a dinky pad @ 8,000-10,000 RPM. It is a shocker, but what a difference there is between using it compared to a Griot's 3" machine or a Metabo SXE400.

Kevin, that does make a lot of sense and I appreciate the thorough explanation that convinces me about 40% and I'll take your word on it about another 60%.



You see my vision of what I was thinking about is during the finishing polish (rather than compounding) when I use 85RD I dont see much dusting therefore I don't really imagine the particles of clear coat are going anywhere except into the pad until I release them with a brush after my section is complete. The edge gradually capturing them.... Hmmmm I hadn't considered that but don't think it accounts for much clear coat capture.



You focused on compounding where I see what you are saying a lot more on that stage (since so much clear is being cut and appears to also be released via dust) especially with something like M105 which I am grateful for when fast cut is needed :dance: however a compound or compound/polish that doesn't dust as much like Fixer I think most of the clear is still sticking to the pad until you release it via brush in which case the pad would still have the same amount of residue regardless.



So is the question about the polish that is used and is there proof in the % of paint particles are in the dusting?



Honestly I can't think of much else to say except now I want the "small foot" also! (but I won't be getting that one) still working on allowing myself to get the rock star)

 

[Kevin Brown]

...You see my vision of what I was thinking about is during the finishing polish (rather than compounding) when I use 85RD I dont see much dusting therefore I don't really imagine the particles of clear coat are going anywhere except into the pad until I release them with a brush after my section is complete.

Understood.

...The edge gradually capturing them.... Hmmmm I hadn't considered that but don't think it accounts for much clear coat capture.

Squeegee effect.

...You focused on compounding where I see what you are saying a lot more on that stage (since so much clear is being cut and appears to also be released via dust)...

You've really boxed yourself in to the "dusting" idea. Of course you're not going to see dust if the buffing liquid, paint residue, & contaminants are all bound together and have either become stuffed into the pad's structure, is stuck to the pad, or has rolled off and away from the pad. Maybe you should think of all the loose stuff that was either used to buff the paint (compound & pad remnants), or that has been removed while buffing the paint (oxidized paint, debris-free paint, environmental contaminants physically attached to the paint)... as debris.

...I think most of the clear is still sticking to the pad until you release it via brush in which case the pad would still have the same amount of residue regardless.

How ever your release the debris is up to you. Brushing I believe is nearly the least effective.

...So is the question about the polish that is used and is there proof in the % of paint particles are in the dusting?

I'm going to need a slide ruler or trigonometry calculator to figure out what you meant by this. Are you asking me to prove the percentage of clear coat that might be residing on dusted-away abrasive particles, or perhaps how much of the powdery "dust" that we might be able to see is actually clear paint?



I guess what I am wondering is... where are you going with all of this?! :fish2:

And when tires wear out, where does all the rubber go?



Someday when we finally meet, I'd like to work side-by-side with you.

Perhaps then we'll BOTH get a better idea of what we're referencing as our "experience-source".





Let me start this over: "The RuPes BigFOoT is HeaDed to the USA..."

 

[Kevin Brown]

Kevin's 40 paragraph retort was liken to "Shock & Awe"........................ "Overwatch goin hot" ...................boom................

Bob, nobody uses "the terminology" the way you do.

A seasoned wordsmith with the subtlety of an anvil and sledgehammer.



I am cracking up right now! "...................boom................" :rockon1:

 

[drew935]

Understood.

Let me start this over: "The RuPes BigFOoT is HeaDed to the USA..."

Actually Kevin, "The Rupes is already Here!" is more accurate. Thanks to you! :bounce:

 

[Accumulator]

[quote name='Kevin Brown']...It's why many of us using the smaller Rupes LHR75 3" Air-Powered Mini Random Orbital just cannot believe that the paint surface is not hazed or scoured after we've polished using a dinky pad @ 8,000-10,000 RPM. It is a shocker, but what a difference there is between using it compared to a Griot's 3" machine or a Metabo SXE400.



Belated Q about the above, good thing that older post keeps showing up- Are you saying there is an appreciable performance diff between the Rupes LHR75 3" Air Powered Mini Random Orbital and the GG 3" *pneumatic* RO? I have no doubt there are significant *ergonomic* advantages, but I'm not gonna upgrade over those... :grinno:

 

[mikemurphy234]

"You see my vision of what I was thinking about is during the finishing polish (rather than compounding) when I use 85RD I dont see much dusting therefore I don't really imagine the particles of clear coat are going anywhere except into the pad until I release them with a brush after my section is complete. The edge gradually capturing them.... Hmmmm I hadn't considered that but don't think it accounts for much clear coat capture"





Corey,



I'm going to try to touch on a couple of things here to maybe help you imagine what's going on. I think you'd agree that 106 cuts more than 85 does and it also dusts more. From what I've been told by industry insiders is that both have the same "size & type" of particles in them used to "cut". It's just that 106 has many more of them. If my memory holds true, this is close to the same with 105 & 205. So while we're "compounding" and the "liquid" dries up there are more particles left behind. ie dust. Now while you may not see as much dusting with Menzerna's as you do with Megs that's because one uses small particles clumped together to get a good initial cut then they break away into smaller pieces to give a finer cut and the other uses equal sized particles that don't "break up" so there are more there to get the cut quicker. That's why when using diminishing abrasives you have to fully "work" or "flash" it to get the results intended where with SMAT you just polish until you get the results you are looking for.



As for the edge of the pad not affecting the end result much. Imagine taking your softest and nicest microfiber towel and contaminating the leading edge with anything that would scratch the paint. If you rubbed it across the surface, even though 99% of the towel was clean, it would scour, correct? Now picture the edge of the pad holding debris, not only is it moving faster than wiping by hand, but the leading edge also becomes the trailing edge. So the first and last part of the pad that touches the paint is the part that is loaded with debris.



Hope this helps.



Mike

 

[C. Charles Hahn]

[quote name='Kevin Brown']...It's why many of us using the smaller Rupes LHR75 3" Air-Powered Mini Random Orbital just cannot believe that the paint surface is not hazed or scoured after we've polished using a dinky pad @ 8,000-10,000 RPM. It is a shocker, but what a difference there is between using it compared to a Griot's 3" machine or a Metabo SXE400.

Belated Q about the above, good thing that older post keeps showing up- Are you saying there is an appreciable performance diff between the Rupes LHR75 3" Air Powered Mini Random Orbital and the GG 3" *pneumatic* RO? I have no doubt there are significant *ergonomic* advantages, but I'm not gonna upgrade over those... :grinno:[/QUOTE]



Remember, George, that the LHR75 is both a 3" machine AND a large-stroke DA at 15mm; the Griot's 3" pneumatic has I believe either a 5/16" stroke, or a 3/8" stroke. While I don't (yet) have an LHR75 on hand, I do have a Chicago Pneumatic 3" which is very similar to your Griot's. If my experiences with bigger scale large-stroke DAs like the Dynabrade and the Rupes LHR21E are any reliable indication, I would say that specification alone would account for significant performance gains with regard to overall capability.



Of course, there are still always going to be situations where a small-stroke tool is better suited to a given task, but I'm sold enough on Rupes that I plan on bringing the entire Bigfoot arsenal into my collection sooner than later.

 

[autoconcierge]

"You see my vision of what I was thinking about is during the finishing polish (rather than compounding) when I use 85RD I dont see much dusting therefore I don't really imagine the particles of clear coat are going anywhere except into the pad until I release them with a brush after my section is complete. The edge gradually capturing them.... Hmmmm I hadn't considered that but don't think it accounts for much clear coat capture"





Corey,



I'm going to try to touch on a couple of things here to maybe help you imagine what's going on. I think you'd agree that 106 cuts more than 85 does and it also dusts more. From what I've been told by industry insiders is that both have the same "size & type" of particles in them used to "cut". It's just that 106 has many more of them. If my memory holds true, this is close to the same with 105 & 205. So while we're "compounding" and the "liquid" dries up there are more particles left behind. ie dust. Now while you may not see as much dusting with Menzerna's as you do with Megs that's because one uses small particles clumped together to get a good initial cut then they break away into smaller pieces to give a finer cut and the other uses equal sized particles that don't "break up" so there are more there to get the cut quicker. That's why when using diminishing abrasives you have to fully "work" or "flash" it to get the results intended where with SMAT you just polish until you get the results you are looking for.



As for the edge of the pad not affecting the end result much. Imagine taking your softest and nicest microfiber towel and contaminating the leading edge with anything that would scratch the paint. If you rubbed it across the surface, even though 99% of the towel was clean, it would scour, correct? Now picture the edge of the pad holding debris, not only is it moving faster than wiping by hand, but the leading edge also becomes the trailing edge. So the first and last part of the pad that touches the paint is the part that is loaded with debris.



Hope this helps.



Mike

Experience is the teacher, very FEW people really understand the why............... results will teach you, but knowing where to go from where you are at the time get's faster BETTER results. If the stove is hot why touch it over and over.



Another "Mike get's it" is in order, the NXT get together was review for alot of what I do but when Brent spoke (Megs chemist) I really opened my ears as it eliminated a few questions in my mind and was validation for others(Will not comment due to NDA agreement).



Paint correction with the current and to be released gear is SO MUCH EASIER than back in the day it is almost funny, the Rupes with certain pads and gear is the standard as of now.



.02 $

 

[LilJayV10]

Please forgive a few newb questions.



1. Can you use a 5 inch backing plate/pads with this? I have only seen 6in mentioned. I have the PC7424XP right now and didn't like using 6inch pads. With the longer throw and a 6 in pad, I'm afraid there will be a lot of places I couldn't use it on and would have to use another polisher which would defeat the purpose.



2. How do the Rupes pads compare to industry standards like LC pads?

 

[johnboy]

i would like to know that also[to lazy to read all the posts]

 

[Kevin Brown]

Can you use a 5 inch backing plate/pads with this? I have only seen 6 inch mentioned.

You can change the backing plate on the LHR 21ES from a 6" to a 5".

Rupes also makes the BigFoot LHR 15ES, which is virtually identical to the LHR 21ES.



LHR15 ES:

• 5" backing plate

• 15mm-diameter orbit

• 5,000 RPM/OPM maximum speed

• $349 approximate



LHR21 ES

• 6" backing plate

• 21mm-diameter orbit

• 4,200 RPM/OPM maximum speed

• $394 approximate



Keep in mind that when you drop backing plate diameter, you are essentially shrinking the "platform" size.

... I have the PC7424XP right now and didn't like using 6inch pads. With the longer throw and a 6 in pad, I'm afraid there will be a lot of places I couldn't use it and would have to use another polisher which would defeat the purpose.

If you plan on owning just one machine, then the large stroke Rupes may not be your best bet: No doubt about it... there are many benefits to using a machine with a 15mm or 21mm orbit, but you'll be hard pressed to beat the versatility of a machine touting a 6mm-10mm orbit.



As an example, the Meguiar's G110v2 has an 8mm orbit diameter, excellent low speed performance (top-end isn't as high as a typical Griot's, but the latest versions are pretty speedy, and the G110v2 is very reliable nowadays. The backing plate can be easily exchanged, so you could feasibly use any size of plate you'd like. The mid-range stroke size allows you to accomplish polishing in tight areas, yet it can cut very well in the larger areas, especially if you use the proper backing plate.



Oops! Just re-read... you already own a PC. Oh well, no need to erase the stuff about the G110v2.

How do the Rupes pads compare to industry standards like LC pads?

So far, the pads are performing very well, and durability seems to be excellent. They cost a bit more perhaps, but not much more on the 5" and 6" pads. I have to say that when I run the 3" air-powered machine, the Rupes pads "feel" fantastic, not puffy, and even when they warm up (something kinda new... warm pads!), they continue to perform well, and squeegee the surface clean.



80/100mm (3") pad - $8.95 approximate

80mm Velcro side, flares to 100mm at the polishing face



130/150mm (5") pad - $12.95 approximate

130mm Velcro side, flares to 150mm at the polishing face



155/180mm (6") pad - $14.95 approximate

155mm Velcro side, flares to 180mm at the polishing face





Here are the Rupes 3" pads.

 

[mikemurphy234]

Please forgive a few newb questions.



1. Can you use a 5 inch backing plate/pads with this? I have only seen 6in mentioned. I have the PC7424XP right now and didn't like using 6inch pads. With the longer throw and a 6 in pad, I'm afraid there will be a lot of places I couldn't use it on and would have to use another polisher which would defeat the purpose.



2. How do the Rupes pads compare to industry standards like LC pads?

No need for an apology.



As far as I know there is no other backing plate for the 21mm. Although the 15mm version has a 5" backing plate. Keep in mind these machines were designed specifically for paint correction and to be used day after day and hour after hour. By changing the backing plate it's quite possible you'd upset the incredible balance that Rupes has engineered into them.



I know we're used to changing plates on our da's to suit our needs but they weren't designed for comfort or with the thought of paint correction in mind. Do I think I can get every nook and cranny with the Bigfoot? I doubt it, but I also couldn't get them all with my G110V2 either. This is where the microfiber pads really do help because you can edge them. I worked a radius on a hood, that with foam it would have only hit the edges but the microfiber pad was able to follow the contour precisely.



I'm not going to throw away my rotary's or other da's but I sure wont be reaching for them all too often.



As for the pads, I didn't order any so maybe someone else will chime in.

i would like to know that also[to lazy to read all the posts]

Hope this helps.

 

[LilJayV10]

i would like to know that also[to lazy to read all the posts]

Good to see you are willing to put the work in....



But at least you are honest about it.

 

[LilJayV10]

KB,



Thanks for the reply. I'm looking to add another polisher on top of my PC. I had considered something like a FLEX but I started hearing about the Bigfoot. IMO there is no one tool that will do everything. The PC is impressive as I have personally seen what it can do. I'm just wanting something more powerful for those really bad jobs.

 

[Accumulator]

Kevin Brown- Your best guess...how would those flared 3" pads work out on the GG 3" pneumatic RO?



C. Charles Hahn- Thanks for the info Re the GG 3" Pneu. vs. Rupes.



Oh man, I'm just sooo trying to not add to the polisher Accumulation I mean, sheesh...I'm always on these polisher-threads and here I hardly ever do any polishing! And anyhow, I think Accumulatorette already has something (in the tool category) for me this Christmas.

 

[RaskyR1]

I really liked the 3" pads on the LHR75. Haven't tried the larger ones yet but will give them a whirl soon and would expect them to perform as well as the smaller ones.

 

[CEE DOG]

"You see my vision of what I was thinking about is during the finishing polish (rather than compounding) when I use 85RD I dont see much dusting therefore I don't really imagine the particles of clear coat are going anywhere except into the pad until I release them with a brush after my section is complete. The edge gradually capturing them.... Hmmmm I hadn't considered that but don't think it accounts for much clear coat capture"





Corey,



I'm going to try to touch on a couple of things here to maybe help you imagine what's going on. I think you'd agree that 106 cuts more than 85 does and it also dusts more. From what I've been told by industry insiders is that both have the same "size & type" of particles in them used to "cut". It's just that 106 has many more of them. If my memory holds true, this is close to the same with 105 & 205. So while we're "compounding" and the "liquid" dries up there are more particles left behind. ie dust. Now while you may not see as much dusting with Menzerna's as you do with Megs that's because one uses small particles clumped together to get a good initial cut then they break away into smaller pieces to give a finer cut and the other uses equal sized particles that don't "break up" so there are more there to get the cut quicker. That's why when using diminishing abrasives you have to fully "work" or "flash" it to get the results intended where with SMAT you just polish until you get the results you are looking for.



As for the edge of the pad not affecting the end result much. Imagine taking your softest and nicest microfiber towel and contaminating the leading edge with anything that would scratch the paint. If you rubbed it across the surface, even though 99% of the towel was clean, it would scour, correct? Now picture the edge of the pad holding debris, not only is it moving faster than wiping by hand, but the leading edge also becomes the trailing edge. So the first and last part of the pad that touches the paint is the part that is loaded with debris.



Hope this helps.



Mike

Thanks Mike, I appreciate that but I do understand this already. I completely understand the difference between diminishing, smat, and combination polishes. Perhaps I didnt word things in a way that is getting across the other side of the discussion.



I have also heard the same from the "industry insiders" about the menzerna products but never heard that about 105/205. Very interesting! Are you sure it's the case with 105/205?



As for the towel and pad analogy I would disagree that it's a fair comparison. What I am saying is the edge of the pad is not more contaminated in the manner theoretically suggested. If it was we would find a different end result which I do not see. Perhaps it is due to a completely different technique, tools, etc. but I don't see it. Rather it seems all the particles including polish and paint are cut to a size that does not affect the finish and are evenly pressed into the pad pores or dust off away from the surface. As long as it's made clean after each section there isn't an issue and the finish can be flawless in the real world regardless of theory.



Thank you,



Corey

 

[imported_Quenga]

Wow, only $400? I had been avoiding threads because i thought they were gonna be 700 or whatever others were estimating. Pff...i think the price separates the hobbyists from the pros. For 400...reserve me one. I will email you asap!