UDM & Megs 85 Diamond Cut

G

Glossy McGlosserton

New member
At the Carolina Detail Fest this past Sat., my '97 Dodge Dakota was the guinea pig. It had every paint defect known: RIDS, swirling, and some very deep scratches. (Got the truck used a year ago.) Someone broke out Megs #85, which was used on one side of the hood with a Makita rotary and a wool pad. On the other side of the hood, we used the #85 with the UDM and an LC yellow pad (6", I believe).



The UDM was, amazingly, able to achieve essentially the same correction as the rotary--but it took about 1-2 minutes with the rotary and about 10 with the UDM. And we all agreed that the UDM did a good job breaking down the MG #85. Having not used the MG #85 before, I did some searching on the boards, and don't find anyone too complementary about it. Also, there were warnings in several posts only to use it with rotary.



We were all impressed with the UDM, both with its relative smoothness compared to a PC and its power. The speed dial was quite stiff on that first day of use, making it awkward to use. By my second full day of detailing, it was loosening up a bit. As to vibration, after hours of use on 5 and 6, my hands were fine.



I really liked the #85, and the way it finished down nicely. I'm not sure why it isn't better regarded for working with paint in bad shape. Any comments? I'm new to machine detailing, and would appreciate feedback.



Thanks!
 
It was also #4 we were using on the hood. I think that is what we mainly used on the hood, with #85 being used on the sides and rear.



I think that overall, the UDM is for ppl that want the power of a rotary, and use it for their own cars. It just isnt cost efficient for me to use a UDM to break down compounds in 10min while a rotary can do it in 1min. It was a very nice machine though, thanks Sherri for letting us use it while it was brand new.
 
Brandon1 said:
I really liked the #85, and the way it finished down nicely. I'm not sure why it isn't better regarded for working with paint in bad shape. Any comments? I'm new to machine detailing, and would appreciate feedback.



It was also #4 we were using on the hood. I think that is what we mainly used on the hood, with #85 being used on the sides and rear.
Click to expand...



M85 was designed to be the modern replacement for M04. M04 is some gritty stuff whereas M85 is much smoother, though it still has relatively strong cutting properties.



M85 took a while to come to market after the other 80-series products were introduced. Its first version was less than exciting, but the newest M85 v 2.0 is a good product.



Regarding Meguiar's in the body shop, they don't have a great reputation for making compounds that are favorites in the industry. Often, people know Meguiar's for wax and glaze, but many body shops use other lines that include stronger compounds for clearing their sanding marks on fresh paints.



M85 does have some good cutting power and does finish with minimal rotary marks relative to its cutting power. It's not the strongest compound I've used, though it is Meguiar's strongest in the Body Shop Professional Line. I use it, though I will use 3M Perfect It III compounds if I'm trying to remove wet sanding marks.
 
Just as an FYI, according to the abrasive meter that is on each Megs products #85 is more abrasive than #4. My personal opinion is that Megs compounds and polishes (professional line) are some of the best out there. I've had nothing but great results with them, especially with rotary and wool.
 
Have you ever used M04 on clear coat (please say no :soscared: )



Grrrritty stuff, isn't it?



I've stuck with the 80-series since they came out with it in 1995-ish. On rare occasion I'll still use some of the M01 or M04.



Sometimes their products get a bad spin on detailing forums, but the Professional Line does have some solid performers. M85 is one of those products.
 
Yeah, we used #4 on clear, and it worked fantastic. Used it with Wool and rotary and it removed all swirls, left some compounding marks, nothing that OP could not clean up.
 
Brandon, on the UDM side of the Dakota hood, I'm pretty sure we used 85. I wasn't familiar with it, and the bottle reading "Diamond Cut" stuck in my mind.



What I liked was that it finished down nicely, even though it started with a lot of correction. And that truck needed it!



I'm going to check with our cohort with the camera to see if we can get some pics up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top