whats up from austin

Y

YoSteve

New member
Hey autopians, just wanting to gage where some of our products stand.



The only physical assumption is that all cd's have the same harndess (which might not be the case) but since they're mass produced it shouldn't be that different. in any case try to use an old AOL, MSN, etc CD



Test method: Take a product and rub a CD under a specific light source like a bright light bulb (so that you can see the hairline scratches in the CD). Rub the CD with medium force (in an outward direction) twice. Inspect the area? (not the number of scratchs thier distance between them, etc if any) If nothing, then rub again with a good amound of elbow grease 5 more times. Inspect the area again. Then rub hard 5 more times and report again.



Here's the theory. A CD has a certain hardness. All these products have variable hardnesses (cause they're all differnt products and materials). As a rule they should be quite soft, and in this case soft enought to not scratch a CD.



For the exact same sponge applicator, would you use the one that scratched a CD or would you use one that didn't. You've proven the one that scratched the cd is physically a harder substance so why use that one and save yourself the trouble. Plus you can report the good ones (and the not so good ones) to others so we don't have to keep doing this all the time.



I did the mt versus nicsand test. The nicsands downright scratched the cd (damn). after a few good rubs it was scratch city, they were not good. The mt's did not scratch until way after 20 rubs (were talking bending the CD kind of rubs) I wanted to see how far it would go. I would in no way put that amount of force on my car so I feel that they are good.



Here's most of the spread (add your own if I didn't include it) be between all of us we should get the whole set in.



MF section:

linting mt's

non-linting mt's

other's mf's (specify)



Chamois (bleh) and stuff: (feel free to do both wet and dry versions)

water bandit

the absorber

water sprite

griots

leather

any you have lying around (that you know the name of)





Cotton:

charisma's

the ones in your bathroom

the other ones you like to use



Mitt's (yes mitt's too):

chenielle cotton

synthetic (specify)

natural (specifiy)



Bonnets (those of you who like power tools should gauge the hardness of your buffer bonnets too!):

mf ones

the one that comes with it

kits

all the others



Others:

foam applicators

cheese cloth

t-shirts of differnt blends

your car sponge

car brushes



basically anything that anyone will put or has put or no longer uses on their paint.



Thanks, if you decide to contribute in the test. Many will benefit from the reports of a few, Steve
 
I still stand behind the assumption that a CD surface is not the same as a painted automobile surface. Sure, your test will determine the relative scratching ability. But until one performs the tests on actual painted surfaces, the results are meaningless to automobile paint applications.
 
Simple analogies:



Picture a stick of butter. Rub "anything" on it, and you will see scratches. This does not mean that rubbing anything on automotive paint will scratch.



Picture a diamond. Rub it with sandpaper and it's unlikely it will scratch. This does not mean that rubbing sandpaper on automotive paint will not scratch.



If you want to test scratching ability, test it on the surface you intend to use it on, not something else.



You wouldnt test the flammability of nylon by lighting cotton on fire would you?
 
He is using the same material to test each product on, so his test should be relevant. If one product does not scratch a CD and another one does, the test obviously shows that one towel is harsher than the other. I know I would not want to try a nicsand on my vehicle after reading his test. I think nick and sand are two very bad words for a vehicle.
 
I agree with WAXMAN....it won't tell if it will scratch your car, but will tell the relative harshness of different materials..............
 
The test lends itself to a frame of reference from which you can see results from.

If you have objects that scratch butter and objects that don't scratch butter, the object that doesn't scratch the butter is softer then the other.

Likewise if you have sand paper that doesn't scratch diamond versus some that doesn't, which would you use on your clear coat (if you had to).


<strong class='bbc'>Most people will tell you here that certain bonnets will cause swirls on a clearcoat while others will not swirl a clear. Now, all I'm saying is that if the same thing happens on a CD, then voila you have a relationship that says the hardness of a CD maybe more similar to a clear than you think (despite the obvious difference between the two substrates). Why because we are able to see a relative hardness difference between two different substances by third party tests.

In math terms, yuck: If a < b < c and a < d < c then their is a realationship between b and c (existing between a and c) dispite that we cannot confirm that b=d. I would choose applicator a over c because in both cases it is less than both b and d.[/b]


What you are lastly forgetting is the final part of the test which I am conduction (which I now offer anyone else to conduct by their own means) is to estabilsh the hardness difference between the CD surface and a clearcoat by laboratory means.
 
Explain to me how a NicSand towel can be determined to be bad to use on paint if it scratches a CD, and is not tested on actual paint?



The fact is that certain products in these tests will be presented as being "bad" when in fact they "may" be just fine for use on paint. That's all I'm trying to say.
 
But if another towel is more plush and does not scratch a CD, it would mean that product was less harsh and gentler on your clear coat. Neither may scratch your clear coat, but we are so picky here about swirls and products here , I think a lot of guys would find results of that test interesting, while not very scientific, to find the least harsh product.
 
I have not done a clearcoat scratch test on a nicsand towel.



But, many people have (inadvertently) done a clearcoat scratch test with orbital bonnets. How? It sounds like the bonnet that comes with some cheaper models cause 3d swirls, while the kit you buy from CMA doesn't cause 3d swirls.



Now take the two bonnets and attempt a CD test upon them. If the one that caused the 3D swirls scratches the CD, while the one that didn't cause swirls didn't scratch the CD, then we have a test. If not, then we don't.



But I don't have any bonnets (and many of you do) which is why I'm asking everyone to do a test.



Just like some sponges scratch and others don't on the car. If we try it on a cd and see a the same difference, then the hardnss of the clear exists between the two.



I'm getting a headache now :) just humor me for once



I will go home and sacrifice a section of my clearcoat and run a nicsand versus mt scratch test, and if the nicsand scratches and the mt doesn't then its your fault :D
 
i don't see any validity in the test. i do understand dk's and waxmans thoughts on it, that at the very least, measures the abrasiveness of products in general, but it just sounds like bad science.



we all know that cd's are very scratch prone, and they are not a painted surface. the cd could be a softer surface, that would scratch, but a painted surface would be harder, which would not produce a scratch. so in theory something that scratched the cd could possibly not scratch the paint. then all we've accomplished is to unjustly put fear into peoples minds about the products their using.



the originator of this cd test, dr. richard ha (neoprufrok) has since dismissed it's relevance and validity.





a better way to do this would to get a fresh wreck automotive panel from a pick-n-pull, and do the same test. this would be infinately more valuable than using a completely non-automotive related test subject (cd).



just because a certain medicine caused cancer in lab mice, doesn't mean it's going to cause cancer in humans.
 
beau you're not listening we have to rule out the cd test as being valid or not (I agreed to that in the latter post)

Here's how we rule out the CD test (read carefully):

Pick a bonnet that scratches (3D swirls) a clearcoat (by experience).

Then find a better quality bonnet (same type, sponge, synth, whatever) that's been proven to not scratch it (again by experience).

Do a CD test on the two to get 3 possibilities.

A) they both scratch the cd, so our test is null (it does not show what the clear shows).

B) they both don't scratch the cd, so our test is null (it also does not show what the clear shows).

C) one scratches and one doesn't (and the one that scratches the clear corresponds with the one that does on the CD) And then we have a test. because we see the same difference in both and then we can test all the other products

<strong class='bbc'>Okay, now stop and post why this test isn't a valid way to rule out the hardness of a CD compared to the hardness of a clearcoat with a bonnet that does and does not scratch.[/b] Try to answer only exactly what is invalid about this test to test the validity of a CD test.

Otherwise, you're right we can only compare between relative hardnesses. But until we can do this first test (so I'm asking anyone who has a scratchy and non scratchy bonnet), I can't prove I'm right, and you can't prove your right, Agreed? if not please post why again.
 
...for someone willing to produce cold rolled steel CDs with base-coat/clearcoat (j/k by the way - my flameproof suit is at the cleaners :D )
 
Beau did a test to show that the test is null by choice A (which is all I was asking everyone to do)

(even though he only did half the test, he did prove that something could scratch a CD that obviously didn't the car)

We asses that the car is obviously harder than the CD.

But we can come to our final conclusion about the CD test:

<span style='color: green'>If it doesn't scratch your CD, it won't scratch your car.
If a product does scratch your CD, then further experimentation must be done.
 
I think your site is very nice looking. I've seen those colors somewhere before but can't put my finger on it :spy:

While I haven't looked at everything, your prices seem very low. I suppose that keeps you busy though :soldier:

I really find your Home Detailing intresting. I have thought about opening a home cleaning service myself. I already have built in clientele, now I would just have to find employees to meet my standards :sarge

Director Welcome to Truth In Detailing. Hope to see you around
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top