Tweet
I have always had good results with 80 but tried 82 on a black Murano with a reasonably good finish using a PC with an 8006 pad at 5 speed. On close inspection with a light I found micromarring. This surprised me because I expected 82 to be too gentle to do this. I then tried the 80 and it took the micromarring right out. I understand 82 was developed for use with a rotary and I suspect the PC was not enough to break down the abrasives, although the bottle says it can be used by hand, orbital, PC or rotary. I don't know if I'll ever try the 82 again, but just in case, does anyone have any ideas as to why I had this problem? Thanks.
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
-
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
Could be the pad... maybe a 9006 would be better.2017 Subaru WRX Premium - WR Blue -
Re: Micromarring with 82
#82 does take considerably longer to break down the diminishing abrasives than #80 does. Are you sure you worked it long enough? I can get a perfect finish from #82 with a polishing pad.Jim
My Gallery Comment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
Superquad
that's the opposite of my experience with 82, on some softer paints, I have trouble finishing out with 80 on the PC, my black grand prix has a hazy look when I use it with a polishing pad. if I switch to 82 on the PC with a finishing pad if finishes out great! I really like it, especially with black.
TomComment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
Crank your speed down to 4.0 to 4.5 and apply using a softer pad like the suggested W-9006 pad.
When you applied the last time was your W-8006 a new, clean dedicated pad?Comment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
Thanks for the replies. To answer Mike's question, yes, the 8006 was brand new. It's certainly possible I did not work it in long enough; I worked it as long as I work 80, but maybe that's not long enough for 82. I'll try a 9006 pad on a test spot to see if that is any better.Comment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
Is 82 about the best for this? Reason I ask is I am doing a black mustang this weekend and I can't get my hands on 82 by the weekend. They stock 9 at my local store. Has anyone had good luck with 9 and the PC on the finishing pad?
The client was impressed by the 80 test spot, but I know it can be better.Comment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
Only way to tell is do a test spot and either pull it out in the sun or use a test light. I would do a section with 80 and inspect. You can always then go over that same area with 9 which is pretty similiar to 82 and then re-inspect. 80 works great on most vehicles, it's the ones that mar easily I have trouble with it.Comment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
If you have 80, I would try it in combination with a 9006 pad for the final polishing set. Slow arm motion lighter pressure and really work it in. While it doesn't remove much it works really well at removing any marring left by 83 or even 80 with a polishing pad. If you can get your hands on #9 give it a try.Originally posted by mini44 View PostComment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
I cant get #80 or #82 to finish out perfect on my car.
Ive tried everything, every speed, all kinds of different pressure, 70 ppi pad and 80 ppi pad, super slow arm speed, fast arm speed, overlapping passes 50%-90%, working it longer, not working it as long, different temps, different humidty's.....you name it, ive done it.
Yet, on every other vehicle ive done i can get them to finish with no micro-marring what-so-ever, even #83.
My car hates meComment
-
Re: Micromarring with 82
I've heard of guys finishing with m66 after the m80. Kinda fills I guess. Some paint seems to mar just wiping it. For that you've gotta fill or you'll drive yourself crazy.Comment
Comment