Aggressive and Abrasive

[blackt00th]

I would like to know the correct term of aggresive and abrasive.
As the more I read, I would get confuse over these 2 terms.
Could anyone help me out.

Can a product be aggressive but not abrasive?
or as the product gets more aggressive, it become more abrasive?

thank you.

[Carfire]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Aggressive is how vigorous some thing is.
Abrasive is how harsh or rough.

[Murr1525]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Honestly, at least around this board, I wouldn't worry about the difference. I tend to use them both interchangeably, and I think others do to.

[blackt00th]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Honestly, at least around this board, I wouldn't worry about the difference. I tend to use them both interchangeably, and I think others do to.

Oh. I thought is would be something like what carfire has mention.
Aggressive is how vigorous some thing is.
Abrasive is how harsh or rough.

I am thinking that Abrasiveness is terms as how well a products "cuts" into the clear-coat. But I could not think of any term for aggressive.

[Murr1525]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Carfire is probably right. But they both end up having the same affect. If I say #105 is more aggressive/abrasive than #205... you know what is meant. Same as terry cloth is more aggressive/abrasive than a foam pad.

Meguiar's tends to try to avoid the word abrasive as well.

[blackt00th]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Carfire is probably right. But they both end up having the same affect. If I say #105 is more aggressive/abrasive than #205... you know what is meant. Same as terry cloth is more aggressive/abrasive than a foam pad.

Meguiar's tends to try to avoid the word abrasive as well.

In addition to what Mark told me, I think I have a better understanding after what you and Carfire have added.

I think the answer is
Aggressiveness is ability to remove paint
Abrasiveness is how rough is the product.

If this is the case it would be good to have a product that is less abrasive so that it would not leave behind any marks?

[Murr1525]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Yes, that case would be correct for maintaining a good finish.

It is when some sort of swirl removal/paint correction is needed that you would have to bring in different types of "abrasiveness' and 'aggressiveness', both from the product and the application method.

[blackt00th]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Yes, that case would be correct for maintaining a good finish.

It is when some sort of swirl removal/paint correction is needed that you would have to bring in different types of "abrasiveness' and 'aggressiveness', both from the product and the application method.

okay...just out of topic.
Since Mike mention the marine compound/polish its too aggressive for car, I have decided to stop using it.
I am in a dilema whether to wait for SwirlX, ScratchX2.0 and UC to be release here after March or to go search for ScratchX and use it temporary or invest in #105.
currently I have ColorX, #21 v2 and the wax from the marine series.

[Murr1525]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

#105 is nice if you can get a good price over there. It is similar to UC.

[blackt00th]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

#105 is nice if you can get a good price over there. It is similar to UC.

I am not sure if we can get a good price for #105 here.
Moreover, I am not able to compare the price for #105 with UC.

[Michael Stoops]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Aggressive is how vigorous some thing is.
Abrasive is how harsh or rough.

Take this a bit further, but also think about the fine distinction between the two terms.

Consider 80 grit sandpaper (almost like little stones glued to paper) compared to 800 grit sandpaper (like super fine sand glued to paper). You could say that 80 grit is both more aggressive (it will cut faster) AND more abrasive (it will leave visible, deep gouges in the surface) than 800 grit.

Now look at M85 Diamond Cut Compound (you can feel the "grit" in the liquid) compared to M205 Ultra Finishing Polish (feels like hand lotion, nice and creamy). M85 is more aggressive (cuts faster) and more abrasive (use it by hand and you probably won't like the way the finish looks) than M205.

Now compare M205 Ultra Finishing Polish to M105 Ultra Cut Compound. Both feel nice and creamy and both will leave a nice, clear finish. But M105 will cut much faster than M205 so while it's easily more aggressive, it doesn't come across as being more abrasive.

A fine distinction, yes, but it gets the point across.

[Mike Phillips]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Also just to chime in on the word abrasive, or non-abrasive as there is some confusion about how Meguiar's uses this word and part of the problem is perception.

If you say a product is abrasive, most people think that means it's gritty and will scratch paint and this paints a negative picture in their mind's eye and does a disservice to the product and potentially the person looking for a solution to their problem.

Fact is Meguiar's offers many product that technically are abrasive in that they can abrade the paint in an effort to remove defects but won't scratch the paint when used correctly and thus are non-abrasive.

So when compared to products on the market that can scratch and scour paint, that is products that are abrasive, we offer products that are non-abrasive, that is they won't scratch the paint even though they have the ability to remove defects by removing small particles of paint.

Both ScratchX and ScratchX 2.0 have the ability to abrade the paint and remove small particles of the paint but when used correctly neither will leave scratches in the paint, so in an effort to avoid painting the wrong picture or give the wrong impression about what the product is capable of, we state that some of our products are non-abrasive.

Online enthusiasts tend to dissect every detail about everything by discussing topics to death as a way of forming a consensus on any particular topic, for example the discussions over the word wax as explained here,

Is it a wax? Or a paint sealant?


As long as you choose the right product for the job and then apply, work and remove it correctly, then you should produce the positive results you're looking for in your car's paint.

We often type out the below sentience in a thread when posting a reply to a question, in fact you'll never see me post the below using the word abrasive in place of aggressive.


"Use the least aggressive product to get the job done"


Sometimes we'll see someone else type it out like this,

"Use the least abrasive product to get the job done"


While both get the same point across the latter confines the statement to products that are abrasive while the first statement is open-ended without restrictions to the product being referred to.

For example, M26 is a non-abrasive, or non-cleaning pure wax and if the job at hand is applying a wax to a pristine finish, then applying M26 will get the job done and is the least aggressive product for the job.

Good discussion...

[blackt00th]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Take this a bit further, but also think about the fine distinction between the two terms.

Consider 80 grit sandpaper (almost like little stones glued to paper) compared to 800 grit sandpaper (like super fine sand glued to paper). You could say that 80 grit is both more aggressive (it will cut faster) AND more abrasive (it will leave visible, deep gouges in the surface) than 800 grit.

Now look at M85 Diamond Cut Compound (you can feel the "grit" in the liquid) compared to M205 Ultra Finishing Polish (feels like hand lotion, nice and creamy). M85 is more aggressive (cuts faster) and more abrasive (use it by hand and you probably won't like the way the finish looks) than M205.

Now compare M205 Ultra Finishing Polish to M105 Ultra Cut Compound. Both feel nice and creamy and both will leave a nice, clear finish. But M105 will cut much faster than M205 so while it's easily more aggressive, it doesn't come across as being more abrasive.

A fine distinction, yes, but it gets the point across.

Hi Michael, thank for using an example to show the distinction.
However, is there a product that is not aggressive but abrasive?

[blackt00th]

Re: Aggressive and Abrasive

Also just to chime in on the word abrasive, or non-abrasive as there is some confusion about how Meguiar's uses this word and part of the problem is perception.

If you say a product is abrasive, most people think that means it's gritty and will scratch paint and this paints a negative picture in their mind's eye and does a disservice to the product and potentially the person looking for a solution to their problem.

Fact is Meguiar's offers many product that technically are abrasive in that they can abrade the paint in an effort to remove defects but won't scratch the paint when used correctly and thus are non-abrasive.

So when compared to products on the market that can scratch and scour paint, that is products that are abrasive, we offer products that are non-abrasive, that is they won't scratch the paint even though they have the ability to remove defects by removing small particles of paint.

Both ScratchX and ScratchX 2.0 have the ability to abrade the paint and remove small particles of the paint but when used correctly neither will leave scratches in the paint, so in an effort to avoid painting the wrong picture or give the wrong impression about what the product is capable of, we state that some of our products are non-abrasive.

Online enthusiasts tend to dissect every detail about everything by discussing topics to death as a way of forming a consensus on any particular topic, for example the discussions over the word wax as explained here,

Is it a wax? Or a paint sealant?


As long as you choose the right product for the job and then apply, work and remove it correctly, then you should produce the positive results you're looking for in your car's paint.

We often type out the below sentience in a thread when posting a reply to a question, in fact you'll never see me post the below using the word abrasive in place of aggressive.


"Use the least aggressive product to get the job done"


Sometimes we'll see someone else type it out like this,

"Use the least abrasive product to get the job done"


While both get the same point across the latter confines the statement to products that are abrasive while the first statement is open-ended without restrictions to the product being referred to.

For example, M26 is a non-abrasive, or non-cleaning pure wax and if the job at hand is applying a wax to a pristine finish, then applying M26 will get the job done and is the least aggressive product for the job.

Good discussion...

Hi Mike,

Thanks for chipping in as well.
I started this thread as sometimes I do get confuse over the terms for aggressive and abrasive.

If we are working by hand and using an aggressive product, the level of aggressiveness will be determine by the amount of passion behind the pad.
But what about the abrasiveness? does the level of abrasiveness is also determined by the amount of passion?