Which is more aggressive?

[FRS]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

.. or just bookmark this tread.

[Bill Davidson]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Nice post Bill, that is exactly what I am looking for. Thanks...Jon

You're welcome Jon. This site can get a little overwhelming, because there is so much info/content. Glad I could help.

I suggest you print 3 copies

[JonH]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Nice post Bill, that is exactly what I am looking for. Thanks...Jon

[Bill Davidson]

Re: Which is more aggressive?



I think this is the info you are after Jon. It came from the first sticky under the DA Polisher threads. Here is the link to the thread.

http://meguiarsonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37547

[JonH]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Michael,

Without looking at every label on every product, what would you consider best products for a DA with a foam pad for 1. heiavy cut andscratch removval. 2. medium cut and swirl removal. 3. light cleaner for paant in good condition. I know pads and pressure influence things, just looking for your best reccommendation. Thanks. Jon

[ziggo99]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Michael, would you chart from your post about Total Cut be a better graphic than the chart posted above you said was outdated?

[Michael Stoops]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Let's see if we can clear a few things up here:

Ultimate Compound is not as aggressive as M105. It is indeed derived from it and it is much more forgiving when used on a D/A, but it is not as aggressive. UC is also not body shop safe while M105 is.

With regards to the chart posted by Bill, it is a bit outdated. ScratchX has since been replaced by ScratchX 2.0 which is now more aggressive than M83, as are SwirlX and Ultimate Compound. Within those three new(er) products the level of aggressiveness from least to most is SwirlX, ScratchX 2.0 and UC.

D151 is a somewhat unique animal and it's cutting ability can be a bit difficult to classify. It can be used on a rotary with a wool pad, on a D/A with a finishing pad, and everything inbetween. The cut will vary dramatically when using these two ends of the options spectrum and can be fine tuned anywhere in between. To some degree the same is true of our other products - for example, M205 can be used with a polishing pad or a finishing pad and the total cut will be reduced when using the finishing pad, but D151 is compatible with probably the widest spectrum of tools and pads. M105 can be used on a rotary with a wool or foam pad, or on a D/A with a couple of different foam pads. The total cut is going to be different, and dramatically so, when using M105/rotary/W5000 or M105/DA/W8207.

From this we can quickly determine that the cut of the product alone is not the whole story since the pad and tool can have a huge impact. But even beyond that is how each liquid actually works. DAT and SMAT abrasives are quite different technologies, and sometimes one will work far better on a given paint system than another. In fact, sometimes a less aggressive SMAT product will get a better result than a more aggressive DAT product simply because of the nature of the paint. Regardless whether you believe that paint to be "hard" or not. And that less aggressive SMAT product might well finish out a lot nicer in the process. Or it might not.

Confused? You should be if you're simply trying to classify a product by it's inherent cutting ability alone, because that's just a tiny part of the whole process.

[JonH]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

xantonin, I like your signature. But I would think that at some point you must even doubt yourself!!!

[xantonin]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Similar, not the same. The consumer is meant to easier to use.

[JonH]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Thanks Kyle!!

[ziggo99]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

I guess I am comparing consumer products to professional products, but according to what everyone has said and the charts it looks like consumer grade in the black bottle ultimate compound is the same as professional #105 ultra cut compound, correct???

Well, #105 had to be formulated to work with the heat of the rotary, while UC is not. Plus the #105 dusts more and dusts quicker than UC. But they are very similar in cut.

[JonH]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

I guess I am comparing consumer products to professional products, but according to what everyone has said and the charts it looks like consumer grade in the black bottle ultimate compound is the same as professional #105 ultra cut compound, correct???

[ziggo99]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

Can anyone confirm the accuracy of this chart. Any of the Meguiar's chart that I have seen list M105 as being more aggressive than M95. It makes me question the remainder of the chart. Maybe they are just lumping them into one level of aggressiveness (meaning there is no particular order if they are in the pink area).

http://meguiarsonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40514&highlight=smat

From the most to the least aggressive...

M105 Ultra-Cut Compound/M95 Speed Cut Compound = The same in abrading power
Ultimate Compound
ScratchX 2.0
M86 Solo Cut & Polish Cream
D151 Paint Reconditioning Cream
SwirlX
M205 Ultra Finishing Polish

Now instead of SCANNING... (like we're all prone to do on discussion forums), read the below very carefully.

The order shown here is relative, to the idea that if all things were equal, if all influencing factors could be controlled and be identical when using these products.

That of course is impossible because some of these products are only recommended for use with a rotary buffer while some of these products are only recommended for use by hand or with a dual action polisher. So if we were to follow the manufactures recommendations then we wouldn't be able to compare all of these products side-by-side because in some examples they cannot be used in an equal manner.

[JonH]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

The swirls are not an issue, I am trying to get out fine scratches that you can not feel with a finger nail.

[FinalTouchDetail]

Re: Which is more aggressive?

I don't know about D151 being as low on the list as it is. I have seen it do some pretty decent correcting to the point that I thought it would be higher up than scratch-x.

Maybe not though.