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.
Originally posted by 305Cummins Does #82 use a diminishing abrasive and will it stain rubber and plastic trim?
What is the proper way to apply #82 with a PC?
Thanks!
I believe it does, but it take longer to breaks down than #80.
Just apply it like any other polish, I apply 3 semi-circular beads on the outer edge of the pad and work it in with a 4-4.5 speed setting and when it starts to haze, but not completely dry wipe off with a MF. I love #82 it is so smooth and a little goes a long way !, #82 will give you the true condition of your paint without any fillers or oils hiding the defects like #80 and should the polish to use if its your own car, #80 is great if your doing someones elses ride and time is a factor, but still require a professional results.
I would not call the lubricating oils in both the #82 and the #80, fillers. True, they will help beautify the surface, but neither will hide imperfections.
I have been using #80 for sometime now and really love it. It is more aggressive than the #82 but less than the #83 DACP. As such, it fills the void between the #83 and the #82. And, although the #80 was designed to be used as a paintable polymer (allowing fresh paint to cure), more and more Pro's are using it with great success.
As for staining trim, I have never had a problem though it would be wise to always protect the trim by taping it prior to polishing with any product.
#82 uses a diminishing abrasives that goes away when it is worked in pretty well... Like everybody else said, it's longer to break down than #80.. Both of these products are mostly used to finish up the haziness that the DACP leaves behind.. #80 is sometimes used as a all-in-one step cleaner/polish when time is scarce because it's already rich in polishing oils... Everybody else already commented on the aggressiveness relationships..
Comment