Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

[akimel]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Good luck! I hope you're able to create the finish you hope for.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

While waiting for the M105/M205 to arrive I’ve done some more experimentation, specifically with 4” (100mm) pads and UC and the Menzerna polishes. You might remember from the earlier post that UC is more aggressive, than the most aggressive Menzerna polish I have P0203S. I originally purchased the small pads with the idea of tackling a couple of bird dropping etchings, some relatively deep scratches on various panels and the tight areas around the front and rear, because the smaller pads would be more aggressive than the larger pads for a given pad compound/polish combination.

Unfortunately I now think the bird droppings defects are beyond any compound and probably even wet sanding because they are so deep, so I guess those panels will have to be repainted, but I’d like to hear from others here re their luck with these things. I had more luck with the deep scratches and removed them. One problem surprised me, the back bumper had what I believed was a tire scuff mark from another vehicle. I’m not really sure what it was or how it got there, but it was an ugly 8-10” grey/black scar across the plastic bumper. Earlier with the standard 6” pads, UC on an orange pad made no impression on this defect so I assumed at the time it was something more than a tire scuff mark. That mark came out with very little work with the 4” pad and UC/orange pad – a couple of seconds and it was completely gone.

I therefore came to the conclusion that with careful work you can do even more with 4” pads, so I started again on some of my more disappointing results. I reworked a section of that rear quarter in the photo with UC and an orange pad and then with P0106FF on a white pad (skipped the P0203S). The result was big improvement with much more gloss. I then completed the panel and swapped back to a 6” black pad to finish the panel with P085RD. Obviously the last step topped it off. I still don't think the result is jaw dropping, but at least it would probably look ok along side a new beemer.

I’ve now completed most of the vehicle using the above method, but I deliberately left one door on one side so I can compare against M105/M205.

Anyone care to comment re their experiences re the difference in results with 4” as compared to 6” pads? One thing that is difficult with 4” pads is to keep the pad rotating because it tends to jam when it abuts a panel running in a different direction such as you get on wheel arches. The larger pads do keep turning with the same amount of pressure in the same situation.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

The M105/M205 eventually arrived today, so I got back into the rear quarter panel with M205 on a black pad. Used the KBM and primed the pad first and then just added 4 small drops on each pass. M205 is sure nice to work with, seems to be workable forever as compared to P085RD. I set the speed to 3.5 with enough pressure to keep the pad rotating. I’m not sure if I got carried away or not, but after the first pass on the first section, I thought there was more gloss, so I did an extra couple of passes on that section to see if I could get more out of it. I didn’t notice straight away, but by the time I moved to another section, I noticed that the black pad was getting a bluish/green tinge to it, the colour of the vehicle’s paint.

I wasn’t expecting that and have never observed anything like that with any of the Menzerna polishes on the orange, white, black or blue pads. Probably wouldn’t have noticed anyway using P085RD on a black pad, because 85RD is a gray polish anyway.

Even though the finish is looking much better, I thought it appropriate to stop until I check with you guys for your comments. I’ve read everywhere that it is impossible with a DA to get through the clear coat, but something is colouring that pad. I’m sure I read somewhere that a DA is unlikely to even remove a micron of clear coat.

Looking forward to your comments.

I’m attaching a couple of photos, but I doubt they help that much – no sun again today and it is a different camera and the light wasn’t all that good.

Just as an aside, Sunday was a great sunny day (but no camera) and I had a chance to check the BMW during the afternoon while it was parked in a street. From all angles as I walked around it, I couldn’t observe any swirls, except for one tiny one on the driver’s door. The driver’s door hasn’t been reworked with the 4” pads as I mentioned in a previous post. The finish from across the road looked great, but again once out of the sun it looks pretty ordinary. You might remember I was saving this door for M105.

After the colour change on the black pad, I think I'll leave that door until you guys comment.

Thanks
Graham

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Hi Guys,

even though the finish is looking much better, I thought it appropriate to stop until I check with you guys for your comments. I’ve read everywhere that it is impossible with a DA to get through the clear coat, but something is colouring that pad. I’m sure I read somewhere that a DA is unlikely to even remove a micron of clear coat.

Would really like some help on the above.

Started on a test section of '96 Mazda 323 with really poor paint and almost immediately noticed the paint colour on the pad. Was using M105/orange pad. Maybe D/As can take more paint off than I thought. The paint maybe bad, but it is original as it has never been repaired.

[Selectchoice]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Hi Graham,

Just read your posts today and I see you said 105/205 isn't available from the distributor here in Australia.

It isn't listed on their website for whatever reason, but they do stock it. I bought a bottle of each from them late last year.

If it helps in future, here are their details:

MotorActive (Meguiar's Australia)
35 Slough Business Park
Holker Street
Silverwater NSW 2128 Australia

Phone: (02) 9737 9422
Fax: (02) 9737 9414
Toll Free: 1800 347 570

They have somewhere in Melbourne you can source it too, best bet to call their toll free number and sure they will help out.

Hope this helps you in the future!

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Selectchoice:

Thanks for the info. I've gave them a ring, but I wasn't at all impressed with the guy I spoke to. Both M105/M205 are only available here in the 32oz size (about 950ml). I don't do this stuff for a living and only have about 5 vehicles I want to look after. He wanted something like $A85 each, plus freight. That is just a rip off in my opinion, when you consider our favourable exchange rate. You can import that size from properautocare.com for about $US26.

I read all the hype about M105/M205 here and on other forums so I thought I’d like to try it, but I certainly didn’t want to spend approx $A190 just to try it out. Anyway I purchased the 8 oz sampler size from properautocare.com, cost about $US60 which was mainly freight with a couple of extras thrown in with the purchase. Arrived a week after I placed the order. Meguiars Australia should wake up and do the same as the Menzerna guys here and supply sampler kits.

I see from your posts here that you were a professional detailer, would you mind giving an opinion on the problems I’m experiencing. It would be great to be able to talk with someone like yourself, if you have the time.

I did some work with M105 today and I have to admit that it is not the easiest product to use on a D/A. I presume since you are a pro that you only use it with a rotary. Unfortunately this Mazda has pretty bad paint, so it may not be the best choice to experiment with. I’m going to swap tomorrow to a 2000 Astra that I’ve already done the front of reasonably successfully (with UC and the Menzerna polishes). I’ll try M105/M205 on that and compare.

Graham

[Selectchoice]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Graham, I sent you a PM.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

I've tried sending you a pm both yesterday and today, but they don't show up in my sent box.

Would you mind going to email? My email is gmckechnie at glmsoftware.com or my mobile is 0418 526 768.

Thanks
Graham

[Michael Stoops]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Graham, while it is unusual to run into burn through problems when using a D/A, it is most definitely NOT impossible. Rare, yes, especially compared to how common it is with a rotary, but definitely not impossible.

When using an aggressive compound, a small pad, high speed and good bit of pressure you are really concentrating the energy of the D/A into a very small space and you can then generate a surprising amount of heat. A small pad on a D/A can dramatically increase the heat on the paint whereas the same small pad on a rotary will reduce cut due to the slower overall speed of the outer edge of the pad.

But if you were running on speed 3~4 with M205 on a soft pad, it should be almost impossible to burn through the paint. Have you had the car since new and/or do you know the past history of the finish? It is possible that earlier in its life it was buffed very aggressively and very little clear is left - in that case it becomes much easier to burn through it.

[rapport25]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Graham, while it is unusual to run into burn through problems when using a D/A, it is most definitely NOT impossible. Rare, yes, especially compared to how common it is with a rotary, but definitely not impossible.

When using an aggressive compound, a small pad, high speed and good bit of pressure you are really concentrating the energy of the D/A into a very small space and you can then generate a surprising amount of heat. A small pad on a D/A can dramatically increase the heat on the paint whereas the same small pad on a rotary will reduce cut due to the slower overall speed of the outer edge of the pad.

But if you were running on speed 3~4 with M205 on a soft pad, it should be almost impossible to burn through the paint. Have you had the car since new and/or do you know the past history of the finish? It is possible that earlier in its life it was buffed very aggressively and very little clear is left - in that case it becomes much easier to burn through it.

x2 as i mentioned earlier a paint depth gauge is a handy tool. I would not machine polish a car without checking paint depths first.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your reply. I thought this thread had fizzled out, so I was just about to start a new thread on some more tests I’ve done when I saw your post. Selectchoice (Brad) another Aussie guy offered to help, but I’ve been unable to PM him using your forum software, so I actually haven’t made contact with him. Whenever I attempt a pm it appears to have been sent, but I can’t see it in my Sent Items. I use similar forum software on my own website and always seem to have problems with PMs, so I prefer email when I do support. If you can check out what is wrong there I’d appreciate it. Brad probably thinks I’m a real bum for not replying to his offer of help.

I think the burn through on my BMW was due to using the boot lid for all manner of testing various polishes. Since this little project started, the lid has become my test section, so I guess you can overdo the test section. At this stage there doesn’t appear to be any damage, so I’ll just have to repaint it, if it goes bad down the track. I’ve owed the car since new and it has never been repaired or even hand polished, just a touch neglected up until now, so I think you can put it down to my overzealous testing. I just didn’t think it would be possible with M205 and a black pad. So black pads can cut…

Just so other newbies aren’t put off by this example; I had chased down a bad scratch and a bird bomb on that boot lid with a 4” orange pad and UC and had been pretty aggressive in trying to remove them. I had got to the point where the scratch was nearly gone but decided that it wasn’t safe pursuing it any further as the lid was getting pretty hot. So I’d guess, when I received the M205 some days later, I just ran the M205/black pad combo over that scratch once too many times.

Going through the clear on my wife’s old Mazda with M105 on an orange pad I suppose was very possible when I consider how bad the paint is on that car. There were already small areas (different panels) where the clear had failed, so considering how aggressive M105 on an orange pad can be I suppose I should have expected it, even though it was original paint. I realize Mike from Meg’s point of view you have to harp on about taking the least aggressive route, but from a practical point of view, if you want to learn how to do paint correction properly you have to experiment – it’s all a learning curve. I’ll bet anything, that all the best paint correction guys have burnt paint at one time or another. The last thing I’m going to do is purchase a paint gauge if I’m only using a DA. In my opinion you need to find the limits. If you are a “nervous Nellie” then don’t do it and leave it to someone else.

Just don’t tell my wife, but having a vehicle like hers to experiment with is perfect. Either that or get some panels from a junk yard and find the limits of the paint and your own limits.

M105:

Now that I’ve got that little rant out of the way, I’d like to pursue the M105 problems I’m still having. On Sunday I decided to work the roof of the Mazda. However since I really had problems controlling the DA with M105 on an orange pad previously, I wanted to check out what it would be like using a white polishing pad. It was certainly easier to control, but I just couldn’t find a combination that let me work with it easily.

Used KBM, tried squirting with water, tried a pad with a just an X amount. No amount of fiddling gave me anytime to work with M105. It cuts fast for sure, but I feel as though I’ve got no control. It will cause the DA to dig in and walk the surface etc obviously more so with the orange pad than the white pad. Anyway I persisted and eventually got the roof looking reasonable, but I feel sure that it would have been easier with UC, even if it might have taken longer.

I then thought I’d run some tests over the bonnet (your hood). The paint quality on this was all over the place, lots of swirls from the car wash, a heap of oxidation, stone chips and a couple of clear failures. Took about an hour to just clay it and the clay was junk after I finished.

I divided the bonnet into 4 areas with tape, two larger areas, 450mm x 450mm (18” x 18”) and two smaller remaining areas. I’ve left two other irregular areas for further testing.

Larger areas:

Menzerna PowerGloss/orange pad
M105/white pad

Smaller areas:

UC/orange pad
M105/orange pad (4” as I’d run out of standard pads)

I primed all the pads the same way using KBM, used firm pressure and speed at 5.5. I then went over each section with 6 passes and repeated 3 times, wiping off and adding 4 small drops of polish after each. The PowerGloss was easy to work just like all Menzerna polishes I’ve tried, the UC about the same. On the sections with the M105, the polish had disappeared before the 6th pass and the DA was hard to control wanting to walk around the panel as it hit the bare spots. The results surprised me, the M105 cuts about the same as the PowerGloss, but I reckon the UC was just as good and the finish was probably even better than the other two. I’d have to say that if I really needed that much cut then I have to lean towards the PowerGloss or just work longer with UC.

I took some photos, but they don’t show much, other than clouds. I think I need to do these type of shots in doors with some good lighting.

You can probably tell I’m frustrated with M105. You read all the good stories here and elsewhere and I just can’t seem to get the dam stuff to work well. Do you have any further tips or perhaps even a video of using M105??

This weekend I’ll do further testing with it, but this time I’m going to do test sections on newer vehicles. Maybe it is more suitable to newer paint systems.

BMW gloss:

Since I’ve decided not to use M105 for now on the BMW, I went back to the technique of using UC on a 4” orange pad on the panels I was previously disappointed with. I followed up this time with M205, on a white pad (still 4”) and finally with M205 on a black normal size pad. I now reckon it could sit alongside a new BMW.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Rappy:

I heard you the first time.... I'm not worried about burning some paint; I want to find the limits of these polishes and the DA. These are all my own vehicles, so if I cut through a panel, I’ll paint it.

I’d agree with you, if I was working on other people’s vehicles, but not for my own vehicles using a DA. Basically if you cut through paint unexpectedly using reasonable techniques with a DA, then that paint was too thin in the first place and would have needed repainting anyway.

I’m probably going to buy a rotary, so I might at the same time consider a paint gauge then.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Mike,

A small correction to my test. Made a typo.


Smaller areas:
UC/orange pad
M105/orange pad (4” as I’d run out of standard pads)

Should have read
UC/yellow pad. - not orange.

[Michael Stoops]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

I just didn’t think it would be possible with M205 and a black pad. So black pads can cut…

Just so other newbies aren’t put off by this example; I had chased down a bad scratch and a bird bomb on that boot lid with a 4” orange pad and UC and had been pretty aggressive in trying to remove them. I had got to the point where the scratch was nearly gone but decided that it wasn’t safe pursuing it any further as the lid was getting pretty hot. So I’d guess, when I received the M205 some days later, I just ran the M205/black pad combo over that scratch once too many times.

In all honesty, it really sounds like the damage you inflicted on the paint was with the very aggressive use of the very aggressive combination of the 4" orange pad and UC. We're willing to bet the clear was hammered at that point but didn't fully reveal same until the final step, even though that step was with a very light combination of product/pad. It's sort of like when your wife is struggling for 20 minutes trying to unscrew the lid from a pickle jar but you find it practically falls off when you give it a light twist. "Oh, sure, I loosened it for you!" is the usual comeback. So UC on the 4" pad beat the clear down to almost nothing and M205 finally showed the result. And you don't have to open up much of a hole in the clear to start transferring color, that's for sure.

Just don’t tell my wife, but having a vehicle like hers to experiment with is perfect. Either that or get some panels from a junk yard and find the limits of the paint and your own limits.

When we tell someone to pick up a body panel from a junk yard we tell them to try and damage it. That's the time to get crazy and see what happens, learn the limits, learn what it takes to mess things up. Don't use that time to get lulled into a false sense of security - go nuts and see what you can break!

Now that I’ve got that little rant out of the way, I’d like to pursue the M105 problems I’m still having. On Sunday I decided to work the roof of the Mazda. However since I really had problems controlling the DA with M105 on an orange pad previously, I wanted to check out what it would be like using a white polishing pad. It was certainly easier to control, but I just couldn’t find a combination that let me work with it easily.

Used KBM, tried squirting with water, tried a pad with a just an X amount. No amount of fiddling gave me anytime to work with M105. It cuts fast for sure, but I feel as though I’ve got no control. It will cause the DA to dig in and walk the surface etc obviously more so with the orange pad than the white pad. Anyway I persisted and eventually got the roof looking reasonable, but I feel sure that it would have been easier with UC, even if it might have taken longer.




The results surprised me, the M105 cuts about the same as the PowerGloss, but I reckon the UC was just as good and the finish was probably even better than the other two. I’d have to say that if I really needed that much cut then I have to lean towards the PowerGloss or just work longer with UC.



You can probably tell I’m frustrated with M105. You read all the good stories here and elsewhere and I just can’t seem to get the dam stuff to work well. Do you have any further tips or perhaps even a video of using M105??

This weekend I’ll do further testing with it, but this time I’m going to do test sections on newer vehicles. Maybe it is more suitable to newer paint systems.

All of this frustration with M105 and the opposite experience with UC really don't surprise us as much as you might think. So many people read all these great things about M105 but lose sight of the fact that it was indeed designed for use on fresh paint, and to pull sanding marks out using a wool pad and a rotary buffer. Sure, in many, many cases it does an outstanding job on your typical cobwebs, holograms, towel marks, etc via D/A but even though we tweaked the formula to make it a bit more D/A friendly, it really is more of a rotary product. Of course people love the fast cut and beautiful finish in one step - most of the time.

But when you put it on a paint that doesn't like it, it really doesn't like it. I have personally used M105 via rotary and D/A more times than I can recall, but only on a couple of occasions has it exhibited this heavy dragging or gumming that was really frustrating. But in both cases it was being used on what I can only describe as dried out paint. The most memorable for me was on a Ferrari 360 Modena that I did immediately following another car, in the same shop, that responded beautifully to M105. But the exact same process - same tool, same pads (fresh ones, of course) that performed flawlessly on the first car were a total and complete disaster on the Ferrari. The product instantly gummed up and was darn near impossible to remove.

Now, neither car was technically what the product was designed to be used on. But M105's track record is such that it was almost a logical choice for these two cars. In the end, the Ferrari responded much better to M80 Speed Glaze, which is far less aggressive than M105 - not even close, actually. But the Ferrari loved it.

That said, there is a very high probability that your BMW is, at it's age, just feeling the effects of the Aussie sun for so long that the paint is more dessicated than you might imagine. We think about paint as being "dry" but it can, in fact, get even "drier"! And when that happens, M105 is probably not going to play well with it. Ultimate Compound, on the other hand, is formulated to be much more user friendly on a D/A and as such offers a much longer buffing cycle - it stays wetter longer. No, it doesn't cut as much as M105 but it doesn't have to. It's not designed to remove sanding marks via rotary buffer!

Your observations sound pretty much spot on in that context, and it's nice to see you experimenting and learning from what you're seeing. We're confident that once you put M105 onto some newer, healthier paint you'll find the experience to be quite a bit different. Even then, however, you'll still see UC being a lot more user friendly on the D/A.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Mike

In all honesty, it really sounds like the damage you inflicted on the paint was with the very aggressive use of the very aggressive combination of the 4" orange pad and UC. We're willing to bet the clear was hammered at that point but didn't fully reveal same until the final step, even though that step was with a very light combination of product/pad.

I tend to agree with your assessment.

All of this frustration with M105 and the opposite experience with UC really don't surprise us as much as you might think. So many people read all these great things about M105 but lose sight of the fact that it was indeed designed for use on fresh paint, and to pull sanding marks out using a wool pad and a rotary buffer. Sure, in many, many cases it does an outstanding job on your typical cobwebs, holograms, towel marks, etc via D/A but even though we tweaked the formula to make it a bit more D/A friendly, it really is more of a rotary product. Of course people love the fast cut and beautiful finish in one step - most of the time.

That said, there is a very high probability that your BMW is, at it's age, just feeling the effects of the Aussie sun for so long that the paint is more dessicated than you might imagine. We think about paint as being "dry" but it can, in fact, get even "drier"! And when that happens, M105 is probably not going to play well with it. Ultimate Compound, on the other hand, is formulated to be much more user friendly on a D/A and as such offers a much longer buffing cycle - it stays wetter longer. No, it doesn't cut as much as M105 but it doesn't have to. It's not designed to remove sanding marks via rotary buffer!

Actually M105 has never been used on the BMW. I’ve only used M105 on the even older Mazda. The BMW has only had Menzerna P0203S (less cut than UC) and UC. The Mazda has had even more years in the hot Aussie sun, so you may well be right about M105 not appreciating its paint.

As I said previously I'm going to try M105 on some late model stuff. I've got one vehicle I’m keen to try it on. It’s a 2008 Black Astra (I think you call them Saturns over there). When we purchased it, the paint looked very good, but only a week back it was washed on a sunny morning (they are a bit rare around here at the moment) and after drying it off, I found the driver’s side doors to be just a swirl pool. I suspect the dealer’s detailer isn’t paid well enough per vehicle. What a mess, but by the sounds of it perfect for a M105 test. When I first saw those swirls though, my initial reaction was I better get hold of a rotary.

I report back when I’m done.

Thanks for your help.

PS:
Any solution re the PM problem?