1 step vs 2 step? Business owners welcome.

nissenc1337

nissenc1337

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
250
Reaction score
0
In my head a 1 step is compounding and 2 step is compounding followed by a polish, waxing/glazing is understood.

So, is it not typical that you ALWAYS follow up a compounding with a polish? I know compounding can yield some good results but polish really gets the results you want.

So, do the majority of detail shops differentiate between the two?
 
Wash, clay, compound, polish, glaze, sealant, wax, spray wax

You can do a 1 step with a compound, but make sure it finishing off very well

Compound leaves slight haze, finer scratches, and other small imperfection. Might as well do an AIO
 
Start with the least aggressive . A one step to me is a polish followed by a sealer or wax . Or a one step could be a aio or cleaner wax.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using AG Online
 
For me a 1 step is either an AIO polish or a more aggressive polish followed by a wax or sealant. The goal for a 1 step is to get a moderate amount of correction using only 1 product and one run over the entire vehicle.

A 2 step is compound followed by a polish then LSP.

I generally only do 1 steps for retail clients unless they are willing to pay for a compound step. Compounding to do real correction is what takes huge chunks of time... and it is also something most retail clients don't care about. Most of them just want it clean and shiny.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using AG Online
 
I don't do a 1 step compound. I do an AIO with D151 or a single step polish with 205.
 
statusdetailing said:
I don't do a 1 step compound. I do an AIO with D151 or a single step polish with 205.
Click to expand...

:iagree:

Unless you have done your test spots and determine the car has very hard clear coat, typically I would not recommend a 1 step with a compound. With that being said, most of the popular compounds (FG400, M105, M101, D300) finish down so well that you may not need to follow up with a polish, however I have almost always found that following a compound with a polish produces better results no matter what the paint hardness is like.

Keep in mind cutting power is also pad dependent - so you could use something like FG400 with a white polishing pad to achieve more cut than a traditional polish, but still much less cut than using FG400 with something like a MF cutting pad. This has proven to be a useful 1-step combo for me on occasion.
 
zmcgovern45 said:
:iagree:

Unless you have done your test spots and determine the car has very hard clear coat, typically I would not recommend a 1 step with a compound. With that being said, most of the popular compounds (FG400, M105, M101, D300) finish down so well that you may not need to follow up with a polish, however I have almost always found that following a compound with a polish produces better results no matter what the paint hardness is like.

Keep in mind cutting power is also pad dependent - so you could use something like FG400 with a white polishing pad to achieve more cut than a traditional polish, but still much less cut than using FG400 with something like a MF cutting pad. This has proven to be a useful 1-step combo for me on occasion.
Click to expand...


I agree. Occasionally I'll do a one step with a compound but it's rare. One of the main reasons is time. Usually clients aren't willing to pay a lot for a one step. Compounds, although some finish well, typically dust more and are more difficult to remove than polishes like 205.
 
I should be working right now haha. There's an Excursion in my shop waiting to be detailed. . .Black, full paint correction and interior. . .it's going to be a long couple days.
 
Most of my 1 steps I use MF pads with FG400 or D300 they finish down very well for 1 steps and followed with a sealant. My 2 steps start out like a one step just add a finishing polish and then wax/sealant. I don't consider wax/sealant only because after you do paint correction you should use a sealant or a wax. Thats just me a lot of people consider wax/sealant a step but I don't.
 
When I bought the Mustang I saw the water spots all over the car, had it detailed, looked good. But my eye wasn't trained at the time and now I know how to identify and name imperfections. My car has micro marring and water spots, even after this "buffing."

I'm thinking I'll start with an CCS orange pad and polish, if that doesnt get results I'll throw compound on the orange pad and go to work. Followed by a white pad and polish, then blue pad and glaze/wax. Sound like a good plan of attack?
 
nissenc1337 said:
When I bought the Mustang I saw the water spots all over the car, had it detailed, looked good. But my eye wasn't trained at the time and now I know how to identify and name imperfections. My car has micro marring and water spots, even after this "buffing."

I'm thinking I'll start with an CCS orange pad and polish, if that doesnt get results I'll throw compound on the orange pad and go to work. Followed by a white pad and polish, then blue pad and glaze/wax. Sound like a good plan of attack?
Click to expand...

Do a test spot and see how that works and go from there.
 
So some of you do use compound? And produce noticeably better results? I thought most of you guys said this was no no?
 
hernandez.art13 said:
So some of you do use compound? And produce noticeably better results? I thought most of you guys said this was no no?
Click to expand...


I don't think it's really a no no as long as the customer fully understands what he or she is getting and what he is paying for.

Like some guys mentioned, it's possible to finish a compound out relatively well. I just don't do it because, IMO, it takes longer to do a one step with a compound as opposed to a polish. . .time I don't have (if the customer isn't paying for a multistep paint correction).
 
nissenc1337 said:
In my head a 1 step is compounding and 2 step is compounding followed by a polish, waxing/glazing is understood.

So, is it not typical that you ALWAYS follow up a compounding with a polish? I know compounding can yield some good results but polish really gets the results you want.

So, do the majority of detail shops differentiate between the two?
Click to expand...

The vast majority of production detail shops, dealers, and reconditioners go straight from compound, then to protection. They also are not AG oriented.

Compound is often over rated, and over used.

Here is a product that you may choose to investigate: Menzerna Power Finish PO 203, one step polish, swirl remover, finishing polish, car polish, german car polish, menzerna polishing compounds, power

Menzerna Power Finish PO 203 is made for the OEM market as a quick way to polish out light flaws and amplify the paint’s gloss. It has the cutting ability just a step below Super Intensive. This will remove moderate to mild swirls, water spots, and light scratches. Then Menzerna Power Finish PO 203 does something amazing – it burnishes the paint to an ultra high gloss, like you’d expect from Nano Polish. For busy detailers, Menzerna Power Finish PO 203 saves time and money by doing the work of two products.
Click to expand...

Also this post by Mike may shed some light on the issue. The point being that even the most swirled up neglected paint can be resurrected to the customers price point, without the use of compounding and multiple steps.
 
When doing a 1 step you still have todo a test spot so if a polish can get you the results you want great but some clears are harder and will need a compound the get the results you want out of a one step D300 mixed with a little 105 works great. Here is a picture of a on step with this mix.

 
When doing a test spot, do you have to reset to a different location when doing a different test spot with a more aggressive product? Or is the same test spot re-doable?
 
hernandez.art13 said:
When doing a test spot, do you have to reset to a different location when doing a different test spot with a more aggressive product? Or is the same test spot re-doable?
Click to expand...

It depends on what you are trying to accomplish... typically I would say you can just do it on the same spot because chances are you are going to a more aggressive product/pad combo so you can assume that it would have removed everything your first test combo did and you just want to see if it can remove the remaining defects.

If for some reason you are wanting to test a less aggressive product/pad combo after doing your initial test, you will obviously need to do a test in a new location.

If you are wanting to compare two different results, then you will also obviously need to do each test in a different location.
 
zmcgovern45 said:
It depends on what you are trying to accomplish... typically I would say you can just do it on the same spot because chances are you are going to a more aggressive product/pad combo so you can assume that it would have removed everything your first test combo did and you just want to see if it can remove the remaining defects.

If for some reason you are wanting to test a less aggressive product/pad combo after doing your initial test, you will obviously need to do a test in a new location.

If you are wanting to compare two different results, then you will also obviously need to do each test in a different location.
Click to expand...

+1 :)
 
hernandez.art13 said:
So some of you do use compound? And produce noticeably better results? I thought most of you guys said this was no no?
Click to expand...

I think some said its a no no because some of your post. Sounds like you have gone straight to 3m aggresive compound before trying less aggressive first.

I have done one step with m205 which you can play with different pads and ultimate compound which finishes down pretty good

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top