Re: Flex Precision Pads 1 inch 2 inch 3 inch
Why are they so tall?
I thought, "thin is in"
Thin is in.
That is when talking about
dual action polishers that use a
free floating spindle bearing assembly.
Gear driven tools don't really care if you use a thick or thin pad and I find normal foam pads, that is to say thick foam pads work great with both rotary buffers and the Flex 3401.
The entire reason thin pads work great with tools like the Porter Cable, etc. is due to less mass overall for the tool to rotate.
Also, less mass to absorb liquid. Thick wet pads rotate worse than thin wet pads.
Proof in the pudding is Meguiar's Xtra Cut MF pads, anyone ever measure how thin these pads are?
I know I've posted the thin is in - Meguiar's Xtra Cut MF pads analogy multiple times on this forum.
Also, my guess is there small diameter creates an illusion of the pads looking tall. If I place these pads next to most historically normal foam pads, that is
non new trend thin pads, they will be about or the same thickness.
I am anxious to see if they can be used on a rotary without leaving holograms on soft paint
In my experience, the smaller the diameter the pad on a rotary the greater the chance to see a hologram or buffer trail in the paint. Not sure why this is but I've seen this for over probably as long as I've been using the rotary as I used to make my own small foam pads.
Could be with todays abrasive technology, stuff I didn't have in the old days, that small pads on a rotary buffer and holograms are now a non-issue. Black paint would be the way to find out.
Big picture is more like this... even if you are leaving some type of faint hologram on a thin panel like an A-Pillar... chances are by the time you apply a wax you'll never see it because it's a thin panel.
Holograms are seen easiest on flat panels, especially large flat panels.
Here's some holograms in a
1978 Trans Am vertical panel...
:dunno:
