Rupes LHR 15ES vs GG6

HateSwirls said:
It now seems apparent I didn't know what the hell I was doing with the Rupes. Lol

One thing is certain , the Rupes may be the smoothest machine out there.

I found it to also be well balanced and pretty light.
Click to expand...

:)

Yea, the Rupes polishers are monsters. The washer mod helps a ton in keeping the pad spinning. However, I do feel the pad bogs fairly easily on non flat panels if not used with excellent technique. I'd rather use my Flex 3401 and not have to worry about that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Doesn't seem to be any bogging down here and you can bet there is no washer mod in these units----

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjyIPoHpmSA]RUPES BIGFOOT RANDOM ORBITAL SYSTEM: ZERO VIBRATIONS - YouTube[/video]
 
FivePoint.0 said:
:)

Yea, the Rupes polishers are monsters. The washer mod helps a ton in keeping the pad spinning. However, I do feel the pad bogs fairly easily on non flat panels if not used with excellent technique. I'd rather use my Flex 3401 and not have to worry about that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

See, this is where I really don't know what I'm sort of talking about, because I've never used any of the Rupes Polishers, so in that respect I am not sure that all of their machines benefit, or need the implementation of this so called "washer mod"?

Perhaps someone who's used them all, or somebody like Mike Phillips, or one of the other AG Crew can chime in?

From the vid posted, they sure do look smooth though!
Maybe one day I'll have the Rupes!?
Mark
 
I don't think the Rupes 15/21 "needs" the washer mod. If you check out the companies videos, they seem to be correcting wet sanded paint to perfection just fine sans WM. It may help a little, but it's likely not a make or break for the machine.

If you can't get the job done without the WM - the WM isn't going to be your salvation. I've recently WM'ed my 15, but haven't had a chance to use it yet with the mod.

I do know I had no problems without the mod. But, since it's easily reversible, I thought I'd check it out.
 
swanicyouth said:
I don't think the Rupes 15/21 "needs" the washer mod. If you check out the companies videos, they seem to be correcting wet sanded paint to perfection just fine sans WM. It may help a little, but it's likely not a make or break for the machine.

If you can't get the job done without the WM - the WM isn't going to be your salvation. I've recently WM'ed my 15, but haven't had a chance to use it yet with the mod.

I do know I had no problems without the mod. But, since it's easily reversible, I thought I'd check it out.
Click to expand...


Yep, I think that’s about right. Without the washer mod, the amount of intentional friction between the top of the backing plate and the shroud is pretty small. It’s just enough designed-in rubbing friction to prevent the pad from spinning out of control if the pad is spinning in free air. It does leave some debris on the top of the backing plate due to the rubbing, so it might be a good idea to clean that every now and then if you don't add the washer spacer.

If your pad has a couple rotations per second or more while you’re using the machine, the small rubbing friction isn’t going to make much difference in the rotations. But if you’re on a curved panel and the pad is barely rotating or on the verge of stopping, that small extra friction is going to stop the pad sooner.

With the washer mod spacer, since the backing plate no is no longer contacting the shroud, you have a bit more margin before the pad stops rotating. You can think of it like this: you have centripetal force driving the pad rotation, and various resistance forces countering that driving force to slow rotations.

It’s when the sum of all resistance to rotation (e.g. user pressure on the pad, plus resistance from non-flat contact area, plus the resistance from the pad/polish combination, plus the resistance from the backing plate rubbing on the shroud) is greater than the centripetal force driving the rotation, that the rotation stops. Taking that backing plate resistance out of the equation (by installing the washer spacer) just gives you a bit more margin before rotation stops.

Since I don’t see the need to prevent the pad from free spinning when the machine is running in free air, I don’t see any reason not to put the washer/spacer in, to pick up a slight bit of margin on when slow pad rotations eventually stop. But people do get great results without the washer spacer installed, so it’s whatever you’re comfortable with. As Swanicyouth noted, it’s not going to make or break your success with the machine.

On a different but related note…
Someone asked earlier about doing the washer mod on other DA’s. Most of the other machines already have a clear gap between the top of the backing plate and the bottom of the shroud (that gap is where you insert the wrench to loosen/tighten the backing plate).


It would only be useful if other machines also implemented some intentional friction between the top of the backing plate and the shroud in order to prevent out-of-control rotation when the pad is in free air. I don’t think any others do implement that, but I could be wrong.
 
SR99 said:
Yep, I think that’s about right. Without the washer mod, the amount of intentional friction between the top of the backing plate and the shroud is pretty small. It’s just enough designed-in rubbing friction to prevent the pad from spinning out of control if the pad is spinning in free air. It does leave some debris on the top of the backing plate due to the rubbing, so it might be a good idea to clean that every now and then if you don't add the washer spacer.

If your pad has a couple rotations per second or more while you’re using the machine, the small rubbing friction isn’t going to make much difference in the rotations. But if you’re on a curved panel and the pad is barely rotating or on the verge of stopping, that small extra friction is going to stop the pad sooner.

With the washer mod spacer, since the backing plate no is no longer contacting the shroud, you have a bit more margin before the pad stops rotating. You can think of it like this: you have centripetal force driving the pad rotation, and various resistance forces countering that driving force to slow rotations.

It’s when the sum of all resistance to rotation (e.g. user pressure on the pad, plus resistance from non-flat contact area, plus the resistance from the pad/polish combination, plus the resistance from the backing plate rubbing on the shroud) is greater than the centripetal force driving the rotation, that the rotation stops. Taking that backing plate resistance out of the equation (by installing the washer spacer) just gives you a bit more margin before rotation stops.

Since I don’t see the need to prevent the pad from free spinning when the machine is running in free air, I don’t see any reason not to put the washer/spacer in, to pick up a slight bit of margin on when slow pad rotations eventually stop. But people do get great results without the washer spacer installed, so it’s whatever you’re comfortable with. As Swanicyouth noted, it’s not going to make or break your success with the machine.

On a different but related note…
Someone asked earlier about doing the washer mod on other DA’s. Most of the other machines already have a clear gap between the top of the backing plate and the bottom of the shroud (that gap is where you insert the wrench to loosen/tighten the backing plate).


It would only be useful if other machines also implemented some intentional friction between the top of the backing plate and the shroud in order to prevent out-of-control rotation when the pad is in free air. I don’t think any others do implement that, but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPCMUTDtlSU]BuffDaddy Rupes Washer Mod - YouTube[/video]

From a mechanical design standpoint, to me, it seems wrong to myself to have any sort of rubbing-contact with the backing plate-shroud, when the basic design of the Rupes is no different than any other free spnning DA machine. Yes, it might cut down on sling if you accidentally lift the machine before rotation stops.

It's a bad habit that's easy enough to rectify-correct with some practice-experience. I've done it a few times with the Porter Cable, and after, you'll definitely say to yourself "Oh Hell!" LOL

To eventally see debris accumulate over time because of this rubbing condition, doesn't sound good to me.
 
MarkD51 said:
From a mechanical design standpoint, to me, it seems wrong to myself to have any sort of rubbing-contact with the backing plate-shroud, when the basic design of the Rupes is no different than any other free spnning DA machine.
Click to expand...

Hard to say for sure what motivated RUPES to add this "feature" but it might be due to tool safety regulations in some of the countries they plan to sell in, and they figured it would be easier to just include it for all markets.

There are several patents on ways to keep the pad on random orbit sanders/polishers from spinning out of control when the pad is not in contact with a surface. Makita, Ryobi, and Porter Cable, probably others, have patents, and they are a bit more elaborate than this method the RUPES uses. So they might have picked this fairly crude approach to avoid any potential patent infringement suits if they tried something more elaborate, or avoid upfront legal costs to have attorneys do patent searches and decide whether there might be an infringement claim. Don't know for sure but that would be my guess.
 
Here's what Kevin Brown sent me about the washer mod. I hope this helps some.

Thanks to the simple device, the machine is able to deliver more backing plate rotation, which helps to increase cutting force due to the additional speed. The added rotation of the plate ALSO assists in increasing the rolling & tumbling action of any buffing liquid, its abrasives, and any consequent ground-up paint residue.


The added motion also helps to keep the pad clean (especially in the case of foam pads) because all of the constant spinning, wiggling, orbiting, and varying directional shifts make it harder for the "polishing debris" to remain attached to the buffing pad.


The primary reason cut is diminished is because paint residue buries the abrasives, so they lose some cutting speed. The debris also coats the pad, deeming it less effective. Paint residue is also responsible for creating haziness and micro-marring of an otherwise perfectly-polished paint finish.


The washer helps minimize these negative effects. If you choose to drop the machine speed (because you won't be dialing extra speed simply to eliminate a stalling of the plate's rotation), the machine, pads, and paint will remain cooler, the machine will be easier to control, and it will be remarkably comfortable to operate.


 
I'm not saying the Rupes is better, even though it cost more. Will spending $200 more give me $200 more of a better polish? Not $200 more for sure IMO. What can qualify one polisher is better based on price? There are clones sold at 1/3 the cost of the Rupes that can discredit the $200 price increase over the GG6 that offer the same performance on paper as the Rupes, but that is another story that warrants another thread and not this one.

What I am saying is my technique using the GG6 is flawed compared to the Rupes (re-read my first post). Especially on vertical panels, I was not applying enough pressure on the GG6 compared to the Rupes (which I believe I used the same downforce).

I think the Rupes is less forgiving on the technique used compared to the GG6. I believe the larger throw on the Rupes helps to give better correction using less downforce on vertical panels giving me better results and a glossier finish (based on my flawed technique of polishing). This is the basis of this thread.
 
rstark said:
I'm not saying the Rupes is better, even though it cost more. Will spending $200 more give me $200 more of a better polish? Not $200 more for sure IMO. What can qualify one polisher is better based on price? There are clones sold at 1/3 the cost of the Rupes that can discredit the $200 price increase over the GG6 that offer the same performance on paper as the Rupes, but that is another story that warrants another thread and not this one.

What I am saying is my technique using the GG6 is flawed compared to the Rupes (re-read my first post). Especially on vertical panels, I was not applying enough pressure on the GG6 compared to the Rupes (which I believe I used the same downforce).

I think the Rupes is less forgiving on the technique used compared to the GG6. I believe the larger throw on the Rupes helps to give better correction using less downforce on vertical panels giving me better results and a glossier finish (based on my flawed technique of polishing). This is the basis of this thread.
Click to expand...

This thread is pointless.. Have you read the 3 pages of replies? Did you see the thread Mike Phillips himself just posted on here about the mind blowing performance of there Rupes? If you have countless professionals, Mike Phillips himself, plus every other heavy hitter on all detailing forums proclaiming the rupes is king, guess what, it IS king and IS worth $200 more. And you should know that a Chinese knockoff of any product doesn't compare or affect the value of a quality made brand name product. Sorry to sound harsh but I'm not sure what your accomplish with this thread. If you don't see the answer to the value of this machine in this thread, you must not be reading the replies. :buffing:
 
I have never read a thread with such inaccurate information, EVER!! To put the GG6 in the same sentence as the Rupes 15/21, or hell, even the 12 is mind blowing! If you're not getting MUCH better results with the RUPES over the GG6, you do NOT know what you're doing!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It seems to me that the purpose of paying so much money for a polisher like the Rupes would be ease of use and faster correction. As with anything else, "it don't mean a thing if you ain't got that swing". I'm thinking of buying a Rupes 21 but all this talk about bogging down has got me a little confused. If I want bogging down all I have to do is pickup my PC. I would hope by now that I learned enough to be able to handle a Rupes with a little practice. The way some of these post sound, it seems that the learning curve is a little big. BTW: has anyone tried the duetto. If so what are your thought on it.
 
FivePoint.0 said:
I have never read a thread with such inaccurate information, EVER!! To put the GG6 in the same sentence as the Rupes 15/21, or hell, even the 12 is mind blowing! If you're not getting MUCH better results with the RUPES over the GG6, you do NOT know what you're doing!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

As an old acquaintance once told me, "Sometimes it's hard to recognize Diamonds from BS", but I think this thread has passed on some good end user info.

The principles, and some facts I come away with are that yes, one can bog any of these free-wheeling DAs, but this might not actually be a bad thing in some respects. Yes, less correction ability when this happens, rotation comes to a halt, but also a more forgiving nature-quality.

I've read more than a few comments about the Flex DA, that if one uses poor technique, maybe starts "edging" a Pad, or does some other odd or scatter brained technique, the machine can have a tendency to skip-slide, and probably similar in many respects to a Rotary Machine, such a mistake may harm-damage the finish.

Some may, or may not get an improvement in performance with the Rupes Washer Mod, but I feel the more such is discussed, the more visible such info becomes, it may help some new users in the future.

Everyone will agree, there's going to be a learning curve with any new bought machine, to get the feel of how it works. Hand-Eye Coordination, and practice-experience certainly go far.

I think that is the one theme of what this thread mostly showcases.
 
runrun411 said:
It seems to me that the purpose of paying so much money for a polisher like the Rupes would be ease of use and faster correction. As with anything else, "it don't mean a thing if you ain't got that swing". I'm thinking of buying a Rupes 21 but all this talk about bogging down has got me a little confused. If I want bogging down all I have to do is pickup my PC. I would hope by now that I learned enough to be able to handle a Rupes with a little practice. The way some of these post sound, it seems that the learning curve is a little big. BTW: has anyone tried the duetto. If so what are your thought on it.
Click to expand...

If it bogs down, your not operating it properly. :buffing:
 
MshawnBauer said:
This thread is pointless.. Have you read the 3 pages of replies? Did you see the thread Mike Phillips himself just posted on here about the mind blowing performance of there Rupes? If you have countless professionals, Mike Phillips himself, plus every other heavy hitter on all detailing forums proclaiming the rupes is king, guess what, it IS king and IS worth $200 more. And you should know that a Chinese knockoff of any product doesn't compare or affect the value of a quality made brand name product. Sorry to sound harsh but I'm not sure what your accomplish with this thread. If you don't see the answer to the value of this machine in this thread, you must not be reading the replies. :buffing:
Click to expand...

Wow, you guys are harsh. MODS, please delete this thread. Objectivity is pointless. My intentions were stated and obviously ignored. Thanks for not listening. Thanks for not listening to my original intentions.
 
rstark said:
Wow, you guys are harsh. MODS, please delete this thread. Objectivity is pointless. My intentions were stated and obviously ignored. Thanks for not listening. Thanks for not listening to my original intentions.
Click to expand...


LoL, sorry OP. Some people get their feelings hurt when their expensive machine is critizised. At the end of the day, a true detailer can achieve the same results constantly regardless of what machine he uses. Granted you can correct a bit faster with a Flex or a Rupes. I find it laughable that some members think that by owning a Rupes, it makes them that more skilled than others who operate other lesser priced tools. The argument of DA polishers will always rage on, just like the Wax war will never end. Some people will never learn, and life goes on.
 
To clarify, the RUPES is not the end all to polishing. It WILL bog down on some panels, there's just no way around it. I don't care who you are. However, when used correctly on sufficient panels, it's AMAZING! I actually prefer the Flex 3401 and it's forced rotation because it will never bog! However, it's not as easy to control as the Rupes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
rstark said:
Wow, you guys are harsh. MODS, please delete this thread. Objectivity is pointless. My intentions were stated and obviously ignored. Thanks for not listening. Thanks for not listening to my original intentions.
Click to expand...

I apologize, I really do, I don't mean to come off like an arse, but this post has nothing but solid facts to back up the usefulness of the machine and you still are not convinced it's worth the money (comparing it to cheap knock-off's even). There comes a point where ya gotta poop or get off the pot. Everyone's likes and requirements for machines are different. I personally have used the PC and Griots for 12+ years and, to me, the Rupes is revolutionary. I am not a professional. I do this as a hobby for myself, my step fathers car/motorcycle collection and a few friends vehicles. We can't tell you what machine to buy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top