WRAPT C5Z06
New member
- Nov 12, 2009
- 12,615
- 0
I trust 200% what Kevin Brown says or recommends about Rupes polishers or anything detailing related.
Rupes LHR 15ES vs GG6
- Thread starter rstark
- Start date
ski2
New member
- Dec 2, 2011
- 1,826
- 0
Regarding the washer mod questions Kevin Brown's responses:
"With the spacer installed, backing plate rotation increased immensely. While I was not able to verify exactly how big an increase occurred in terms of backing plate rotation or cutting power, I can say that it was a LOT. My best guess: backing plate rotation increased to 10-14 times per second, and cutting speed increased by about 50 percent.
Will this temporary modification void the machine's warranty?
I have verified through Francesco Ginocchio, Marketing Manager at Rupes S.p.A. that the warranty will remain intact. The wonderful Technicians and Engineers at Rupes hold firm in their belief that this modification is not necessary or beneficial in the chase for increased performance. Further, we both agree (Rupes and I) that with an increase in backing plate rotation comes a potential for loss of high RPM stability. Therefore, if you wish to temporarily or permanently try this modification...
PAY ATTENTION WHILE OPERATING THE MACHINE.
No message texting or brushing of your teeth while operating the UNLEASHED BIGFOOT BEAST!!!
Thanks for reading, best of luck!"
"With the spacer installed, backing plate rotation increased immensely. While I was not able to verify exactly how big an increase occurred in terms of backing plate rotation or cutting power, I can say that it was a LOT. My best guess: backing plate rotation increased to 10-14 times per second, and cutting speed increased by about 50 percent.
Will this temporary modification void the machine's warranty?
I have verified through Francesco Ginocchio, Marketing Manager at Rupes S.p.A. that the warranty will remain intact. The wonderful Technicians and Engineers at Rupes hold firm in their belief that this modification is not necessary or beneficial in the chase for increased performance. Further, we both agree (Rupes and I) that with an increase in backing plate rotation comes a potential for loss of high RPM stability. Therefore, if you wish to temporarily or permanently try this modification...
PAY ATTENTION WHILE OPERATING THE MACHINE.
No message texting or brushing of your teeth while operating the UNLEASHED BIGFOOT BEAST!!!
Thanks for reading, best of luck!"
WRAPT C5Z06
New member
- Nov 12, 2009
- 12,615
- 0
Good stuff. ski2!!
rops:
MshawnBauer
New member
- Apr 18, 2013
- 203
- 0
lol, I'm tempted to try the WM, but I want to get 100% proficient with the machine first. My cars as well as the ones I maintain aren't bad enough to where I need more from the Rupes, Who knows. I usually have a bug to mod everything from Cars to computers and cell phones, I'm holding out on the Rupes as of yet.
Kevin Brown
New member
- Apr 11, 2009
- 176
- 0
"Let's see if I can remember how to do this. Ahem!..."
Several guys asked if I would chime in on this thread. Okay, I’ll do it!
Many of the discussions pertaining to the latest detailing trends are not found on detailing forums anymore. This is because the convenience of Facebook has drawn vast amounts of knowledgeable guys away from the forums to groups such as Detailer Buddies, and many other "secret" groups.
I mention this because the “washer mod” debate has played out on the various groups quite some time ago, but then it occasionally resurges. In fact, it has been brought up for discussion again today! A lot has been written about the topic, but the beautiful side of Facebook has an equally-ugly side: it’s very difficult to track down old discussions and posts. I know this because it can sometimes take me an hour to recall where the discussion I am looking for emerged.
To be VERY clear, I have the highest level of respect for the Rupes® organization and its employees. The level of enthusiasm and pride in what they are attempting to do is undoubtedly apparent, which is to manufacture and bring to market truly trendsetting, mold-breaking detailing machines & products.
That being said, it’s no secret that Marco D’Inca (the engineer responsible for products such as the BigFoot® line of products) and I do not see eye-to-eye on the washer mod aka the “Hi-Speed, Passive Random Rotational Restoration Device!”
Or… something like that.
We've discussed it in person and via e-mails and messaging. Not to say that Marco is wrong, and I am right. No sir! After all, Marco is an engineer, and I am not. For all intents and purposes, I am merely a driver of the BigFoot machine that Marco has so masterfully built, and my vehicle of choice is the LHR21ES. It’s a modded-up variant, but it still features a 21mm orbit diameter outfitted with the KBM-HSPRRRD! ☺, and a low-tack original equipment 150mm gray-backed backing plate. Upgraded 16g cord. Micro-polished brushes. And some other stuff I just thought up.
Anyway… I hope it’s okay that I post up the latest discussion related to the washer mod. Here’s the crux of today’s discussion, which began as a question about choosing either the LHR15ES or the LHR21ES. Eventually, the washer mod was brought up, which is why I chimed in:
Several guys asked if I would chime in on this thread. Okay, I’ll do it!
Many of the discussions pertaining to the latest detailing trends are not found on detailing forums anymore. This is because the convenience of Facebook has drawn vast amounts of knowledgeable guys away from the forums to groups such as Detailer Buddies, and many other "secret" groups.
I mention this because the “washer mod” debate has played out on the various groups quite some time ago, but then it occasionally resurges. In fact, it has been brought up for discussion again today! A lot has been written about the topic, but the beautiful side of Facebook has an equally-ugly side: it’s very difficult to track down old discussions and posts. I know this because it can sometimes take me an hour to recall where the discussion I am looking for emerged.
To be VERY clear, I have the highest level of respect for the Rupes® organization and its employees. The level of enthusiasm and pride in what they are attempting to do is undoubtedly apparent, which is to manufacture and bring to market truly trendsetting, mold-breaking detailing machines & products.
That being said, it’s no secret that Marco D’Inca (the engineer responsible for products such as the BigFoot® line of products) and I do not see eye-to-eye on the washer mod aka the “Hi-Speed, Passive Random Rotational Restoration Device!”
Or… something like that.
We've discussed it in person and via e-mails and messaging. Not to say that Marco is wrong, and I am right. No sir! After all, Marco is an engineer, and I am not. For all intents and purposes, I am merely a driver of the BigFoot machine that Marco has so masterfully built, and my vehicle of choice is the LHR21ES. It’s a modded-up variant, but it still features a 21mm orbit diameter outfitted with the KBM-HSPRRRD! ☺, and a low-tack original equipment 150mm gray-backed backing plate. Upgraded 16g cord. Micro-polished brushes. And some other stuff I just thought up.
Anyway… I hope it’s okay that I post up the latest discussion related to the washer mod. Here’s the crux of today’s discussion, which began as a question about choosing either the LHR15ES or the LHR21ES. Eventually, the washer mod was brought up, which is why I chimed in:
Kevin Brown
New member
- Apr 11, 2009
- 176
- 0
Kevin Brown:
"As a reseller of the Rupes BigFoot line, I am often asked my opinion on the cutting power of the LHR15ES and LHR21ES machines. Polishing styles and pad/liquid combinations can certainly affect overall performance, but let's sidestep that conversation for now.
The LHR15ES features an additional 600-800 RPM (120v/240v). But really, the added RPM is there to increase backing plate rotation, not so much to allow a guy to polish a particular area 10-13 times more per second! Its important to note that there are a lot of things going on when you extend stroke diameter. One BENEFIT is an ability to deliver a fantastic finish IF you are not using excessive machine speed AND you minimize any buffing pad edge-digging that may occur due to an extended stroke.
Perhaps the following short story will help to clarify why there is such a large difference in cutting power between the two machines. Instead of using millimeters to compare the 15 and 21, the story uses linear feet:
"One day, best friends Timmy and Tommy are hanging around the garage with nothing to do.
At some point, Timmy rifles through a box of junk, eventually finding a piece of string and a tennis ball.
Timmy pokes a hole through both sides of the ball, and fishes the string through the holes. He ties a knot at the end of the string in order to secure the ball onto the string.
The string length measures 7.5 feet.
Timmy takes his newfound toy and spins the ball above his head at a rate of one revolution per second. As the ball whirls around, it creates an orbit diameter of 15 feet.
Timmy takes aim, and smacks Tommy in the chest with the ball.
"SMACK!"
"OUCH!"
After some back-and-forth arm punching, things calm down. Timmy eyeballs another piece of string that measures 3 feet in length, and uses it to extend the string on his whirling contraption to 10.5 feet.
To increase the sting, Timmy submerges the ball into a bucket of water and gives the ball a squeeze. As the ball restores its shape, it sucks in enough water to add 3 to 4 ounces of weight to the ball.
Timmy repeats his prank. He whirls the ball above his head at the rate of one revolution per second, and smacks Tommy square in the chest. The added mass of the water combined with the extended length of the string (which increases the ball speed per revolution) makes a noteworthy difference in force.
"SUH-MACK!"
"YEE-OUCH!"
"THWACK!"
The "thwack" is the sound of Tommy bopping Timmy in the eyeball. For the record... Timmy and Tommy are no longer friends."
Not a perfect comparison, and there are other factors to consider. Either way, when you purchase a Bigfoot…
You're buying a "kick-@$$" machine!"
A question is asked:
"Is the washer mod really necessary for the 21, Kevin Brown?"
Kevin Brown:
The machine works well without it. However, I always use my machine with the washer installed. Polishing styles dictate whether you'll notice a difference when using the spacer. For example, let's compare two very different heavy-cut polishing methods, and assume that the panel being polished is perfectly flat.
The first method uses a typical foam cutting pad that is relatively rigid and porous (the Rupes blue or green pad would fall into this category), and 5-7 drops of buffing compound. In this case, the machine should be capable of delivering an ample amount of backing plate rotation.
However, if you use a method similar to mine, which is:
A microfiber cutting pad whose face has been fully primed with an abrasive-laden buffing compound (in attempt to "prime", "dress", or "prep" each individual microfiber string so that there is a maximum level of abrasive action in play).
Which of these two setups will likely create immensely more friction between the pad and paint? It's VERY likely that mine will. Consequently, it's also very likely that because of the added friction, the backing plate will be more apt to slow or stall altogether. The addition of the spacer enables the machine to deliver maximum backing plate rotation. Should I find it unnecessary to employ maximum plate rotation, I can simply dial down the machine speed. In doing so, several positive things can occur, including:
• The machine runs at a lower RPM, thus potentially extending its life, while keeping its internal parts cooler.
• User experience should be better, as there will be less high-rpm vibration, and the machine will be easier to manage since it is running at a lower speed (debatable).
• The buffing pad's attachment material, adhesives, and foam structure will likely last longer since heat and ferocious motion of its foam will be lessened.
• Buffing liquids should have their buffing cycles extended (this is a debatable topic, better discussed another time!)
There are a couple of other benefits, but the point is that I do not see any detriment to using the spacer. And for every argument against it, I can make a tremendous opposing argument for it. Really though, the easiest thing to do is to use the machine as-is. If you are satisfied with its overall performance... Perfect! However, if you feel that there are some shortcomings with the machine's polishing ability, try another pad, or pad design, or choose another polishing liquid. If you're still curious after implementing various pad & liquid changes... slip in a spacer and judge for yourself!
For me, it made all the difference."
"As a reseller of the Rupes BigFoot line, I am often asked my opinion on the cutting power of the LHR15ES and LHR21ES machines. Polishing styles and pad/liquid combinations can certainly affect overall performance, but let's sidestep that conversation for now.
The LHR15ES features an additional 600-800 RPM (120v/240v). But really, the added RPM is there to increase backing plate rotation, not so much to allow a guy to polish a particular area 10-13 times more per second! Its important to note that there are a lot of things going on when you extend stroke diameter. One BENEFIT is an ability to deliver a fantastic finish IF you are not using excessive machine speed AND you minimize any buffing pad edge-digging that may occur due to an extended stroke.
Perhaps the following short story will help to clarify why there is such a large difference in cutting power between the two machines. Instead of using millimeters to compare the 15 and 21, the story uses linear feet:
"One day, best friends Timmy and Tommy are hanging around the garage with nothing to do.
At some point, Timmy rifles through a box of junk, eventually finding a piece of string and a tennis ball.
Timmy pokes a hole through both sides of the ball, and fishes the string through the holes. He ties a knot at the end of the string in order to secure the ball onto the string.
The string length measures 7.5 feet.
Timmy takes his newfound toy and spins the ball above his head at a rate of one revolution per second. As the ball whirls around, it creates an orbit diameter of 15 feet.
Timmy takes aim, and smacks Tommy in the chest with the ball.
"SMACK!"
"OUCH!"
After some back-and-forth arm punching, things calm down. Timmy eyeballs another piece of string that measures 3 feet in length, and uses it to extend the string on his whirling contraption to 10.5 feet.
To increase the sting, Timmy submerges the ball into a bucket of water and gives the ball a squeeze. As the ball restores its shape, it sucks in enough water to add 3 to 4 ounces of weight to the ball.
Timmy repeats his prank. He whirls the ball above his head at the rate of one revolution per second, and smacks Tommy square in the chest. The added mass of the water combined with the extended length of the string (which increases the ball speed per revolution) makes a noteworthy difference in force.
"SUH-MACK!"
"YEE-OUCH!"
"THWACK!"
The "thwack" is the sound of Tommy bopping Timmy in the eyeball. For the record... Timmy and Tommy are no longer friends."
Not a perfect comparison, and there are other factors to consider. Either way, when you purchase a Bigfoot…
You're buying a "kick-@$$" machine!"
A question is asked:
"Is the washer mod really necessary for the 21, Kevin Brown?"
Kevin Brown:
The machine works well without it. However, I always use my machine with the washer installed. Polishing styles dictate whether you'll notice a difference when using the spacer. For example, let's compare two very different heavy-cut polishing methods, and assume that the panel being polished is perfectly flat.
The first method uses a typical foam cutting pad that is relatively rigid and porous (the Rupes blue or green pad would fall into this category), and 5-7 drops of buffing compound. In this case, the machine should be capable of delivering an ample amount of backing plate rotation.
However, if you use a method similar to mine, which is:
A microfiber cutting pad whose face has been fully primed with an abrasive-laden buffing compound (in attempt to "prime", "dress", or "prep" each individual microfiber string so that there is a maximum level of abrasive action in play).
Which of these two setups will likely create immensely more friction between the pad and paint? It's VERY likely that mine will. Consequently, it's also very likely that because of the added friction, the backing plate will be more apt to slow or stall altogether. The addition of the spacer enables the machine to deliver maximum backing plate rotation. Should I find it unnecessary to employ maximum plate rotation, I can simply dial down the machine speed. In doing so, several positive things can occur, including:
• The machine runs at a lower RPM, thus potentially extending its life, while keeping its internal parts cooler.
• User experience should be better, as there will be less high-rpm vibration, and the machine will be easier to manage since it is running at a lower speed (debatable).
• The buffing pad's attachment material, adhesives, and foam structure will likely last longer since heat and ferocious motion of its foam will be lessened.
• Buffing liquids should have their buffing cycles extended (this is a debatable topic, better discussed another time!)
There are a couple of other benefits, but the point is that I do not see any detriment to using the spacer. And for every argument against it, I can make a tremendous opposing argument for it. Really though, the easiest thing to do is to use the machine as-is. If you are satisfied with its overall performance... Perfect! However, if you feel that there are some shortcomings with the machine's polishing ability, try another pad, or pad design, or choose another polishing liquid. If you're still curious after implementing various pad & liquid changes... slip in a spacer and judge for yourself!
For me, it made all the difference."
Kevin Brown
New member
- Apr 11, 2009
- 176
- 0
Question:
"At the risk of starting a debate, would a more powerful motor be beneficial?"
Kevin Brown:
"Yeah, this could start a big debate!
I think you'll find that most guys complaining about stalled backing plate rotation are using LHR15's. In addition, the design of the pad and how it is supported by the backing plate has WAY more to do with backing plate rotation than is commonly understood.
For instance, if you are using a soft and pliable foam buffing pad that features a flared-edge design, you might expect that it would slow backing plate rotation compared to a similar foam pad that featured a squared-edge design. But wait! If you decided to use a pad with a squared-edge design, we'd have to account for the height of the pad as well as the support it receives from the backing plate. If the backing plate failed to extend close to edge of the pad, then backing plate rotation would be even worse than it originally was with the flared-edge pad installed.
What I'm getting at is this: if the pad & backing plate combination has a tendency to stall backing plate rotation… Then a stronger motor would not help. In fact, a stronger motor may shorten the life of the buffing pad, since the added machine motion would only encompass the foam pad's structure and superheat it (due to friction caused by excessive motion).
A sidenote: during the development phases of products such as the Meguiar's DA Microfiber Discs, we were able to eliminate sanding marks as deep as 800 grit using the Porter Cable 7424 (8mm orbit diameter, 3.7 amp motor), and Meguiar's M86 So1o Cut & Polish Cream.
It's not JUST motor strength and stroke diameter that enables a machine to do incredible cutting.
It's also the setup.
"At the risk of starting a debate, would a more powerful motor be beneficial?"
Kevin Brown:
"Yeah, this could start a big debate!
I think you'll find that most guys complaining about stalled backing plate rotation are using LHR15's. In addition, the design of the pad and how it is supported by the backing plate has WAY more to do with backing plate rotation than is commonly understood.
For instance, if you are using a soft and pliable foam buffing pad that features a flared-edge design, you might expect that it would slow backing plate rotation compared to a similar foam pad that featured a squared-edge design. But wait! If you decided to use a pad with a squared-edge design, we'd have to account for the height of the pad as well as the support it receives from the backing plate. If the backing plate failed to extend close to edge of the pad, then backing plate rotation would be even worse than it originally was with the flared-edge pad installed.
What I'm getting at is this: if the pad & backing plate combination has a tendency to stall backing plate rotation… Then a stronger motor would not help. In fact, a stronger motor may shorten the life of the buffing pad, since the added machine motion would only encompass the foam pad's structure and superheat it (due to friction caused by excessive motion).
A sidenote: during the development phases of products such as the Meguiar's DA Microfiber Discs, we were able to eliminate sanding marks as deep as 800 grit using the Porter Cable 7424 (8mm orbit diameter, 3.7 amp motor), and Meguiar's M86 So1o Cut & Polish Cream.
It's not JUST motor strength and stroke diameter that enables a machine to do incredible cutting.
It's also the setup.
Flash Gordon
Well-known member
- Feb 6, 2010
- 11,450
- 458
I'm sure Marco is very humiliated knowing someone else knows his machine better then he does
WRAPT C5Z06
New member
- Nov 12, 2009
- 12,615
- 0
No disrespect to Marco, but I firmly believe the only reason for the anti spinning shroud is safety related for those who may not know the consequences. Does that make sense to have a safety feature? Hell yes! However, I know how to avoid any safety issues, so why not increase the performance of the machine with the washer?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Flash Gordon
Well-known member
- Feb 6, 2010
- 11,450
- 458
WRAPT C5Z06
New member
- Nov 12, 2009
- 12,615
- 0
Safety, smafety. I want maximum results !!
rops:
runrun411
New member
- Oct 9, 2012
- 1,789
- 0
Christopher.Brown
New member
- Jun 4, 2013
- 439
- 0
This isnt the case at all, which im sure KB will agree. And this was never the intent of him posting.
Marco is a smart man. Kevin is simply stating his opinions here based on a lifetime of buffing, teaching, researching technologies, testing, and dissecting the variables involved with the processes. Kevin offers completely different insights to the processes of buffing than Marco, therefore the differing thoughts.
There is more than one way to skin a cat. And the style that Kevin employs to buff will not necessarily work for others automatically and the same can be said of others' techniques. Therefore others are not wrong for having a different methodology.
I think this is an important thing to keep at the forefront of discussions. Any endeavor is an fluid process, evolving over time. Therefore, one must be open to different view points and discussing them openly without judgement.
Rsurfer
Well-known member
- Jan 26, 2007
- 14,159
- 26
You sound like a marriage counselor I once had.
swanicyouth
New member
- Mar 3, 2011
- 9,388
- 0
