Finally Got To Use My Flex
- Thread starter Dubbin1
- Start date
JonM
New member
- Jan 4, 2010
- 398
- 0
Got ya...ever consider the 3" then? Its a great machine (I have both 3" and 6"). Will save you some money, but then again you won't have the chance to ever run bigger pads on a bigger machine, but the flex...just food for thought
I just got to use my Flex just rushed to me from Geek headquarters..... I just recently upgraded from the original PC (non XP) to a Flex and am very happy with this decision. The Flex is more ergonomically developed and just reeks of quality. Let me say that the PC is a great beginner tool and did me right on some finishes and saved my butt more than once, but left me hanging on tougher jobs. I jumped up to 7.5" wool using a rotary but the margin for error using this setup is very small and I would not attempt it on someone elses car for money. I wanted something to fill the gap and enter the Flex. An alternative was the GG but I was more impressed with the Flex and did not want to come up short so was willing to cough up the extra money.
One of the things talked about on these forums is power. Just for grins I hooked up a load meter to my tools and found the following:
Flex Freewheeling at 6 setting (highest) 4.5 amps
Flex with a LC 6.5" orange flat pad on sheet metal with a 10 lb load 9.0 amps
PC Freehwheeling on 6.0 setting 2.1 amp
PC under same 10 lbs load with LC orange 3.8 amps
Now realize that this original PC was rated for 4.0 amps and in fact comes close to this. The XP is rated at 4.5 amps so I assume it will run close to that under the same loaded condition.
But interestingly enough, the Flex exceeded advertised current draw by 1.2 amps!
A simple test was to run your hand on the pad with equal pressure with the highest setting on both tools and with the Flex, it was too hot to touch after 3 to 4 seconds. With the PC it was 7 or 8 seconds....roughly double the time which is somewhat consistent with current draw. Now realize that these mechanisms are different which will affect output efficiency and cutting ability etc, but it is clear that the Flex power (ability to generate friction and heat at the pad surface is at least double of the older PC and at least 70% more than the XP. My guess is the GG is somewhere in between the Flex and XP but I am GUESSING here. (Love to try one just for grins).
In addition to ergonomical advantages such as the Flex handle is smaller and easier to grip and is further away from the motor so it will not run hot, and the fact that the Flex has easier speed control adjustments on the fly and a soft start and trigger lock and easier to hold forward grip, and less jiggly and possible less fatigue factor despite weighing a tad more than the PC, it does come down to power.
I suppose one can make up for lack of power from the machine by increasing Pad courseness or more aggressive chemical but It seems to me that solution will create other issues given the same amount of time applied to the job.
One of the reasons why the PC is "safe" to use is because it is not that aggressive and you can 'sneak up" to your desired finish but it takes more time. I would think that with a slightly milder polish and a more aggressive tool you can achieve the same results in less time on certain jobs.
As a practical matter, most light swirl jobs can be corrected in the same amount of time whether you use PC at 5 and Flex at 3 or whatever. But on the 1 out of 4 jobs where you need the extra power, I suspect but have not yet proven that you could save some significant time with the Flex. (plenty of others out there have said this is so and I believe them). And time is money. If I was a full time detailer I would not be without the Flex as it it could pay for itself in 2 weeks.
But let me say that the PC is a proven tool and is more than adequate for 75% of the typical buffing job, but over 12 months of even weekend detailing the Flex will justify itself and its higher costs in my opinion. :xyxthumbs:
One of the things talked about on these forums is power. Just for grins I hooked up a load meter to my tools and found the following:
Flex Freewheeling at 6 setting (highest) 4.5 amps
Flex with a LC 6.5" orange flat pad on sheet metal with a 10 lb load 9.0 amps
PC Freehwheeling on 6.0 setting 2.1 amp
PC under same 10 lbs load with LC orange 3.8 amps
Now realize that this original PC was rated for 4.0 amps and in fact comes close to this. The XP is rated at 4.5 amps so I assume it will run close to that under the same loaded condition.
But interestingly enough, the Flex exceeded advertised current draw by 1.2 amps!
A simple test was to run your hand on the pad with equal pressure with the highest setting on both tools and with the Flex, it was too hot to touch after 3 to 4 seconds. With the PC it was 7 or 8 seconds....roughly double the time which is somewhat consistent with current draw. Now realize that these mechanisms are different which will affect output efficiency and cutting ability etc, but it is clear that the Flex power (ability to generate friction and heat at the pad surface is at least double of the older PC and at least 70% more than the XP. My guess is the GG is somewhere in between the Flex and XP but I am GUESSING here. (Love to try one just for grins).
In addition to ergonomical advantages such as the Flex handle is smaller and easier to grip and is further away from the motor so it will not run hot, and the fact that the Flex has easier speed control adjustments on the fly and a soft start and trigger lock and easier to hold forward grip, and less jiggly and possible less fatigue factor despite weighing a tad more than the PC, it does come down to power.
I suppose one can make up for lack of power from the machine by increasing Pad courseness or more aggressive chemical but It seems to me that solution will create other issues given the same amount of time applied to the job.
One of the reasons why the PC is "safe" to use is because it is not that aggressive and you can 'sneak up" to your desired finish but it takes more time. I would think that with a slightly milder polish and a more aggressive tool you can achieve the same results in less time on certain jobs.
As a practical matter, most light swirl jobs can be corrected in the same amount of time whether you use PC at 5 and Flex at 3 or whatever. But on the 1 out of 4 jobs where you need the extra power, I suspect but have not yet proven that you could save some significant time with the Flex. (plenty of others out there have said this is so and I believe them). And time is money. If I was a full time detailer I would not be without the Flex as it it could pay for itself in 2 weeks.
But let me say that the PC is a proven tool and is more than adequate for 75% of the typical buffing job, but over 12 months of even weekend detailing the Flex will justify itself and its higher costs in my opinion. :xyxthumbs:
Last edited:
MikeyC
Member
- Mar 7, 2006
- 886
- 0
Instead of getting a whole seperate machine to run smaller pads why not just get the 3M quick disconnect adapter. It costs a lot less than a Griot's.