The problem with this would be that the mini BP + pad is lighter than the duetto's so you would needed to somehow reduce the weight of the duetto's BP so that it and the pad ends up weighing about the same as the mini's. I don't think it's possible.
Making the mini's BP heavier for use with a...
I'm sorry if you felt that I only scanned your posts, Mike. I did read through the entire thread and read your posts twice to see if I could find an explanation for the difference between rubbing down with a terry towel vs using a DA with a soft pad to apply the Show Glaze and remove the...
Hi Mike and other single stage paint experts,
I'm still a bit puzzled by the hand buffing requirement for this process. I understand that one of the goals is to revitalise the paint by working in the oils in the Show Glaze but another is to also remove the oxidation with the abrasive action of...
I was more referring to how the Flex wants to throw you around on soft paints making it a very tiring machine to use. It corrects and finishes fine on soft paint but it works you out as well.
You're dead right about no machine being perfect, though. The last car I did needed a rotary to...
Also, the Flex needs muscle and the Rupes needs finesse to use effectively
I prefer the Rupes as I find it more versatile - the Flex is a bear to use on softer paints while the Rupes works on any paint plus it doesn't beat you up like the Flex.
I've used both but bought the 15 as it's smoother and easier to use on smaller cars - the 21 cuts more but the 15 finishes down better.
If I did a lot of vans or SUVs, then I probably would have got the 21.
The 6" BP can be used on the 15 but it's not officially supported (just like running the...
One thing I haven't seen mentioned here is the size of the shroud around the dual action mechanism. When using a 5" or 6" BP, it is irrelevant but when using a 3" BP, the shroud can have a big effect on the usability in tight spots. The GG6 and megs G110v2 have an oversized shroud when compared...
But according to Setec, with Opticoat, you're giving them a top up of clearcoat ('cos it's PERMANENT) so you can justify the charge as a light respray and refinish :props:
So what then defines Opticoat as being a clearcoat compared to other coatings?
Should OPT start marketing it as OptiPaint, to distinguish from the "non-clearcoat" coatings?
You can compound and polish paint. How does Opticoat respond to being compounded?
Maybe we should get one of the OPT...
Exactly. You have a tradeoff of properties, which is why it isn't paint but rather a coating that protects the underlying paint (which these days is most commonly clear over the base).
And what is the advantage of this? Why wouldn't he make it thicker so it could fill.
Like clearcoat does?
I'm NOT saying it isn't a great coating with some unique properties. But it isn't a clearcoat - not unless you also allow other coatings to regarded as such.
Which does not make it paint.
There are other coatings with those same properties
If Opticoat was a clearcoat, then the applicators wouldn't need to worry about clearcoat strikethrough while correcting.
Try sanding through your clear and then Opticoating it - it won't look the same.