Flex 3401 vs. Rupes Mille/Makita P5000C, for those that are wondering.

jcat9 said:
not trying to speak for RSW, but I believe he's hinting at the amount of heat that each machine puts into the panel using the same product and pad for the same amount of time as a measure of the 'work' being done or the amount of correction that each can do in a given period of time. This in response to claims that one or the other corrects faster.


I think it's important to delineate the term 'cover more ground' as it can be misleading. We should instead separate into 'footprint' and 'correcting speed'.

In the area of 'footprint' the large throw DAs, with pad size being equal, obviously win. This is because rotation has no real effect on the raw number of square inches the pad touches in a single orbit. A 6" pad orbiting 15 or 21mm will obviously cover more surface area than the same 6" pad covering a 5.5 or 8mm orbit.

The area of 'correcting speed' is what RSW is eluding to. Can you correct the same area of paint (Let's say the standard 2'x2' area) faster with a flex/makita/mille faster than a rupes or griots 15 or 21. If the forced machine can make up for its lack of orbital surface area coverage by correcting that same 2x2 in less time or passes than the 15 or 21, then it is 'faster'.
Click to expand...
I totally understand what you're saying as far as correcting speed, but what does heat have to do with correction speed?
 
WRAPT C5Z06 said:
I totally understand what you're saying as far as correcting speed, but what does heat have to do with correction speed?
Click to expand...

doesn't, necessarily I guess. But you reminded me that i forgot to add one last statement to that post.

The more times the pad passes over the area, the more times it will abrade the paint. The more passes it makes abrading the paint, the more heat will be put into the panel.

I don't know of a good way to measure the amount of times a pad moves over the paint in a given square inch, so measuring the heat put into the panel is probably the next best thing. In theory, by doing RSWs test, same pad same product same time, different machine, a higher temperature reading for one machine over the other would seem to indicate more correcting 'work' done in a given time period. More 'work' done in a given time period means correction is faster, as the other machine would require more passes/time to reach the same amount of 'work' done on that area.

You could go crazy and try to figure out at what temp correction begins but there are so many variables, and limited gain from the information.
 
.


Just to chime in...


Great on-going discussion going on hear about all the benefits and drawbacks of free-spinning versus gear-driven tool.

The good news is now days we DO have so many choices.

It use to be this was all most of us had to choose from...

watermark.php





Just as important - be respectful over other's and their opinions and experience. At the end of the day, what's most important is >you< like the tool you own. And >you< are able to take the cars you detail and make them shiny in a time-frame that suits your needs.


My dad has always bought Fords, I don't know why when it's obvious (at least to me), that Chevy's are far superior. I'm joking of course. But we never fight over which brand of truck is better and at the end of the day they both get us down the road. We also don't try to change each other's mind.

One thing I've learned in life is you can't change people they have to want to change on their own. Another way of saying this is you can't change people's minds... at least not by arguing.


So again, GREAT on-going discussion going on here and I'm excited to get my hands on both the new RUPES LH 19 and Mille KK 900E and then give them a test drive.


Carry on...


:)
 
Mike Phillips said:
.



So again, GREAT on-going discussion going on here and I'm excited to get my hands on both the new RUPES LH 19 and Mille KK 900E and then give them a test drive.


Carry on...


:)
Click to expand...

Mike, do you happen to have a comment on my pointed question from a couple pages ago? Basically at what point or under what circumstances should an individual pick a forced machine over a long throw orbital or vice versa?
 
jcat9 said:
Mike, do you happen to have a comment on my pointed question from a couple pages ago?

Basically at what point or under what circumstances should an individual pick a forced machine over a long throw orbital or vice versa?
Click to expand...


The primary time in my opinion and experience to choose a gear-driven orbital is when you want to do your correction work as fast as humanly possible no matter what the size or shape of the body panel to be buffed.

The other consideration is when you want to rely on the tool to get the job done and not technique.



When it comes to rotary buffers which by default are gear-driven, then I think any professional that is anyone that detailes cars for money, (either full time or part time), should have access to a rotary buffer. There are simply some procedures where the rotary buffer is the right tool for the job. In order for a professional to take on the job they should have the right tool or turn the job down.

For example,

  1. Buffing out severely oxidized gel-coat boats.
  2. Removing sanding marks after wet sanding.
  3. Buffing out oxidized aluminum diamond plate.
  4. When defects are deep and speed is needed.


The above is just off the top of my head but probably the things I would choose a rotary buffer instead of ANY free spinning or gear-driven orbital.


Just my opinion for what it's worth...


:)
 
I have 2 x Flex 3401's with all the different backing plates, 2 X PE-14's too along with Rupes Duetto, 15ES, 15MKII,21 MKII,Boss 21,GG6,PC24 etc. I have purchased the Mille and LH19E Rotary but am still waiting as they on back order. I find Joel's comments interesting on the Mille correcting less than the 15 and 21 MKII as the only reason I purchased it was the marketing description stating it corrects faster. I can't comment on the Mille's performance as I am yet to receive and use mines.

What I can comment on is the 15 and 21 MKII correcting faster on both flat and curved panels compared to my 3401's. I have taped off sections on more cars than I know of or care to remember, using both the 3401's and MKII's and the Rupes certainly beat the 3401 in correction every single time. The key thing about the long throws is not the distance covered but the longer the throw the more the friction and slingshot effect across the paint resulting in faster levelling of paint and defects . The 3401 is great and a hoot to use but it is louder,runs hotter,vibrates more and is more tiresome after a detail. If I'm in a rush I grab the 21 MKII over the 15MKII too as its an absolute Beast in removing serious defects fast. I have also put my 21 MKII against my PE-14 and it slightly edged it too in correction but not by much.

All tools can get the job done but I have yet to own a tool that can get it done faster than the MKII's. Oh yeah, tired of lurking thought I would share my personal experience.
 
Ronin47 said:
Oh yeah, tired of lurking thought I would share my personal experience.
Click to expand...


Welcome to AutogeekOnline! :welcome:


One of the things I do behind the scenes is approve pending accounts. Just a few moments ago I checked the queue and saw your account in there and a dozen more and pushed them all through. (except 2 spammers).


Love seeing lurkers become active members!


:)
 
Mike Phillips said:
Welcome to AutogeekOnline! :welcome:


One of the things I do behind the scenes is approve pending accounts. Just a few moments ago I checked the queue and saw your account in there and a dozen more and pushed them all through. (except 2 spammers).


Love seeing lurkers become active members!


:)
Click to expand...

Thank you, appreciate the fast, efficient response.
 
Ronin47 said:
I have 2 x Flex 3401's with all the different backing plates, 2 X PE-14's too along with Rupes Duetto, 15ES, 15MKII,21 MKII,Boss 21,GG6,PC24 etc. I have purchased the Mille and LH19E Rotary but am still waiting as they on back order. I find Joel's comments interesting on the Mille correcting less than the 15 and 21 MKII as the only reason I purchased it was the marketing description stating it corrects faster. I can't comment on the Mille's performance as I am yet to receive and use mines.

What I can comment on is the 15 and 21 MKII correcting faster on both flat and curved panels compared to my 3401's. I have taped off sections on more cars than I know of or care to remember, using both the 3401's and MKII's and the Rupes certainly beat the 3401 in correction every single time. The key thing about the long throws is not the distance covered but the longer the throw the more the friction and slingshot effect across the paint resulting in faster levelling of paint and defects . The 3401 is great and a hoot to use but it is louder,runs hotter,vibrates more and is more tiresome after a detail. If I'm in a rush I grab the 21 MKII over the 15MKII too as its an absolute Beast in removing serious defects fast. I have also put my 21 MKII against my PE-14 and it slightly edged it too in correction but not by much.

All tools can get the job done but I have yet to own a tool that can get it done faster than the MKII's. Oh yeah, tired of lurking thought I would share my personal experience.
Click to expand...

I have mini, dueto, 15mk2, 21mk2, Mille and Flex PE 14-2. Yeah i was surprised too since i had the exactly same reason to buy Mille. I will do more tests, it is good machine but 15-21mk2 are hard to beat.

I have samekind experience. Only combo that beats 15-21mk2 on my tests is rotary with a twisted woolpad. That is the most effective combo there is, but it also usually means 3-step process.
 
WRAPT C5Z06 said:
Jason Rose of Rupes told me the Mille requires less technique and should correct faster than an MK II 21. He did say, in the right hands, the MK II 21 is a beast, but again, in the right hands. With the Mille/PO5000, the smaller forced throw can be very finicky with a lot of pads. The 3401 is more forgiving when it comes to pad selection.
Click to expand...
I think this sums it up quite nicely.
 
Joel1979 said:
I have mini, dueto, 15mk2, 21mk2, Mille and Flex PE 14-2. Yeah i was surprised too since i had the exactly same reason to buy Mille. I will do more tests, it is good machine but 15-21mk2 are hard to beat.

I have samekind experience. Only combo that beats 15-21mk2 on my tests is rotary with a twisted woolpad. That is the most effective combo there is, but it also usually means 3-step process.
Click to expand...

Where would you rate the Mille in cutting power compared to others in the Rupes range? More than Duetto and 15ES but less than 15MKII?
 
JCDetails said:
not trying to speak for RSW, but I believe he's hinting at the amount of heat that each machine puts into the panel using the same product and pad for the same amount of time as a measure of the 'work' being done or the amount of correction that each can do in a given period of time. This in response to claims that one or the other corrects faster.


I think it's important to delineate the term 'cover more ground' as it can be misleading. We should instead separate into 'footprint' and 'correcting speed'.

In the area of 'footprint' the large throw DAs, with pad size being equal, obviously win. This is because rotation has no real effect on the raw number of square inches the pad touches in a single orbit. A 6" pad orbiting 15 or 21mm will obviously cover more surface area than the same 6" pad covering a 5.5 or 8mm orbit.

The area of 'correcting speed' is what RSW is eluding to. Can you correct the same area of paint (Let's say the standard 2'x2' area) faster with a flex/makita/mille faster than a rupes or griots 15 or 21. If the forced machine can make up for its lack of orbital surface area coverage by correcting that same 2x2 in less time or passes than the 15 or 21, then it is 'faster'.
Click to expand...


JCDetails,

Well said, so, adding:

When it comes to polishing, there are IMHO just a few variables.

The pad and product, a harder pad and more aggressive compound will cut faster but probably leave more marring. A harder pad will drive the abrasive into the paint harder and result in faster cut. If you're trying to remove deep defects, swapping out deep scratches for lighter scratches then removing the lighter scratches with a softer pad and lighter cutter or polish will take less time.

Then, there is movement between the pad and the paint and the kind of movement. More movement equals more work and will be expressed in both a faster cut and more heat. A rotary cuts fastest because it put the most movement between the pad and the paint and it moves in only one direction, so the abrasives tend to stay held in place and cut instead of breaking loose and doing nothing until they get caught again. This is why you can use a rotary with very soft foam or with long nap wool. The movement isn't mitigated by flex in the foam or the wool fibers moving back and forth without moving as much relative to the paint as they are on a random orbital machine - any of the machines with a free floating backing plate.

Then there is pressure. For my purposes here, I'm going to divide pressure into machine pressure and contact pressure. Machine pressure is the pressure you put on the machine against the paint. The contact pressure would be measured in lbs per square inch. Obviously, if you have a large contact patch the machine pressure can be high while the contact pressure is still acceptable. As the contact patch gets smaller, machine pressure has to be decreased to keep the contact pressure correct.

With a rotary, once you've determined what pad and polish you want, that variable is fairly consistent - it changes as you add more polish and as the polish gets used up or worn out until more polish is added but that change is relatively slower than what you can do with the other variables.

The contact patch will change as you move around the car. Wide open spaces will let you have a larger contact patch so you can apply more speed and machine pressure while maintaining a safe and effective contact pressure, but as you move into tighter areas or places where the whole pad just wont rest against the paint, both speed and machine pressure have to be changed to keep contact pressure and speed in a safe range.

If you were to watch me run a polisher on video you might be absolutely appalled by my technique because I look like I'm moving too fast and up on my edges too much, though if you looked closely you'd see the backing plate almost never gets bent. If you were looking at the result you'd see I'm cutting consistently because I'm controlling the contact pressure and speed to stay most effective without damaging. Video can't convey changes in pressure or show the contact patch perfectly enough to give an honest representation of what's happening.

So, that's it for the rotary. Now, onto the random orbitals. The first random orbitals had a small orbit. A small orbit means a small amount of movement between the pad and the paint. Small movement means less effect. Not much heat, not much cutting but a whole lot of safety. It's really hard to do damage with a small orbit random orbital. It's also hard to correct, like polishing out colorsanding scratches, with a small orbit random orbital.

This is pure opinion on my part. Read that last sentence again:

Random orbitals got popular not because they were particularly effective but because they are almost ridiculously safe. No one who wants to sell products wants to spend their days taking phone calls from people yelling at them because they burnt their paint. Add fillers, promote the random orbital, let the fillers dry out and the scratches come back, sell more product and smile all the way to the bank. Life is good.

That worked for awhile, but as people got more sophisticated they started thinking more about real correction. At that point, the orbit had to be increased to get more movement and abrasives and pads had to be developed that did real correction and the longer throw orbitals were/are a step in the right direction - then the orbit was increased even more to try and get an effective amount of movement between the pad and paint - but the basic design is still limited because the orbit can only be increased so much before the machine starts being hard to hold because the friction against the paint kicks a vibration back into the machine, no matter how well it's balanced and the sideways movement starts making it hard to get close to edges in an effective way.

This leads me to the forced rotation dual action machines. They incorporate forced spin and elliptical movement. Here again, remember, this is my opinion. There are two ways typically used to get forced rotation with elliptical movement. One, the way the Flex does it, is by interfacing the bell housing with the backing plate. This results in less movement between the pad and the paint than does the other method which is by using planetary gears and driving the backing plate in the same direction as the orbit. Makita, Bosch, Festool, and now Rupes - with the Mille are in this camp.

So, and again, this is only my opinion. The most effective tool for scratch removal in the rotary. With the right pad and product I can cut defects out quickly and importantly, because I'm wiping my product off with my machine while I'm working I can see the paint clearly and determine which scratches I think it's in my customer's best interest to let go. I can also see the areas where very little needs to be done and move on. Of course, I'm leaving a swirl mark but with modern pads and polishes, a swirl mark isn't a problem it takes much time to solve. In most cases, its both faster and safer to make the correction cut with a rotary then remove the swirls with a dual action - that is, again - a machine with forced rotation and elliptical movement. For me, that's the Makita PO5000 even though it spins backward. expletive deleted

Wow, this post is a lot longer than I thought it was going to be and wait, there's one more thing!

When it comes to speed, speed is your friend, the faster you can get things done right the more you can do for your client and the more value for money you can provide. Each step only needs to be good enough to get to the next step and make that step easy and effective. It's hard not overdo each and every thing because we all want to do the best job possible but wasting time is in no one's best interest.

RSW
 
Ronin47 said:
Where would you rate the Mille in cutting power compared to others in the Rupes range? More than Duetto and 15ES but less than 15MKII?
Click to expand...

Just looking at the specs, and having talked with people from Rupes, I'm sure the Mille will beat the rest of their line. If it went up to 800 or so RPMS it would for sure and, because it spins the same direction as a rotary it would kill the PO5000 Makita and obsolete the rest of the Rupes line except for the nano maybe. Honestly, I think the speed was determined by marketing.

RSW
 
I sold my Mille,its a good machine but i get better results with 15-21mk2 and i have a Rotary so its a bit pointless for me. Im bot.the only one here in Finland who have had similar results.
 
Joel1979 said:
I sold my Mille,its a good machine but i get better results with 15-21mk2 and i have a Rotary so its a bit pointless for me. Im bot.the only one here in Finland who have had similar results.
Click to expand...



Have you tried the PO5000?

RSW
 
Ok quick question guys, Mille or lhr 15 or 21 mk2?? Keeping in mind, I have a rotary and need one of these mainly for finishing or in some case for AIO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top