Meguiars Ultimate Compound

LuxuryMobile

LuxuryMobile

New member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
1,532
Reaction score
0
Anyone had any experience with this. Just tried it for the first time and was pretty suprised with the ease and results of the product. I used it on an orange pad with the 7424.

The product seemed very thin for a "compound". I was able to remove alot of swirls, scratches/spider webs from washing.

Overall I was very happy with the product and even more the price.

Any others had luck with this?
 
blackz said:
Anyone had any experience with this. Just tried it for the first time and was pretty suprised with the ease and results of the product. I used it on an orange pad with the 7424.

The product seemed very thin for a "compound". I was able to remove alot of swirls, scratches/spider webs from washing.

Overall I was very happy with the product and even more the price.

Any others had luck with this?
Click to expand...

Are you referring to Megs #105 or #205 ? Both are incredible products easy to use and results are great
 
Ultimate compound is their consumer line compound.




I just bought UC and swirlX to try out with the pc. Ill post back comparing it to m105/205 once the weather clears
 
it is just an OTC product actually called "Meguiars Ultimate Compound"
 
blackz said:
Anyone had any experience with this. Just tried it for the first time and was pretty suprised with the ease and results of the product. I used it on an orange pad with the 7424.

The product seemed very thin for a "compound". I was able to remove alot of swirls, scratches/spider webs from washing.

Overall I was very happy with the product and even more the price.

Any others had luck with this?
Click to expand...

The new UC is similar to the professional line M105. Both use Meguiars new (SMAT) Super Micro Abrasive Technology. It's an awesome OTC compound and is even better when paired with SwirlX. ;)

Been seeing lots of good reviews on both the UC and SwirlX,

Rasky
 
Hey rasky I know you probably know more about megs than I do but imo the only thing similar about uc and m105 is the type of abrasives.

From what I've read UC has a decent work time where as m105s work time on even the pc is pretty short.

And the big difference is its cut. Though they don't give it an actual rating on the scale, if you look where its placed on how abrasive it is, its cut is probably about half.

It seems to be more of a strong polish more so than a heavy cut compound like m105.

I've used m105 but not UC yet so I could be wrong
 
M105 is non dimishing abrasives where I think the MUC uses a fine dimishing abrasive.
 
Dsoto87 said:
Hey rasky I know you probably know more about megs than I do but imo the only thing similar about uc and m105 is the type of abrasives.

From what I've read UC has a decent work time where as m105s work time on even the pc is pretty short.

And the big difference is its cut. Though they don't give it an actual rating on the scale, if you look where its placed on how abrasive it is, its cut is probably about half.

It seems to be more of a strong polish more so than a heavy cut compound like m105.

I've used m105 but not UC yet so I could be wrong
Click to expand...

Well the use of the word similar can be inferred differently. They are definitely not the same compound, but the new DA approved M105 has a much longer working time now and for that is one reason I said they are similar. I do believe that UC is a little less agressive but have not compaired them myself.

I guess another reason I said they are similar is that if you didn't want to order stuff online, UC would be the next closest thing to it OTC. ;)



Dub, Both use the new SMAT technology
 
Last edited:
Is AG's 105 the new DA friendly formula or the old?
 
I still want proof that the 'new' 105 is in fact different aside from Meg's calling it good for DA use.
I heard it was the same stuff.
 
dublifecrisis said:
I still want proof that the 'new' 105 is in fact different aside from Meg's calling it good for DA use.
I heard it was the same stuff.
Click to expand...

Where did you hear that?

It's not a drastic difference, but if you've had the chance to use both for a while, you wil notice the longer working time.
 
RaskyR1 said:
LOL. I think we can all agree that this falls under the "user error" category. ;)
Click to expand...
For the most part, yes.

However, I look at it like this... A lot of people are going to use it the wrong way and it is going to start looking like a bad product. Meguiar's advertised that it can be used as a swirl remover. People might read the directions, but there isn't anyone I know that has enough patience to use this bad boy as stated on the label over the whole vehicle. They are going to rush after the first panel. I have a feeling a lot of people are going to have a lot of "operator error" problems with it. While that is the bottom line, I think the way Meguiar's is advertising and marketing it fuels more of these "operator errors".

While I don't think it is a bad product at all, I don't think it is a good OTC product. To much room for error. I don't think there are enough of us detailing oriented people out there that will use it the right way.
 
67Customs said:
While I don't think it is a bad product at all, I don't think it is a good OTC product. To much room for error. I don't think there are enough of us detailing oriented people out there that will use it the right way.
Click to expand...

Which is precisely why aspirin, and a host of other drugs, should only be available by prescription ... ;)

But before we sink too deeply into the ocean of paternalism, I wish to cast my vote for individual responsibility: the consumer still has the responsibility to learn as much as he can about a product before using it. This particular individual did not do so. And the damage would, of course, have been limited if he had only done a test spot first before applying it to the entire car. As David Bynon bluntly stated over at Autopia: "I'm sorry ... the product did not create that damage. An idiot did!"

I also suggest that "horror stories" like this one should not always be taken at face value. This individual posted his horror story on Sunday 2/7, logged-back on the next day, and hasn't returned to the forum since to find out what kind of help or coiunsel had been offered by the MOL members. To me, that speaks volumes.

I have no idea whether UC is a good product or not, but I do not believe that this one "story" should influence anyone one way or another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top