MF DA system observations after a few cars:
Griots 6” DA
Car 1
1 yr old rental car, black accord, only washed and vac.
Typical prep which includes clay bar.
MF DA performed as in the video and directions.
Paint wasn’t bad, once over each step very much like in the video.
Observations:
Wonderful to work with, both 300 and 301(too easy?), no/little dust, no gum, no splatter, no real risk of burning, marring, swirling…easy cleanup. J
Finish wax felt soft, marred easily, maybe a little duller than expected. Decided to put a carnuba paste over.
Very satisfied, very acceptable amount of time per results.
Car 2
6 year old black crv, completely neglected and previously swirled badly.
Same prep
Step 1 rotary 8” med cut pad, old school aggressive compound. Walked around car worked a few nasty areas, not the hood though.
2. MF DA method, used 300 twice, with good pressure on most of the hood and hit a few spots on the hood 3 times to get to the level of correction I wanted (guessing 90+%).
On other panels, hit a few spots twice, mostly just extended working time and a little section overlap was good enough.
Again during finish wax process things seemed dull, still very enjoyable products to work with, love it.
Experimented on a panel with the meg. 66 quick detailer and a orange hydrotech, use this combo on a lot of cars now as a nice looking/acting one step. This panel looked much clearer and glossier than the MF301 panel. Did the rest of the car that way, applied the carnuba, Very pleased with the end result.
I have no idea how durable either m66 or 301 are or how they will look in 6 weeks, have not used the carnuba or 66 for that long.
Other notes:
Half way through the 2nd car the MF cut pad was remaining caked in the center, a bit over golf ball size, wouldn’t fluff up with brush or air, got out another new pad. Later observed the Velcro was delaminating in the center back from the most used pad. IMHO if this delamination happens while using it, a lot of the energy from machine to pad could be lost, correction improved when I replaced the pad which at the time I didn’t know was failing. It still has enough not delaminating that it works, but lost its effectiveness I imagine.
Quick experiment:
1 yr old blue accord, rental, paint much better than car 1 blk accord. I tried a few combos on the hood.
300 compound with cyan hydrotech, worked fine
300 with MF pad, again, cant complain, pleasure to work with, more correction than the cyan(foam) pad.
M105 with cyan hydrotech, correction in the middle of the group.
All 3 looked good for the pass and pressure I used but there were slight differences and the ease of use of MF and 300 is way better, AS LONG AS the pads hold up. Hope this is not going to be an ongoing occurrence, I know there are others.
I did not try M105 with and MF pad, but will see what that has to offer, however the dusting is a pain when you have to do some volume.
Question:
Durability of M301, and the durability of Meg #66.
66 has replaced our main one step product, we had a very easy to use, nice looking but absolutely no durability product. So far 66 seems to have more correcting ability and is glossier. It has to last longer but I have no idea yet what that is.
MF DA system observations after a few cars:
Griots 6” DA
Car 1
1 yr old rental car, black accord, only washed and vac.
Typical prep which includes clay bar.
MF DA performed as in the video and directions.
Paint wasn’t bad, once over each step very much like in the video.
Observations:
Wonderful to work with, both 300 and 301(too easy?), no/little dust, no gum, no splatter, no real risk of burning, marring, swirling…easy cleanup. J
Finish wax felt soft, marred easily, maybe a little duller than expected. Decided to put a carnuba paste over.
Very satisfied, very acceptable amount of time per results.
Car 2
6 year old black crv, completely neglected and previously swirled badly.
Same prep
Step 1 rotary 8” med cut pad, old school aggressive compound. Walked around car worked a few nasty areas, not the hood though.
2. MF DA method, used 300 twice, with good pressure on most of the hood and hit a few spots on the hood 3 times to get to the level of correction I wanted (guessing 90+%).
On other panels, hit a few spots twice, mostly just extended working time and a little section overlap was good enough.
Again during finish wax process things seemed dull, still very enjoyable products to work with, love it.
Experimented on a panel with the meg. 66 quick detailer and a orange hydrotech, use this combo on a lot of cars now as a nice looking/acting one step. This panel looked much clearer and glossier than the MF301 panel. Did the rest of the car that way, applied the carnuba, Very pleased with the end result.
I have no idea how durable either m66 or 301 are or how they will look in 6 weeks, have not used the carnuba or 66 for that long.
Other notes:
Half way through the 2nd car the MF cut pad was remaining caked in the center, a bit over golf ball size, wouldn’t fluff up with brush or air, got out another new pad. Later observed the Velcro was delaminating in the center back from the most used pad. IMHO if this delamination happens while using it, a lot of the energy from machine to pad could be lost, correction improved when I replaced the pad which at the time I didn’t know was failing. It still has enough not delaminating that it works, but lost its effectiveness I imagine.
Quick experiment:
1 yr old blue accord, rental, paint much better than car 1 blk accord. I tried a few combos on the hood.
300 compound with cyan hydrotech, worked fine
300 with MF pad, again, cant complain, pleasure to work with, more correction than the cyan(foam) pad.
M105 with cyan hydrotech, correction in the middle of the group.
All 3 looked good for the pass and pressure I used but there were slight differences and the ease of use of MF and 300 is way better, AS LONG AS the pads hold up. Hope this is not going to be an ongoing occurrence, I know there are others.
I did not try M105 with and MF pad, but will see what that has to offer, the dusting is a pain when you have to do some volume.
Question:
Durability of M301, and the durability of Meg #66?
66 has replaced our main one step product, we had a very easy to use, nice looking but absolutely no durability product. So far 66 seems to have more correcting ability and is glossier. Durability?
Cause for dullness of 301 step?
TIA, sorry for the long post
Griots 6” DA
Car 1
1 yr old rental car, black accord, only washed and vac.
Typical prep which includes clay bar.
MF DA performed as in the video and directions.
Paint wasn’t bad, once over each step very much like in the video.
Observations:
Wonderful to work with, both 300 and 301(too easy?), no/little dust, no gum, no splatter, no real risk of burning, marring, swirling…easy cleanup. J
Finish wax felt soft, marred easily, maybe a little duller than expected. Decided to put a carnuba paste over.
Very satisfied, very acceptable amount of time per results.
Car 2
6 year old black crv, completely neglected and previously swirled badly.
Same prep
Step 1 rotary 8” med cut pad, old school aggressive compound. Walked around car worked a few nasty areas, not the hood though.
2. MF DA method, used 300 twice, with good pressure on most of the hood and hit a few spots on the hood 3 times to get to the level of correction I wanted (guessing 90+%).
On other panels, hit a few spots twice, mostly just extended working time and a little section overlap was good enough.
Again during finish wax process things seemed dull, still very enjoyable products to work with, love it.
Experimented on a panel with the meg. 66 quick detailer and a orange hydrotech, use this combo on a lot of cars now as a nice looking/acting one step. This panel looked much clearer and glossier than the MF301 panel. Did the rest of the car that way, applied the carnuba, Very pleased with the end result.
I have no idea how durable either m66 or 301 are or how they will look in 6 weeks, have not used the carnuba or 66 for that long.
Other notes:
Half way through the 2nd car the MF cut pad was remaining caked in the center, a bit over golf ball size, wouldn’t fluff up with brush or air, got out another new pad. Later observed the Velcro was delaminating in the center back from the most used pad. IMHO if this delamination happens while using it, a lot of the energy from machine to pad could be lost, correction improved when I replaced the pad which at the time I didn’t know was failing. It still has enough not delaminating that it works, but lost its effectiveness I imagine.
Quick experiment:
1 yr old blue accord, rental, paint much better than car 1 blk accord. I tried a few combos on the hood.
300 compound with cyan hydrotech, worked fine
300 with MF pad, again, cant complain, pleasure to work with, more correction than the cyan(foam) pad.
M105 with cyan hydrotech, correction in the middle of the group.
All 3 looked good for the pass and pressure I used but there were slight differences and the ease of use of MF and 300 is way better, AS LONG AS the pads hold up. Hope this is not going to be an ongoing occurrence, I know there are others.
I did not try M105 with and MF pad, but will see what that has to offer, however the dusting is a pain when you have to do some volume.
Question:
Durability of M301, and the durability of Meg #66.
66 has replaced our main one step product, we had a very easy to use, nice looking but absolutely no durability product. So far 66 seems to have more correcting ability and is glossier. It has to last longer but I have no idea yet what that is.
MF DA system observations after a few cars:
Griots 6” DA
Car 1
1 yr old rental car, black accord, only washed and vac.
Typical prep which includes clay bar.
MF DA performed as in the video and directions.
Paint wasn’t bad, once over each step very much like in the video.
Observations:
Wonderful to work with, both 300 and 301(too easy?), no/little dust, no gum, no splatter, no real risk of burning, marring, swirling…easy cleanup. J
Finish wax felt soft, marred easily, maybe a little duller than expected. Decided to put a carnuba paste over.
Very satisfied, very acceptable amount of time per results.
Car 2
6 year old black crv, completely neglected and previously swirled badly.
Same prep
Step 1 rotary 8” med cut pad, old school aggressive compound. Walked around car worked a few nasty areas, not the hood though.
2. MF DA method, used 300 twice, with good pressure on most of the hood and hit a few spots on the hood 3 times to get to the level of correction I wanted (guessing 90+%).
On other panels, hit a few spots twice, mostly just extended working time and a little section overlap was good enough.
Again during finish wax process things seemed dull, still very enjoyable products to work with, love it.
Experimented on a panel with the meg. 66 quick detailer and a orange hydrotech, use this combo on a lot of cars now as a nice looking/acting one step. This panel looked much clearer and glossier than the MF301 panel. Did the rest of the car that way, applied the carnuba, Very pleased with the end result.
I have no idea how durable either m66 or 301 are or how they will look in 6 weeks, have not used the carnuba or 66 for that long.
Other notes:
Half way through the 2nd car the MF cut pad was remaining caked in the center, a bit over golf ball size, wouldn’t fluff up with brush or air, got out another new pad. Later observed the Velcro was delaminating in the center back from the most used pad. IMHO if this delamination happens while using it, a lot of the energy from machine to pad could be lost, correction improved when I replaced the pad which at the time I didn’t know was failing. It still has enough not delaminating that it works, but lost its effectiveness I imagine.
Quick experiment:
1 yr old blue accord, rental, paint much better than car 1 blk accord. I tried a few combos on the hood.
300 compound with cyan hydrotech, worked fine
300 with MF pad, again, cant complain, pleasure to work with, more correction than the cyan(foam) pad.
M105 with cyan hydrotech, correction in the middle of the group.
All 3 looked good for the pass and pressure I used but there were slight differences and the ease of use of MF and 300 is way better, AS LONG AS the pads hold up. Hope this is not going to be an ongoing occurrence, I know there are others.
I did not try M105 with and MF pad, but will see what that has to offer, the dusting is a pain when you have to do some volume.
Question:
Durability of M301, and the durability of Meg #66?
66 has replaced our main one step product, we had a very easy to use, nice looking but absolutely no durability product. So far 66 seems to have more correcting ability and is glossier. Durability?
Cause for dullness of 301 step?
TIA, sorry for the long post
