POLL - What's the number one most important factor when it comes to polishing paint?

What's the number one most important factor when it comes to polishing paint?

  • Total voters
    336
Riff said:
Another opinion. Go to 1:40.

http://youtu.be/KP-eAddv2sk
Click to expand...


I respectfully disagree. But I respectfully disagree with everyone that says technique.

You can have the BEST TECHNIQUE in the world but if someone hands you some old school compound or polish that uses antiquated abrasive technology (and it exists on the market today), then all the technique in the world won't make the abrasives leave a GREAT looking finish on black paint.

And if it's not working on black paint then it's not working on any color of paint it's just on lighter colored cars you're eyes cannot easily see defects like holograms, micro-marring, scratching and scouring and these are the types of defects left by mediocre abrasive technology regardless of technique.



People keep thinking that they would automatically get to choose and use a great compound or polish in this poll scenario?

What if you were asked to detail a black car and you had no choice over the compound or polish.

You wouldn't know if you were going to get a quality compound or beach sand in a bottle.

If you don't START with great abrasive technology then all the technique in the world won't get you great results.

I've used products that don't use great abrasive technology and I'm hear to tell you technique become #2 when you don't have great abrasive technology to start with.

After abrasive technology then the next most important factors are,

Tool, pad and technique but not in any order assuming you're using the right tool, pad and right technique.

It all starts with what's touching the paint first and that is the abrasive technology.


People can disagree all they want but if you DON'T get to choose your product to prove your choice of which factor is most important you cannot assume you're starting with a quality compound in this poll.

You see I never said in this poll you could use the compound or polish of choice. People just assumed this. The question or poll is open ended, you have no choice, you have to break the process down to it's most base elements and when you do that the most important factor becomes the abrasive technology because it is the abrasives first that come into contact with the paint, not the tool, not the pad and not technique.


:)
 
Mike.Phillips@Autogeek said:
I respectfully disagree. But I respectfully disagree with everyone that says technique.

You can have the BEST TECHNIQUE in the world but if someone hands you some old school compound or polish that uses antiquated abrasive technology (and it exists on the market today), then all the technique in the world won't make the abrasives leave a GREAT looking finish on black paint.

And if it's not working on black paint then it's not working on any color of paint it's just on lighter colored cars you're eyes cannot easily see defects like holograms, micro-marring, scratching and scouring and these are the types of defects left by mediocre abrasive technology regardless of technique.



People keep thinking that they would automatically get to choose and use a great compound or polish in this poll scenario?

What if you were asked to detail a black car and you had no choice over the compound or polish.

You wouldn't know if you were going to get a quality compound or beach sand in a bottle.

If you don't START with great abrasive technology then all the technique in the world won't get you great results.

I've used products that don't use great abrasive technology and I'm hear to tell you technique become #2 when you don't have great abrasive technology to start with.

After abrasive technology then the next most important factors are,

Tool, pad and technique but not in any order assuming you're using the right tool, pad and right technique.

It all starts with what's touching the paint first and that is the abrasive technology.


People can disagree all they want but if you DON'T get to choose your product to prove your choice of which factor is most important you cannot assume you're starting with a quality compound in this poll.

You see I never said in this poll you could use the compound or polish of choice. People just assumed this. The question or poll is open ended, you have no choice, you have to break the process down to it's most base elements and when you do that the most important factor becomes the abrasive technology because it is the abrasives first that come into contact with the paint, not the tool, not the pad and not technique.


:)
Click to expand...


I have to agree with Mike.

In the poll by having abrasive technology as an option, that pretty much automatically takes away every scenario with you starting with a quality compound/polish.

If you have the best technique in the world and use toothpaste are you going to be able to have a showroom shine?

So it starts with abrasive technology, and the new technology has allowed us to do our job much easier and make us look better.

Think about the old school rotary rocks in a bottle compound days.

You would have to do 3-5 steps to get decent results.

Today's world 2 steps surpasses the old school 3 or more step technique.
 
I am probably looking at technique in a broader term. When I think of technique I look at it as determining what the condition of the paint is and then determining what method and material to use. Maybe it's more of a process than technique.
 
timsatx said:
I am probably looking at technique in a broader term. When I think of technique I look at it as determining what the condition of the paint is and then determining what method and material to use.
Click to expand...

No.

I think others have made this assumption also but that's not what's meant at all by the poll.

What is meant is to break the process down into the 5 factors I listed and no one should assume they would get to choose their tool, pad or product or car/paint.


Maybe I'm the only one that has used compounds and polishes that are not as good as what's easily available today?

Before clearcoats were introduced in 1980 there were wasn't the kind of abrasive technology available today. It took decades to get to where the industry is today and there are still products available that simply don't work good.

I've been doing this as long and often times longer than most in the forum world and the Facebook world so I can see how some people that maybe have ONLY used quality products would say technique.

But I can tell you first hand, if you were not given the choice to choose your products all it would take is trying to buff out a car one time with an inferior compound or polish or even inferior cleaner/wax as some cleaner/waxes use abrasive and it would sink in REAL FAST how important this single component to the equation is when it comes to buffing out paint.


:)
 
Everything has come a long way in this business.

The way I am looking at and I may be wrong. The tools we use and the abrasive technology as well as the techniques we use have all changed/advanced cause they needed to in order to keep up with the change in the paint industry.

Lets take a look at the ceramic clears for example. People that were using top quality , latest and most advanced abrasive technology at the time were getting excellent results on everything. Then the ceramic clears came along and they started having issues of not being able to remove what normally would be a normal type swirls/scratches. And if they did it was taking alot longer to do.

Then out come compounds and polishes that were made for these ceramic clears(new abrasive technology).

pad companies had to change the foam in their pads to meet these needs as well.

Machine wise went from the brute power of a rotary down to the gentle touch of a DA cause of the sensitivity of the modern clear coats. Then the harder clears showed up and the DA wasn't cutting it and the rotary was still to aggressive to finish out nicely. So out comes force rotation machine. Power of a rotary but gentle like a DA.

There for my thought process is all these changes have happened because the paint has changed. The paint has not changed because of any of the other items in this poll.

Just my opinion

:)
 
Good post Steve....


I was calling on body shops in the late 1980's when the collision shop industry was still changing over from spraying single stage paint to spraying basecoat/clearcoat paints.

I was there. I saw what was happening.

Compounds and polishes used for decades on single stage ruined clearcoats.

The abrasive technology was cr_p back then.


I was around when Meguiar's introduced #2 and #9 to be used with foam pads in body shops as a cure to the problem caused by the cr_p compounds and polishes and at that time it was the only system that worked.

Since then I've seen major advances in everything but it has been the abrasive technology that has made it easy for today's detailers to get great results. Not technique.


:)
 
I seem to recall on one Thursday night makeover that we made an ATTEMPT to polish Bob McKee`s red Mustang when it was first delivered from his lovely Aunt.(God rest her soul.) We did it just for the goof or following instructions, I don`t know which.We could have wet sanded it with a belt sander and still not get it smooth.It looked like it was painted with a roller.The car went through Wayne Carrini`s shop and after about a years time it`s came back and is resting comfortably in Bob`s air conditioned office.It`s a thing of beauty that convertible.
"PAINT"... it`s what we polish.:buffing:
 
57BORNTORUN said:
I seem to recall on one Thursday night makeover that we made an ATTEMPT to polish Bob McKee`s red Mustang when it was first delivered from his lovely Aunt.

(God rest her soul.) We did it just for the goof or following instructions, I don`t know which.We could have wet sanded it with a belt sander and still not get it smooth.

It looked like it was painted with a roller.
Click to expand...

Not only do I remember the project I took the pictures, led the team and then created the write-up for this project here,

1966 Mustang - Last Chance to Dance Extreme Makeover!


Nothing could have saved this paint job but if it could have been saved it would have started with abrasive technology not the paint.

Before

Maxs_New_1965_Mustang_026.jpg




Test Spot

I did a little testing using Pinnacle XMT #4 with a wool pad on a rotary buffer followed by XMT #2 with a foam pad on a Flex 3401 and if you look at the lower right hand corner you can see it removed enough oxidation and embedded dirt that the section I buffed now looks like a totally new color of red paint!

Maxs_New_1965_Mustang_025.jpg





After

Maxs_New_1965_Mustang_033.jpg


Maxs_New_1965_Mustang_035.jpg




57BORNTORUN said:
The car went through Wayne Carrini`s shop and after about a years time it`s came back and is resting comfortably in Bob`s air conditioned office.

It`s a thing of beauty that convertible.
"PAINT"... it`s what we polish.:buffing:
Click to expand...

Wayne Carini's shop uses Pinnacle Advanced Compound, Advanced Swirl Remover and Advanced Finishing Polish. I trained Marius Wayne's painter and Brandon, Wayne's detailer how to use orbital polishers.

When I first worked with Wayne's team all they owned was an old Black & Decker rotary buffer. Now they use the Flex PE14 to cut with and finish out with the Flex 3401 and the Porter Cable 7424XP.


Here's Marius showing Brandon how use the Porter Cable with Pinnacle Advanced Finishing Polish to "carefully" clean and polish the original paint after we first rubbed the paint down with #7

Marius_Training_Brandon.jpg




After the Mustang was brought back to Autogeek I re-polished the paint using Pinnacle Advanced Finishing Polish and then machine applied a coat of Pinnacle Souveran Paste Wax.

The flawless results you see in the paint job on Bob's Mustang start first with a great paint job but after the paint was sanded down, the final results are due to the abrasive technology.


:)
 
Mike.Phillips@Autogeek said:
I respectfully disagree. But I respectfully disagree with everyone that says technique.

You can have the BEST TECHNIQUE in the world but if someone hands you some old school compound or polish that uses antiquated abrasive technology (and it exists on the market today), then all the technique in the world won't make the abrasives leave a GREAT looking finish on black paint.

And if it's not working on black paint then it's not working on any color of paint it's just on lighter colored cars you're eyes cannot easily see defects like holograms, micro-marring, scratching and scouring and these are the types of defects left by mediocre abrasive technology regardless of technique.



People keep thinking that they would automatically get to choose and use a great compound or polish in this poll scenario?

What if you were asked to detail a black car and you had no choice over the compound or polish.

You wouldn't know if you were going to get a quality compound or beach sand in a bottle.

If you don't START with great abrasive technology then all the technique in the world won't get you great results.

I've used products that don't use great abrasive technology and I'm hear to tell you technique become #2 when you don't have great abrasive technology to start with.

After abrasive technology then the next most important factors are,

Tool, pad and technique but not in any order assuming you're using the right tool, pad and right technique.

It all starts with what's touching the paint first and that is the abrasive technology.


People can disagree all they want but if you DON'T get to choose your product to prove your choice of which factor is most important you cannot assume you're starting with a quality compound in this poll.

You see I never said in this poll you could use the compound or polish of choice. People just assumed this. The question or poll is open ended, you have no choice, you have to break the process down to it's most base elements and when you do that the most important factor becomes the abrasive technology because it is the abrasives first that come into contact with the paint, not the tool, not the pad and not technique.


:)
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

I voted technique, but I guess I read into that too much.

After reading your answer, it makes sense though.

I voted technique, as I understood that to mean there was some experience that backed it up. Experience in doing paint measurements, research on the type of car (i.e. cerami clear Merc's, single stage, tint-coat, clear-coat, etc..), properly taping off areas, and having an understanding of products (SMAT/DAT) and least aggressive methods.

In other words, I equated the answer "Technique" to be all encompassing.

B.T.W. I purchased the PDF version of "Complete-Guide-to-a-Show-Car-Shine" and am enjoying it. I've been reading that more than the forum recently. It's a must read!
 
I answered paint too earlier but admit, like you paul g, i misinterpreted the question. GREAT perspective from Mike P and valid justification for his answer. The best thing about my frequent attendance here at the church of St. Phillips is how he gets me to think hard about what we do and specifically what its doing... either good or bad.

This was a very good read...once again. Thanks Mike!
 
paul_g said:
Hi Mike,

I voted technique, but I guess I read into that too much.

After reading your answer, it makes sense though.

I voted technique, as I understood that to mean there was some experience that backed it up. Experience in doing paint measurements, research on the type of car (i.e. cerami clear Merc's, single stage, tint-coat, clear-coat, etc..), properly taping off areas, and having an understanding of products (SMAT/DAT) and least aggressive methods.

In other words, I equated the answer "Technique" to be all encompassing.
Click to expand...

It's just a poll and we're all having fun and learning so it's all good.



paul_g said:
B.T.W. I purchased the PDF version of "Complete-Guide-to-a-Show-Car-Shine" and am enjoying it. I've been reading that more than the forum recently. It's a must read!
Click to expand...

Thank you for your business and your trust. I try to write all my how-to books so they are information rich and just as important, after reading a section you have the understanding and confidence to go out to your garage and do it!


PDF Version of The Complete Guide to a Show Car Shine

240_2_book.jpg



Just to note... I have 5 books under on the market

Mikes_Book_Collection_01.jpg




I'm working on 3 more books that should be ready for release in November for SEMA.


Can't share the topics just yet but I think they're going to be very popular.


:dblthumb2:
 
I stand corrected as well.One of the biggest concerns in the SHOW CAR GARAGE and any time one is doing paint correction is BURNING through in an attempt to get out the best the paint can offer.And for that reason I said paint first and abrasive technology would have been my second choice.(Now if we only had one of those $3000.00 paint thickness gauges with the software showing every level down to the substrate...HMMMM.):buffing:
 
Before reading through most of the posts on the thread I did vote for paint. My though was let the "paint" speak to you, change your polish and or your pad till you get the desired results.

So after reading Mikes explanation and choice of abrasive technology I thought back to when I was at Mobile Tech Expo this year. I visited the Autogeek booth wanting to try out some compounds that I've not used before. I thank the AG guys for putting up with me as I went through a couple of pads and compounds to see their individual results, all using the Flex3401. All this was done on the same hood like in the pic :). We instilled our own defects, next 1000 grit wet sand spots, then tested removing them. I used 3 brand new LC orange hybrid pads, with 3 different compounds. Two had great removal/results, but the third compound didn't yield the same results.

I now understand why Mike went with Abrasive Technology.

MTE_16_cmpd.jpg
[/url][/IMG]
 
High Caliber said:
Before reading through most of the posts on the thread I did vote for paint. My though was let the "paint" speak to you, change your polish and or your pad till you get the desired results.

So after reading Mikes explanation and choice of abrasive technology I thought back to when I was at Mobile Tech Expo this year. I visited the Autogeek booth wanting to try out some compounds that I've not used before. I thank the AG guys for putting up with me as I went through a couple of pads and compounds to see their individual results, all using the Flex3401. All this was done on the same hood like in the pic :). We instilled our own defects, next 1000 grit wet sand spots, then tested removing them. I used 3 brand new LC orange hybrid pads, with 3 different compounds. Two had great removal/results, but the third compound didn't yield the same results.

I now understand why Mike went with Abrasive Technology.

MTE_16_cmpd.jpg
[/url][/IMG]
Click to expand...

Excellent explanation :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
 
High Caliber said:
Before reading through most of the posts on the thread I did vote for paint. My though was let the "paint" speak to you, change your polish and or your pad till you get the desired results.

So after reading Mikes explanation and choice of abrasive technology I thought back to when I was at Mobile Tech Expo this year. I visited the Autogeek booth wanting to try out some compounds that I've not used before. I thank the AG guys for putting up with me as I went through a couple of pads and compounds to see their individual results, all using the Flex3401. All this was done on the same hood like in the pic :). We instilled our own defects, next 1000 grit wet sand spots, then tested removing them. I used 3 brand new LC orange hybrid pads, with 3 different compounds. Two had great removal/results, but the third compound didn't yield the same results.

I now understand why Mike went with Abrasive Technology.

MTE_16_cmpd.jpg
[/url][/IMG]
Click to expand...

The 3 compounds you used were they all quality brands?
Did they all have the newest abrasive technology in them?
The 1 that did not work do you think it would have done a better job with a different pad,technique or machine?
Do you think the results would have been different if the paint was harder or softer?
 
StephenK said:
The 3 compounds you used were they all quality brands?
Did they all have the newest abrasive technology in them?
The 1 that did not work do you think it would have done a better job with a different pad,technique or machine?
Do you think the results would have been different if the paint was harder or softer?
Click to expand...

Hey Steve! I know you like the GG BOSS compounds/polishes I need to get some of that. Yes all three are big names in the industry. The two that I mentioned that had great results were under the AG umbrella the 3rd was not. I agree changing the pad should yield different results. I just wanted to keep everything the same with the compound to be the only variable. It's my unscientific experiment lol.
 
High Caliber said:
Hey Steve! I know you like the GG BOSS compounds/polishes I need to get some of that. Yes all three are big names in the industry. The two that I mentioned that had great results were under the AG umbrella the 3rd was not. I agree changing the pad should yield different results. I just wanted to keep everything the same with the compound to be the only variable. It's my unscientific experiment lol.
Click to expand...

So even with all of them having the latest abrasive technology 1 did not perform well on the paint?
Wouldn't that make the type of paint being more important than the abrasive technology?

And yes you really need to get the B.O.S.S. creams and pads. Lmao
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top