Rupes 15 III vs. Gear Driven DA’s

[WRAPT C5Z06]

Rupes 15 III vs. Gear Driven DA’s

Just felt the need to compare these.

On a flat panel, I can get more cut with the 15 III all day, everyday versus anY gear driven DA. I have the Rupes Mille and Flex 3401 and Rupes 15 III.

The 15 is WAYYYYYYY more enjoyable to use. It’s smooth as silk and A LOT less taxing on the body. However, it does get annoying constantly having to switch to my Adams MINI and Flex Pixie where the 15 won’t do any good.

You definitely can power through a curved panel and take less time with a gear driven DA. That’s a huge plus, but the less enjoyable experience always makes me reach for the 15 first.

I will use both on a detail, but MUCH prefer the 15.

On a side note, I’ve tried many other 15 & 21 DA’s and none are in the same league as far as smoothness as the Rupes. Pretty much every DA outside of the Rupes is made in China.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



:buffing:

 

[Dan Tran]

Just felt the need to compare these. On a flat panel, I can get more cut with the 15 III all day, everyday versus anY gear driven DA. I have the Rupes Mille and Flex 3401 and Rupes 15 III. The 15 is WAYYYYYYY more enjoyable to use. It’s smooth as silk and A LOT less taxing on the body. However, it does get annoying constantly having to switch to my Adams MINI and Flex Pixie where the 15 won’t do any good. You definitely can power through a curved panel and take less time with a gear driven DA. That’s a huge plus, but the less enjoyable experience always makes me reach for the 15 first. I will use both on a detail, but MUCH prefer the 15. On a side note, I’ve tried many other 15 & 21 DA’s and none are in the same league as far as smoothness as the Rupes. Pretty much every DA outside of the Rupes is made in China.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, it’s definitely apples to oranges. My preference being my RUPES LHR15 MK III over my RUPES Mille.

I have so much time behind the random orbital that it’s just really hard for me to pick up the gear driven. It’s a great machine of course. But I have yet to still fall in love with it.

Note:

The RUPES Mille truly is very smooth for a gear driven polisher still.

I’m sure someone will chime in and will say the entire opposite—preferring the gear driven.

 

[TMQ]

Interesting....

Have a Rupes Mark II. Loved the machine.
Got tired of it stalling all the time.

Got me a Cordless Flex. Lordy!!!! Love the thing!

No cords and powers through anything I need done in half time than the Rupes.
Gather I will be selling the rupes when time comes.

Not going back to a free rotating DA...!

Tom

 

[PaulMys]

Pretty much every DA outside of the Rupes is made in China.

...And Pretty much all of them are either bulletproof, or guaranteed for life.

I enjoyed your post up until the snobby shot I quoted above.

 

[Dan Tran]

Interesting....

Have a Rupes Mark II. Loved the machine.
Got tired of it stalling all the time.

Got me a Cordless Flex. Lordy!!!! Love the thing!

No cords and powers through anything I need done in half time than the Rupes.
Gather I will be selling the rupes when time comes.

Not going back to a free rotating DA...!

Tom

I think it’s about time I find a test panel somewhere. I would love to give it the chance it deserves. It’s clear that many prefer it.

As of right now, I will use it if I have to. Definitely is worth having as a backup machine.

I will also say that I am still drooling over all the FLEX cordless machines on the market. One day.

In the meantime, the next couple of addition to the pack will be a RUPES LHR 21 MK III and the Duetto.

The 21 is my “nice to have” wish list machine. And I have many days where I love the RUPES Mini body style. I know it seems excessive. But it’s true.

 

[Mike PhillipsMike Phillips is verified member.]

Just to chime in,

Rupes 15 III vs. Gear Driven DA’s

On a flat panel, I can get more cut with the 15 III all day, everyday versus anY gear driven DA.

I have the Rupes Mille and Flex 3401 and Rupes 15 III.

I think it's possible for a free spinning long stroke polisher to finish out nicer with great cut compared to a gear-driven tool but I'm not sure about faster and more cut.

The reason I say this is with a gear-driven tool I can press down REALLY HARD and remove paint really fast. Kind of like a rotary buffer. This can be done with a free spinning long stroke to a degree and as long as the panel is flat. That's a couple extra variables to deal with.



So a good test would be,


Sand a flat hood with say #2000 grit

Then have the same person, a fair and balanced person, make the same number of section passes over the sanded area using a free spinning long stroke and a gear-driven short stroke using the same pad and product.

The difference would be the person could take full advantage of whatever feature the tool offers.

But first decide what the criteria for judging will be.

100% defect removal AND best finish

Or

100% defect removal in the least amount of time - finish results not as important


I could see each tool excelling at one but not both.





The above is all hypothetical though and really doesn't matter at the end of the day because all that really matters is if the person buffing out a car is happy with the tool and the time they have to invest to go from start to finish.

If comfort, as in low vibration and smooth operation is more important than speed then free spinning long stroke all the way.

If speed is the top priority and to heck with comfort and smooth operation - the gear-driven all the way.

And that's what's so great about today's market - we have LOTS of choices. Back in the old day you three choices,

1. Rotary buffer
2. Cycle
3. Traditional Orbital Buffer

None of the cool tools we're taking about in this thread were invented yet.

In the meantime, the next couple of addition to the pack will be a RUPES LHR 21 MK III and the Duetto.

I really like the RUPES BigFoot 21 Mark III - for this category it is best-in-class. That said, I have not used the brand new Griot's 21 I have sitting here on my desk. Sad to say - I have not had any cool cars to detail lately.


I tested the Duetto for RUPES before it was introduced, I have the prototype in my collection about 5' from where I'm typing.

I wanted to really like it a lot. I like the body style, it's like a Porter Cable 7424XP 8mm free spinning short stroke polisher, which I really like. The issue with the Duetto is maintaining pad rotation and I think the reason it struggles with pad rotation is because it's a 12mm free spinning random orbital stoke instead of being a short stroke like the PC.

Here's my article that explain all of this,

The ghosting footprint and the actual footprint - Long Stroke Free Spinning Orbital Polishers


My explanation is below this picture,

If RUPES re-introduced the Duetto as a short stroke polisher - I think it work better for paint correction - like the PC.


And from the "For what it's worth" file, YEARS ago I recommended to FLEX to bring out the Mercedes-Benz of Porter Cables by introducing a short stroke free spinning random orbital polisher LIKE the Porter Cable only with FLEX quality. Alas they didn't listen and jumped on the long stroke bandwagon and introduced the 15mm free spinning FINISHER.

If we go to the Wayback Machine, this thread is from the year 2011 - so 9+ years ago in Germany, the FLEX Engineers asked me for my thoughts on tool design and I told them to bring out the FLEX version of the PC.

Secret meeting with the Flex Engineers!

See post #13



Ah.... but what do I know....


:dig:

 

[TMQ]

Hummm....Gonna need to re-eval force rotation and free spinning DA.

Mike's comments above made me rethink and I am observing results carefully.

I am beginning to wonder if force rotation is NOT the best thing to use on med to med/soft and soft paints. Leaves a slight haze---hard to see till hit see it out in the sun.

If one wants high gloss or off the charts paint "pop", Use free spinning DA on med/soft to soft paint.

Is this correct?

Tom

 

[WRAPT C5Z06]

Hummm....Gonna need to re-eval force rotation and free spinning DA.

Mike's comments above made me rethink and I am observing results carefully.

I am beginning to wonder if force rotation is NOT the best thing to use on med to med/soft and soft paints. Leaves a slight haze---hard to see till hit see it out in the sun.

If one wants high gloss or off the charts paint "pop", Use free spinning DA on med/soft to soft paint.

Is this correct?

Tom

Gear driven is definitely not the best choice for soft paint, especially non metallic soft black. Free spinning is a much better option for finishing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TMQ]

Thanks Wrapt....

Tom

 

[Dr Oldz]

A few of my thoughts here:

First is the fact there are so many different brands and TYPES of buffers..... great for detailers. The best buffer is what you are comfortable with and works for YOU!! If you are happy with the results, then you have the right machine.

Personally, I cut with a rotary, Beast or CBeast.

Generally finish with the Flex Finisher or cordless Finisher.

AIO work done with Beast or CBeast.


When Cutting Or doing AIO work, I want to work fast and effective. Hence why I chose the machines I mentioned above.

When Finishing, I am usually starting to fatigue and want the smooth ride from a 15mm free spinning DA. Plus they do finish amazing on most paint systems.

Abrasive technology is so impressive these days that with the right polish and pad, you can finish perfectly with a forced rotation DA even on softer paints and some time mastering the machine. Again on MOST paint systems.

The truth about finishing......is taking a PC style machine (which may not be the coolest now a days) and finishing perfectly on EVERY paint system.

While comparing a long throw DA to a forced rotation DA, I have to agree with Mike. Maybe a long throw will cut faster with machine weight only. Me, I like to muscle the machine around and work fast and effectively. I don’t buff a bunch of cube vans, I get vehicles with curves! So it’s why I prefer a forced rotation machine(either rotary or forced rotation DA)

Again just my thoughts, experiences and what works for me.

 

[TMQ]

Dr Olds...

That is good info! Thanks....

Going to have to go through a bit of a learning curve re Flex polishers. I have both CBeast and the cordless finisher. I still need to get the 7" pads for the finisher.

Hopefully between the CBeast and cordless polisher, it'll get the job done.

Then I don't need to use the Rupes 15 Mark II with all the cords.

Tom

 

[Dr Oldz]

Dr Olds...

That is good info! Thanks....

Going to have to go through a bit of a learning curve re Flex polishers. I have both CBeast and the cordless finisher. I still need to get the 7" pads for the finisher.

Hopefully between the CBeast and cordless polisher, it'll get the job done.

Then I don't need to use the Rupes 15 Mark II with all the cords.

Tom

I love the Flex cordless and use them as much as possible. No cords are amazing.

That being said, I’m power hungry and sometimes their corded cousins just can’t be beat!

 

[TMQ]

I do have the Supa beast next on my list after getting bunch of 7" pads!

Tom

 

[Mike PhillipsMike Phillips is verified member.]

Hummm....Gonna need to re-eval force rotation and free spinning DA.

Mike's comments above made me rethink and I am observing results carefully.

I am beginning to wonder if force rotation is NOT the best thing to use on med to med/soft and soft paints.

Leaves a slight haze---hard to see till hit see it out in the sun.

If one wants high gloss or off the charts paint "pop", Use free spinning DA on med/soft to soft paint.


Is this correct?


Tom

I shared the below in another thread today and have actually been sharing it for years now. It might be the earliest documented observation of free spinning vs gear-driven polisher results on soft paints. Not sure how someone would "search" for anything in writing or in video that dates before 2012



I actually answered this topic as to whether a gear-driven orbital polisher or a free spinning random orbital polisher will finish better back in 2012.

See post #32 in this thread,


https://www.autogeekonline.net/foru...ferrari-p4-move-over-rudolf-4.html#post809378



Here's the question and for those that don't know (because the Meguiar's G100 is not longer made), the Meguiar's G100 is an 8mm FREE SPINNING random orbital polisher. And the FLEX 3401 he's referring to is an 8mm gear-driven orbital polisher.

What made you decide to finish out with the Meguiar's G110 vs the Flex 3401?

Pad size selection or the non forced rotation maybe?

Good question...

I find on softer paints like this car has that the PC style with a Fine Cut Polish finishes out nicer than with the more powerful Flex 3401.

The paint on this car was incredibly soft.

I only did my test spot using the Flex 3401 and end-results were acceptable, I did the 8mm free spinning step just to "make sure".

I also machine applied the wax using the Meguiar's G110 polisher.

Saw this car recently while working on a Maserati, still looks just like it looks in the pictures.

So I can't answer for others but since 2012 it's been my opinion that when it comes to soft paints - any brand of free spinning random orbital polisher will finish out nicer than any brand of gear-driven orbital polisher when all other factors are the same.


And just to add....


If I'm NOT working on soft paint - I go gear-driven orbital with the pedal to the metal. If I am working on soft paint - then I choose a SIMPLE 8mm random orbital polisher to do the work.

If a person reads this write-up carefully - you'll see I CORRECTED the paint on this car with a FINE cut polish, a SOFT foam finishing pad and a Griot's 8mm G6 - paint was SUPER soft an any brand of gear-drive oribtal would not have finished as nice as a simple free spinning random orbital polisher.


Original BASECOAT/CLEARCOAT paint - 1996 Porsche 993

The best thing is to have a collection of tools so you can choose and use the right tool for the paint you're working on.

That and learn how to do a Test Spot and then read the results from your testing so you can move forward.

 

[louielouie]

I have been in the market to buy my first polisher for some time and threads like this are very helpful but also make the decision harder. I only do this as a hobby and likely will only need to correct a handful of cars so I was planning on picking up the new Griot's G15 as it's $240 retail and Black Friday is just around the corner. I've been looking at polishers long enough where I realize that Rupes doesn't really do sales and sits at almost twice the price of the G15.

I always end up still wanting a Rupes after reading up on threads like this, but I don't know if the price difference would really pay off. The machine could likely see months or possibly years of sitting on the shelf in between uses and I likely wouldn't buy another machine.

Hate to derail the main focus but would appreciate if I could get other's 2 cents in my situation.

 

[Mike Hoekstra]

It's not the tool. It's the tool using it. :buffing: I have had the opportunity to use Rupes polishers alongside other brands. Rupes makes a good product, and they have a solid name and brand loyalty. However, I found them to stall out while I used them both at my fellow detailer's places who are Rupes guys, and at the Mike's boot camp. Dialing in the right product and pad will allow a detailer to finish out any kind of paint with a gear driven da polisher like the Mille or Beast. I have, and can, do it. It's not just the tool or method, it's the technique and knowledge of what a product and tool will do in its full capacity.

 

[Mike Hoekstra]

I have been in the market to buy my first polisher for some time and threads like this are very helpful but also make the decision harder. I only do this as a hobby and likely will only need to correct a handful of cars so I was planning on picking up the new Griot's G15 as it's $240 retail and Black Friday is just around the corner. I've been looking at polishers long enough where I realize that Rupes doesn't really do sales and sits at almost twice the price of the G15.

I always end up still wanting a Rupes after reading up on threads like this, but I don't know if the price difference would really pay off. The machine could likely see months or possibly years of sitting on the shelf in between uses and I likely wouldn't buy another machine.

Hate to derail the main focus but would appreciate if I could get other's 2 cents in my situation.

After taking Mike's detailing boot camp class and using the Griot's G9 and Rupes polishers, spend the money on the G9. I tried to make it stall out and it wouldn't unless I really laid into it. It's a powerful machine that Griot's could charge double the asking price. Save yourself the money and buy the Griot's over the Rupes.

 

[JustJesus]

After taking Mike's detailing boot camp class and using the Griot's G9 and Rupes polishers, spend the money on the G9.

I was going to suggest the same. Or even "find" a new GG6 so he can get a 3" plate and pads.

 

[louielouie]

After taking Mike's detailing boot camp class and using the Griot's G9 and Rupes polishers, spend the money on the G9. I tried to make it stall out and it wouldn't unless I really laid into it. It's a powerful machine that Griot's could charge double the asking price. Save yourself the money and buy the Griot's over the Rupes.

I was going to suggest the same. Or even "find" a new GG6 so he can get a 3" plate and pads.

Thanks so much for the help. I did look at the G9 too but had read longer throws are more friendly for beginners due it dissipating heat better?

There's a combo pack out there (can't remember where I saw it) with the G9 and G8 for less than $350. Are the, "minis" needed (as @JustJesus) had suggested?

 

[PaulMys]

spend the money on the G9. I tried to make it stall out and it wouldn't unless I really laid into it. It's a powerful machine that Griot's could charge double the asking price. Save yourself the money and buy the Griot's over the Rupes.

I can second this, Mike.

I couldn't believe how much pressure it took to even make the G9 think about stalling. I was actually expecting the panel to start denting inward.