We're being told for sure. But are we focused on the why?
Diminishing abrasives and proprietary lubricants for longer work times.
My two cents anyhoo.
That's why I'm asking.... why ? I don't think this goes does for this reason....
Why? Name away we are here to discuss things. Hard to talk about "polishing liquids" when you're not mentioning any
It's gonna be kind of hard to keep this thread going without "polishing liquids" to talk about. OK maybe I'll guess..............CarPro Reflect, Wolfgang Uber Compound?
The only one i have heard of is the SONAX PF.
I personally used it, and topped it with gtechniqs coating.
I am certain the coatings bonded properly, and the finish is still flawless.
PS: Carpros Reflect, is a finishing polish, they said it does not correct, so that shouldn't be consider a filler type of product.
CarPro Reflect is AMAZING. If you haven't tried it yet I highly recommend picking up at least a small bottle. This is coming from a religious M205 user.
What tool and pad do you use it with? I can't get it to finish as good as HD Polish.
You see ? That's not hard to figure! If you have being looking around detailing forums, you probably know what I'm talking about... we could go even further and extend this topic back when SMAT liquids were introduced, maybe this was when the shift started to occur.
Don't blame, I'm just trying to roll the dices and see what's up on detailers mind about this topic... I know I'm not the only one questioning this...
But we are living in a world of information that has become more like disinformation, when you don't know in what info you can trust..... I see only 1 way out of this, to get better informed, more in depth.
Once more we have detailing terminology and real world terminology getting everything confused. Honestly chaps, your detailing brands are fantastic at this.
There is no big change to the technology. Let me take an example for you. There is/was a product called wet glaze and it seemed rather popular. I was told this was nothing more than a glaze but it seemed that it was surprisingly durable. Looking into it further, indeed, it contained 'filling oils' (detailers term - what does this actually mean?!). Alas that is not all it contains and it actually has polymers which bond to the surface and thus produce the durability. More than that, these polymers will behave rather like the previously mentioned oil - they will effectively fill and bond. So this product is not at all just a pure glaze, it is effectively an oily sealant. Good for them to come up with something new, you say. But the thing is that this same ingredient has been used in any number of automotive products for years (perhaps decades), albeit sold under different marketing. The same thing is true for the polishes. If a polish is oil, water and abrasive, then it is a pure polish. It will do some level of correction, depending upon the abrasive and that is it (lets not ever start on whether DAT/SMAT have real world meaning). If the product claims to leave an extra glossy finish beyond the basic correction, either the marketing info is questionable or it contains something extra. The truth is that most polishes fall into the latter.
My experience is that the brands selling to you rarely understand exactly what their products are. Excepting the likes of Meguirs or similar, many of the detailing brands I encounter are comprised of a detailer who decided to try to make a bit more money. Even some of the more famed detailing brands are actually without a chemist on board. Contrary to what they might lead you to believe, the average 'detailing' brand does not have product development facilities, scientists permanently on the job, does not have regulatory experts on hand (etc.). They buy products off someone else's shelf and repackage them out to you. There is no sin in this practice and it may very well mean that they identify a product which is superb, but it does mean they have little knowledge of the composition of the product. Further than this, without a chemist on staff what info they do provide has to be subject to interpretation.
The jist of that last paragraph is that your wonder polish with no fillers may very well have loads of filling capacity, but the brand selling it simply does not realise it (for instance, as mentioned, because the filling is not trivially removed with a bit of IPA). Again, no sin in all of this but detailers need to realise that they are not necessarily getting exactly what they think they are! The UK is a rather amusing market and is filled with amateur detailers who are absolutely convinced of their methods etc. Ultimately many of them go on about methodology and things they, personally, would never do but they are actually doing many of those things as a result of their products. I think that the whole market has gone nuts and over complicated everything. People are paying out huge amounts of money based on marketing claims and 'fanboyism' (!) rather than concentrating on how a product actually performs.
So I think the summary is that if a product cuts like a finishing polish but will correct like a compound, no matter what the brand marketeers try to tell you, it is filling!
You have nailed where I wanted this to get.... :dblthumb2:
I'm in no way an experience 10-20 years on the market detailer, but I see a lot of contradiction when I start to talk with some guys that do have.
The key point is that although many might think, reading MSDS won't let you know everything that goes in the bottle.
And it's really hard for me to believe that too many people would be beating products like PO85RD and thus, Menzerna, after a couple of months of "product development".
We all know there's no free lunch.... I just wish to know if and what I'm giving away for this lunch and probably why.
Then you can say: "Who cares ?".... Well... I do... and when using products like opticoat and so on, you want (at least should be concerned of), to offer a very clean surface to grant proper bond...... but on the other hand, what's being left behind, do really interferes with proper bonding from COATs ? Well, that's kind of gets away from the topic, but for me it matters as much. Questions likes this usually end on a never ending debate and no real world, long term tests are provided to prove points.
Competing is good, things get evolved.... but don't mistake one industry for another..... a chemical industry is not like programing.... or thinking on a cool app or feature for the new smartphone..... we don't have tic-toc here and I'm quite sure about that.
oke:
