What's up with all these new super polishing liquids ?

I can vouch for remnants from polishing interfering with OptiCoat. When I used Menz based polishes, I did many IPA (@ 70%) wipedowns and thought I had to be "good". Then I OC'ed and the OC failed.

Realizing that probably was the issue and not "OptiCoat sucks", I OC'ed again, but used all Optimum products. It's still beading like crazy.
 
Nicholas@Autowerx said:
I've been using Reflect with the Flex @ ~3.5/4 + LC black flat foam.
I have a bottle of HD Polish that Thomas gave me that I still need to try out!

I hear nothing but great things about both of these products; both of which are supposedly "non-filling" polishes.
Click to expand...
Should these polishes be included in the realm of "super polishing liquids" that the OP: DaC has referenced?

RE: Filling/Non-filling...Adding/Taking away...Outstanding/Yet they are mild

IMO:
"Fillers" are not only manufactured/processed differently, but also perform different tasks...
than their antiquated ancestors of only few decades ago.
The introduction of BC/CC paint-systems appear to be largely the reason why.

Who would've thought that kaolin clays can be used to burnish/jewel a paint finish;
be a proviso/act as an alternative to TiO2;
and the list goes on, and on, and on....

I wonder:
What's the maximum depth/length...total area...of a "paint-blemish"...that can be successfully "filled"?

crazy.gif


Bob
 
FUNX725 said:
Should these polishes be included in the realm of "super polishing liquids" that the OP: DaC has referenced?

RE: Filling/Non-filling...Adding/Taking away...Outstanding/Yet they are mild

IMO:
"Fillers" are not only manufactured/processed differently, but also perform different tasks...
than their antiquated ancestors of only few decades ago.
The introduction of BC/CC paint-systems appear to be largely the reason why.

Who would've thought that kaolin clays can be used to burnish/jewel a paint finish;
be a proviso/act as an alternative to TiO2;
and the list goes on, and on, and on....

I wonder:
What's the maximum depth/length...total area...of a "paint-blemish"...that can be successfully "filled"?

crazy.gif


Bob
Click to expand...

LoL... did I invented this term ? SPL.... I must have seen this somewhere else.... just kidding...
 
FUNX725 said:
Should these polishes be included in the realm of "super polishing liquids" that the OP: DaC has referenced?

RE: Filling/Non-filling...Adding/Taking away...Outstanding/Yet they are mild

IMO:
"Fillers" are not only manufactured/processed differently, but also perform different tasks...
than their antiquated ancestors of only few decades ago.
The introduction of BC/CC paint-systems appear to be largely the reason why.

Who would've thought that kaolin clays can be used to burnish/jewel a paint finish;
be a proviso/act as an alternative to TiO2;
and the list goes on, and on, and on....

I wonder:
What's the maximum depth/length...total area...of a "paint-blemish"...that can be successfully "filled"?

crazy.gif


Bob
Click to expand...

Part of the trouble in all of this is that the 'antiquated ancestors' are not as you think. Some of these very ingredients are central to some of the very modern formulations. Contrary to many of the comments, automotive formulations and ingredients have not been revolutionised over the previous 10-20 years. The difference is that the ingredients are being used in new ways and in new classes of products and they are being heavily marketed. Fancy polymers and the likes have been doing the rounds for a long time, the patent history alone shows this. Kaolin clays and polishing capacity is nothing new to the formulator either.

All these marketing guys are spinning a merry tale. Nano this and polymer that. Or is it polymer this and nano that? Heck the consumer has no real way of telling so who cares. I suppose, who really cares? I suppose it just pains me to see cheap assed products sold with daft marketing and huge priced tags. It is one thing Joe Public falling for it hook line and sinker, but I see a lot of (supposedly) well informed UK detailers paying as much as 200x manufacturing cost, on certain products, based almost exclusively on brand marketing, rather than product quality.

I'll stop with the ranting now!
 
DaC said:
CAS is nice.... but what if a compound states it'll cut 500 grit and finish like 5000 grit ? Seems pretty vague right ? This information is not enough to let us know how did it has achieved that. Was that really breaking down abrasives ? Was that filling or "durable filling" ? Is the shine produced really a "true shine", or is it something that will wash off sooner or later despite of impeccable maintenance ? You get the point.....
DaC said:
LoL... did I invented this term ? SPL.... I must have seen this somewhere else.... just kidding...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light,
but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it". ~Max Planck

PiPUK said:
Part of the trouble in all of this is that the 'antiquated ancestors' are not as you think. Some of these very ingredients are central to some of the very modern formulations. Contrary to many of the comments, automotive formulations and ingredients have not been revolutionised over the previous 10-20 years. The difference is that the ingredients are being used in new ways and in new classes of products and they are being heavily marketed. Fancy polymers and the likes have been doing the rounds for a long time, the patent history alone shows this. Kaolin clays and polishing capacity is nothing new to the formulator either.

All these marketing guys are spinning a merry tale. Nano this and polymer that. Or is it polymer this and nano that? Heck the consumer has no real way of telling so who cares. I suppose, who really cares? I suppose it just pains me to see cheap assed products sold with daft marketing and huge priced tags. It is one thing Joe Public falling for it hook line and sinker, but I see a lot of (supposedly) well informed UK detailers paying as much as 200x manufacturing cost, on certain products, based almost exclusively on brand marketing, rather than product quality.

I'll stop with the ranting now!
Click to expand...
As always:
Thanks for your posts...and clarification on this and many other subject matters as well.

'Nothing new under the Sun':
If only the truth would be told as candidly by the manufacturers of detailing products.
Then again, as you allude to: Some of these manufacturers...are not really the manufacturers.


IMHO: The below adage still holds true today.

"In a time of universal deceit...
telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell



:)

Bob
 
FUNX725 said:


'Nothing new under the Sun':
If only the truth would be told as candidly by the manufacturers of detailing products.
Then again, as you allude to: Some of these manufacturers...are not really the manufacturers.

 ~George Orwell



:)

Bob
Click to expand...

I overstate the point a bit, I guess. To say there is nothing new would be too much. Of course there are some new things, they just are not occurring on every product, as some of our 'manufacturers' claim. I think a good guide is that the harder someone tries to tell you that they have something special, the less likely the actually do.

Lets just say that we are doing comfortably, formulating and manufacturing decent products based on sound principles. Our products do not always come top of comparisons but that would be a bit of a naive goal. The important thing is that they tend to compare perfectly well with those highly marketed 'nano' products or those with secret proprietary technology or whatever. To my mind, that speaks for itself.
 
FUNX725 said:
I wonder:
What's the maximum depth/length...total area...of a "paint-blemish"...that can be successfully "filled"?

Bob
Click to expand...

Don't put these ideas into my head!! I have way to many write-ups to catch up on and now you've got me looking at my digital microscope with a crazy, mad scientist smile on my face.
 
PiPUK said:
I overstate the point a bit, I guess. To say there is nothing new would be too much. Of course there are some new things, they just are not occurring on every product, as some of our 'manufacturers' claim. I think a good guide is that the harder someone tries to tell you that they have something special, the less likely the actually do.

Lets just say that we are doing comfortably, formulating and manufacturing decent products based on sound principles. Our products do not always come top of comparisons but that would be a bit of a naive goal. The important thing is that they tend to compare perfectly well with those highly marketed 'nano' products or those with secret proprietary technology or whatever. To my mind, that speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
My intentions was to praise you for being candid about detailing products and their formulations...
And that there are many manufacturers that refuse to do so...whatever their reasons may be.

Sorry for my mix-ups...

BTW:
How does a person go about purchasing products from your Company?

:)

Bob
 
FUNX725 said:
My intentions was to praise you for being candid about detailing products and their formulations...
And that there are many manufacturers that refuse to do so...whatever their reasons may be.

Sorry for my mix-ups...

BTW:
How does a person go about purchasing products from your Company?

:)

Bob
Click to expand...

No mix up Bob :)

You can't buy from us I am afraid, we sell only to wholesale and not too many of you chaps are going to want to be hitting the 45 gallon MoQs!
 
Nicholas@Autowerx said:
Don't put these ideas into my head!! I have way to many write-ups to catch up on and now you've got me looking at my digital microscope with a crazy, mad scientist smile on my face.
Click to expand...

Well... do it already! Im the MAN

PiPUK said:
No mix up Bob :)

You can't buy from us I am afraid, we sell only to wholesale and not too many of you chaps are going to want to be hitting the 45 gallon MoQs!
Click to expand...

Maybe that's not necessarily true... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top