BillyJack
08-08-2016, 02:37 PM
Recently, I was one of the giveaway winners chosen to review the Buff and Shine microfiber pads. I hadn’t any nasty correction projects to do, but had occasion to check the polishing pads out this past Sunday. Seems a family member had inadvertently crossed over a freshly–painted traffic line earlier this week in her Crystal Red Cruze. I had the car available for only a few hours, so I elected to tackle the paint damage and leave the wheelhouses for another time. Fortunately, the splatters were confined to one side, but I found when washing that the whole car needed attention from the combination of bird droppings and half-eaten wild cherries from the trees overhanging the driveway.
First, I attacked the road paint, using a Nanoskin Medium pad in the DG wash soap, but the process was going too slow, so a plastic squeegee dislodged the heavier globs, leaving even more marring. I decided to try Meguiar’s D301 with the B&S MF polishing pad to try and accomplish a one-step process, removing the marring and any overlooked paint traces with minimal effort.
Moving on to the rest of the car, I cleaned the pad and switched to DG501 for its cleaning ability on the bird and tree droppings. Once again the B&S MF pad worked well, removing stains without numerous passes.
Now to my thoughts on using the B&S microfiber Pad vs foam:
Immediately, I noticed that on a standard GG polisher it was much easier to keep adequate pad rotation than a comparable foam pad. This Cruze had the RS package ground effects and it didn’t require a delicate touch to keep the pad moving over difficult contours where the entire pad was not in contact with the paint. I hadn’t any previous experience with an MF pad for anything more than spot correction, but I’ve read that high speeds, high pressure, too much product and inadequate cleaning are the biggest contributors to poor MF pad performance and pad failure. Since I had only one 5” pad to work with, I cleaned the pad after every panel by brushing only, avoiding available compressed air just for this test. The microfiber material is quite thick and absorbs quite a bit of product, but still cleans easily. Every time I took a break for some water on the 80+ degree day, I separated the pad from the BP to allow some cooling. Despite using higher speeds than are recommended for Meg’s MF pads, I had no appreciable heat buildup or signs of pending failure.
It will take some further experimentation with various polishes to see the correction capability, but initial results on ease of use and efficiency with these pads are very promising. Contrary to my suspicions, there’s no more of a learning curve than with a foam pad and the reduced pad stalling makes me want to try these more often. Prices are close enough to foam pads that it’s not a consideration.
Thanks to the Buff and Shine “Pad Man” & AGO for the giveaway. I look forward to using these pads more in the future.
Here’s a few after pics. I didn’t take any before, but looking at the wheelwells, you can imagine what I had to deal with down the side of the car.
Bill
http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee388/kaminokids/Buff%20n%20Shine%201.jpg
http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee388/kaminokids/Buff%20n%20Shine%203.jpg
First, I attacked the road paint, using a Nanoskin Medium pad in the DG wash soap, but the process was going too slow, so a plastic squeegee dislodged the heavier globs, leaving even more marring. I decided to try Meguiar’s D301 with the B&S MF polishing pad to try and accomplish a one-step process, removing the marring and any overlooked paint traces with minimal effort.
Moving on to the rest of the car, I cleaned the pad and switched to DG501 for its cleaning ability on the bird and tree droppings. Once again the B&S MF pad worked well, removing stains without numerous passes.
Now to my thoughts on using the B&S microfiber Pad vs foam:
Immediately, I noticed that on a standard GG polisher it was much easier to keep adequate pad rotation than a comparable foam pad. This Cruze had the RS package ground effects and it didn’t require a delicate touch to keep the pad moving over difficult contours where the entire pad was not in contact with the paint. I hadn’t any previous experience with an MF pad for anything more than spot correction, but I’ve read that high speeds, high pressure, too much product and inadequate cleaning are the biggest contributors to poor MF pad performance and pad failure. Since I had only one 5” pad to work with, I cleaned the pad after every panel by brushing only, avoiding available compressed air just for this test. The microfiber material is quite thick and absorbs quite a bit of product, but still cleans easily. Every time I took a break for some water on the 80+ degree day, I separated the pad from the BP to allow some cooling. Despite using higher speeds than are recommended for Meg’s MF pads, I had no appreciable heat buildup or signs of pending failure.
It will take some further experimentation with various polishes to see the correction capability, but initial results on ease of use and efficiency with these pads are very promising. Contrary to my suspicions, there’s no more of a learning curve than with a foam pad and the reduced pad stalling makes me want to try these more often. Prices are close enough to foam pads that it’s not a consideration.
Thanks to the Buff and Shine “Pad Man” & AGO for the giveaway. I look forward to using these pads more in the future.
Here’s a few after pics. I didn’t take any before, but looking at the wheelwells, you can imagine what I had to deal with down the side of the car.
Bill
http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee388/kaminokids/Buff%20n%20Shine%201.jpg
http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee388/kaminokids/Buff%20n%20Shine%203.jpg