crash73
07-17-2008, 09:51 PM
I'm trying to perhaps do too much with too little... Hopefully, someone can set me straight.
Bandgeek99 and I have 5 vehicles to maintain: a 1997 Nissan Pathfinder (Champagne or Gold color); a 2001 GMC Yukon XL Denali (Black); a 2002 Kia Sedona (Green/Tan two-tone); a 2003 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP (Dark Blue - Bandgeek99's old car); and a 2006 Dodge Charger R/T (Magnesium Pearl - Bandgeek99's car).
We have been frustrated by appearance issues that we cannot correct (as yet) with either a PorterCable 7424 or the Ultimate DEtailing Machine, using various graqdes of cutting pads, and using various version of XMT Corrective formulas (XMT1 - XMT3; we have XMT4 on-hand, but are leary to use it - just twisting the cap off, and it sounds like liquid sand papaer - you can hear how gritty it really is).
So we are now questioning whether our problem is the polish(es) in use, or whether the Dual-Action Polishers are not up to the task, our application methodologies, or all of the above.
First, what we're trying to fix; they appear to be wash or polishing 'scratches', some of which may have arisen from washing the cars in the winter with No-Rinse-Wash. Some start at the very front edge of the roof but nearly in the middle, and they're a good 15" to 18" long... Similar 'scratches' appear in the hood, but not as long; very few of these are on vertical surfaces.
We are contemplating changing over to Menzerna products; Bobby at PalmBeach has said XMT3 is a cut of 3.2, so we were thinking of trying the IP/SIP products; the latter stems from some posts indicating that CHrysler paint.clearcoat is harder than others. However, Bobby advised that SIP is really targetted for newer-generation ceramic-based Mercedes finishes, and should not be needed on Chrysler products. So we are seeking more input here - there is little need to spend 78% more for SIP than IP since they have the same cut ability.
Then it's what do we follow that up with... The Kia and the Dodge are the only vehicles that are OEM-paint only, so the 106FA was on our list for those 2 cars. But with the age of the Kia, is it possible that I need to cater for 'Aged/Weather Worn Coatings' (a quote from a pdf file available on the Menzerna web site (choose the downloads on the left side to download the latest version). Any thoughts on that? For the other 3, if we follow-up with PO85U, the gloss rating on that is not as high (4.0) as we want (5.0), so we would need a third step to achieve a better gloss - what would be recommended? Alternatively, should we consider the PO 85 RE 5 for all 5 cars?
Will Menzerna polishes go on much better with a rotary rather than a Dual-Action? TOGWT's post (Menzerna Polishes - Part I, #6) seems to imply that, but he does provide some suggestions for a Dual-Action. I don't want to embark on a new polish line if I don't have the right equipment to apply it and achieve it's best capabilities.
We've been adhering to the (mostly) 2X2 application area, going from lighter cut pads and working our way up, then repeating as we move up in polish correction. It is possible that we are over-working the polish, or even under-working the polish, becuase we haven't really caught on to when the polish is done, hazing exists, but the polish hasn't dried or become 'chalky' or 'dusty'.
Help us if you can - please!
Bandgeek99 and I have 5 vehicles to maintain: a 1997 Nissan Pathfinder (Champagne or Gold color); a 2001 GMC Yukon XL Denali (Black); a 2002 Kia Sedona (Green/Tan two-tone); a 2003 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP (Dark Blue - Bandgeek99's old car); and a 2006 Dodge Charger R/T (Magnesium Pearl - Bandgeek99's car).
We have been frustrated by appearance issues that we cannot correct (as yet) with either a PorterCable 7424 or the Ultimate DEtailing Machine, using various graqdes of cutting pads, and using various version of XMT Corrective formulas (XMT1 - XMT3; we have XMT4 on-hand, but are leary to use it - just twisting the cap off, and it sounds like liquid sand papaer - you can hear how gritty it really is).
So we are now questioning whether our problem is the polish(es) in use, or whether the Dual-Action Polishers are not up to the task, our application methodologies, or all of the above.
First, what we're trying to fix; they appear to be wash or polishing 'scratches', some of which may have arisen from washing the cars in the winter with No-Rinse-Wash. Some start at the very front edge of the roof but nearly in the middle, and they're a good 15" to 18" long... Similar 'scratches' appear in the hood, but not as long; very few of these are on vertical surfaces.
We are contemplating changing over to Menzerna products; Bobby at PalmBeach has said XMT3 is a cut of 3.2, so we were thinking of trying the IP/SIP products; the latter stems from some posts indicating that CHrysler paint.clearcoat is harder than others. However, Bobby advised that SIP is really targetted for newer-generation ceramic-based Mercedes finishes, and should not be needed on Chrysler products. So we are seeking more input here - there is little need to spend 78% more for SIP than IP since they have the same cut ability.
Then it's what do we follow that up with... The Kia and the Dodge are the only vehicles that are OEM-paint only, so the 106FA was on our list for those 2 cars. But with the age of the Kia, is it possible that I need to cater for 'Aged/Weather Worn Coatings' (a quote from a pdf file available on the Menzerna web site (choose the downloads on the left side to download the latest version). Any thoughts on that? For the other 3, if we follow-up with PO85U, the gloss rating on that is not as high (4.0) as we want (5.0), so we would need a third step to achieve a better gloss - what would be recommended? Alternatively, should we consider the PO 85 RE 5 for all 5 cars?
Will Menzerna polishes go on much better with a rotary rather than a Dual-Action? TOGWT's post (Menzerna Polishes - Part I, #6) seems to imply that, but he does provide some suggestions for a Dual-Action. I don't want to embark on a new polish line if I don't have the right equipment to apply it and achieve it's best capabilities.
We've been adhering to the (mostly) 2X2 application area, going from lighter cut pads and working our way up, then repeating as we move up in polish correction. It is possible that we are over-working the polish, or even under-working the polish, becuase we haven't really caught on to when the polish is done, hazing exists, but the polish hasn't dried or become 'chalky' or 'dusty'.
Help us if you can - please!