WG TSR straight to WG DGPS?

[Krwtek1]

Im just about finished with polishing my DD with Total Swirl Remover and a orange ccs pad on my PC. The light correction needed is being done and coming out flawlessly. Should i go straight to the DGPS or do the WG finishing glaze first. My truck is only a year old with grey metallic paint. Im afraid the glaze will kill the metallic paint from popping. Any thoughts?

[MarkD51]

27822
Im just about finished with polishing my DD with Total Swirl Remover and a orange ccs pad on my PC. The light correction needed is being done and coming out flawlessly. Should i go straight to the DGPS or do the WG finishing glaze first. My truck is only a year old with grey metallic paint. Im afraid the glaze will kill the metallic paint from popping. Any thoughts?

I've done it, just the TSR on my Kia the first time I ever DA'd the car and it looked great.
Then went directly to WGDGPS 3.0 and it looked fantastic, like a wet candy apple. Especially after the Sealant cured overnight, it looked even better.

Now supposedly, the folks here claim that WG Finishing Glaze is not a Glaze at all, but a fine Polish, comparable to Menzerna SF4000. I personally am on the fence about this one, cause I did do the roof with it at that time, and it did seem to have like a glaze quality to it, reminded me of like applying and removing Meg's #7 Glaze. They claim otherwise though.

I would imagine the FG should not kill or mute the luster, but should actually refine, and clarify it even further. This is what folks refer to as the "WG Twins", and as Mike Phillips has often mentioned, he's never done a vehicle with these two, that didn't finish out perfectly. Can't get much of a higher compliment that this.

I've never read mention that after using the WG FG, that one has to do any fancy wipe downs with IPA, or Eraser, etc, so I assume no issues going straight from the FG to the Sealant 3.0. Without a doubt, the WG stuff is fantastic.
Mark