Flex vs. Rupes Gear Driven Orbital Polishers

[oneheadlite]

You might try PM'ing user TTQ B4U if he doesn't chime in here - I believe he has both the Mille and the Flex machines. Not sure which he's been using lately, but I bet he'd have good feedback for you.

[Mike Phillips]

Thanks Mike. I knew what your opinion would be as I was creating this thread. From all of your posts relative to using the Flex Polishers, I know that they are amongst your favorites and your go-to polisher more often than not. You're a Flex guy and I get that. And I also respect your opinions.

I love my RUPES BigFoot 21 Mark III and in most of the write-ups I post you see my Angry Nano in the picture.

I'm not a FLEX guy nor an "any" guy, like most of you - I use what works best for me. That's it. In fact, I abhor anything to do with fanboyism.

That said, all of my experience is with CW rotating polishers. It’s natural to me. Throwing a reverse rotation polisher into the mix at this point concerns me a bit. I could certainly adjust and adapt to the reverse rotation with enough tool time, but my tool time is not that great these days. Therefore, I believe getting familiar with a new tool would be more natural and expeditious given the CW rotation.

Completely understand.

Here's the most important feature and also a benefit if trying to buff CLOSE to an edge or a component.

Due to the small 5mm orbit stroke of the Mille, (and also the Makita PO5000C), it's a much more precise tool in it's buffing pattern as far as it relates to getting the outer edge of the pad next to a body line or component - like a side mirror.

Its "Ghosting Image" or Ghosting Footprint" is smaller than the 8mm FLEX tools. And this can come in handy. That or just use a rotary.

[2black1s]

... I'm not a FLEX guy nor an "any" guy, like most of you - I use what works best for me. That's it. In fact, I abhor anything to do with fanboyism. ...

I could have chosen my words more carefully... without being so presumptive. In fact, when I go back and re-read what I wrote, that entire sentence was unnecessary as the prior sentence had already made the point.

[Mike Phillips]

I could have chosen my words more carefully... without being so presumptive. In fact, when I go back and re-read what I wrote, that entire sentence was unnecessary as the prior sentence had already made the point.

It’s all good man

[TMQ]

2Black1s,

Get either the beast or supa beast.

If you're a rotary polisher---Then these Flex polishers will feel tame to you. You'll do fine!
You won't know or feel the the difference in which way pads turns.

Worst case---you can sell the beast since they are discontinuing them.

Me--I'll go BEAST all the way!

And this is from a Rupes polisher guy!

Tom

[PaulMys]

I'm not a FLEX guy nor an "any" guy, like most of you - I use what works best for me. That's it. In fact, I abhor anything to do with fanboyism.

While I certainly respect this statement Mike, you must admit that it is much easier for you to use whatever works for you when you have hundreds of the very best at your fingertips at any given time.

Most of the rest of us have to make a decision on what to buy, and well there you have it.

As for the fanboy's, I do agree to an extent when it becomes venomous. But just like Ford, GM, and Chrysler fans, there will always be a bit of "chest pounding" when it comes to polishers.

Hell, even which snowblowers are the best can become a heated discussion (for us guys up north).

I hope you see my point.......

[2black1s]

I found this thread (linked below) and it, along with some of the comments in this thread, pretty much cover the info I was looking for. TTQ B4U gives a really thorough comparison of the two machines. Later in the thread the discussion turns more towards pad and polish choices, but the machine comparison aspects of the thread fulfilled my interests at this point in time. Thanks TTQ B4U and all that have replied here.

Rupes Mille vs 3401 - UPDATED Thoughts


EDIT: Here's another great thread I found for the Rupes...

I never liked gear driven polishers.

[2black1s]

2Black1s,

Get the either the beast or supa beast.

If you're a rotary polisher---Then these Flex polishers will feel tame to you. You'll do fine!
You won't know or feel the the difference in which way pads turns.

Worst case---you can sell the beast since they are discontinuing them.

Me--I'll go BEAST all the way!

And this is from a Rupes polisher guy!

Tom

And therein lies the problem that I foresee (the line I bolded).

When polishing a big flat panel, I can see where the rotational direction has very little or no effect other than which way the machine wants to walk. But when approaching edges or body lines is where I see the issue.

I have a habit, or what I see as a best practice, of never allowing (or at least minimizing as best I can) the pad to rotate "into an edge". I want only the side of the pad that is rotating "off the edge" in contact. In order to accomplish this the polisher must be tilted slightly. If the polisher is flat then both the "into" and "off of" sides of the pad are making contact with the edge and I want to avoid that wherever possible.

This is where the rotational direction comes into play. It dictates which way to tilt the polisher.

After all these years using a CW rotation polisher that action is natural to me without giving it much thought. I instinctively know which way to tilt the polisher. A polisher with a CCW rotation throws a wrench into that. I suspect that I would then have to "think" each time I approached an edge to keep my "instincts" in check. My instincts would tell me to tilt the polisher one way while the CCW rotation would dictate that I really need to tilt the other way. I just don't want to have to deal with that conflict.

Does that make sense?

This practice I describe was developed over many years of using, and learning with, rotary polishers. While it is not so critical with random orbitals, and some of those who learned with random orbitals may have not even given this practice much thought, it is still a practice I employ regardless of the polisher type. This practice is absolutely critical when using a rotary. And although I have never used a forced rotation orbital, I imagine the criticality of this practice to fall somewhere in between that of a rotary and a random orbital.

While I initially had no intention of discussing the "rotation" effects, or implications, beyond my desire for a CW rotating polisher in this thread, I guess it turned out to be inevitable. Actually, I do enjoy discussing the technical aspects of polishing.

Thanks for your perspective. Now you know where mine is coming from.

[Mike Phillips]

'm not a FLEX guy nor an "any" guy, like most of you - I use what works best for me. That's it. In fact, I abhor anything to do with fanboyism

While I certainly respect this statement Mike, you must admit that it is much easier for you to use whatever works for you when you have hundreds of the very best at your fingertips at any given time.

Most of the rest of us have to make a decision on what to buy, and well there you have it.

You're quite correct and it is one of the perks of my job. And I get it. I completely understand the dilemma of trying to do research, gather information BEFORE getting your wallet out and making a purchase KNOWING that once you open that box - that baby is yours.

I get it.

And that's why I love the way my classes are structured. For those that can attend one of my classes - they get to do what I get to do and that is use a plethora of tools, pads and products and then make-up their mind.

Try before you buy


And I've always been thankful for my job here at Autogeek and my previous job at Meguiar's. I've worked hard to get to where I'm at but I never forget my roots and I'm forever thankful.

As for the fanboy's, I do agree to an extent when it becomes venomous. But just like Ford, GM, and Chrysler fans, there will always be a bit of "chest pounding" when it comes to polishers.

Hell, even which snowblowers are the best can become a heated discussion (for us guys up north).

I hope you see my point.......

I completely see your point.

Don't bother me if someone want's to be a fanboy for a particualar brand but that's simply not me. I choose function over form.

[Mike Phillips]

Here's the most important feature and also a benefit if trying to buff CLOSE to an edge or a component.

Due to the small 5mm orbit stroke of the Mille, (and also the Makita PO5000C), it's a much more precise tool in it's buffing pattern as far as it relates to getting the outer edge of the pad next to a body line or component - like a side mirror.

Its "Ghosting Image" or Ghosting Footprint" is smaller than the 8mm FLEX tools. And this can come in handy. That or just use a rotary.

Here's an article I wrote that discusses and shows what I've termed the ghosting footprint for any brand of orbital polisher, free spinning or gear driven.

The pictures use a 21mm to show this ghosting footprint because the LARGER measurement is simply easier to capture with a camera.


The ghosting footprint and the actual footprint - Long Stroke Free Spinning Orbital Polishers


When you look down at any orbital polisher - if you look carefully you'll see two perimeters rings... the outer perimeter ring is the ghosting footprint as there is not 100% pad contact 100% of the time.

The inner perimeter ring is the actual footprint and there is 100% of pad contact 100% of the time.





I'm not very good in PS so here's the best I could do using the images already in the book.






It's difficult explain this easily with a keyboard. It's much easier to explain in person.

If anyone is interested - perhaps I can show and explain during our LIVE Detailing Class today?