Iron remover

[capnp72]

Is it worth the expense and time to use an iron remover on an older vehicle? I have a 2017 Jeep Grand Cherokee limited with 97k miles.

[briarpatch]

Is it worth the expense and time to use an iron remover on an older vehicle? I have a 2017 Jeep Grand Cherokee limited with 97k miles.

I do not see a reason why not. I have a 2013 Tundra with 121k.....when it gets a full detail, its gets clayed and sprayed with Iron-X.

[Rsurfer]

Is it worth the expense and time to use an iron remover on an older vehicle? I have a 2017 Jeep Grand Cherokee limited with 97k miles.

It depends, are you planning to do a full detail? Detailers have been polishing cars for over half a century and there wasn't iron removers back then, but there was rail dust and brake dust. Does that mean they did an incomplete job?

[Eldorado2k]

IMO the short answer is no, not needed as long as you plan on clay barring the vehicle. The clay will do everything an iron remover will do and more.

This makes me think, back when products i.e. Iron X 1st came to market, was it mainly described for use on wheels? Or was it marketed for use on paint? I’ve got a hunch it had to be 1 before the other, and if it was wheels than that would explain alot, because most people never get around to claying their wheels, which in turn sort of makes using Iron X to clean your wheels a pretty good idea since how else would you go about removing iron particles and therefore preventing premature deterioration of the clearcoat on your wheels…

I believe acid based wheel cleaners also help remove iron particles, but alot of people are scared to death to use them, so that wouldn’t work for them.

My gut tells me that could’ve been the whole reason they decided to make Iron X in the 1st place. What do you guys think?

[Bill D]

I used the Valugard ABC system on a contaminated car before claying—if claying was even necessary ( you can also clay during step B) it’s my understanding this system was the original., even before Iron X,but it remains unpopular because it’s a 3 step system, was never marketed to mainstream detailers, and isn’t straight forward to obtain. I think Valugard is missing the boat by not marketing this system to professional detainers and enthusiasts

Any way, here’s how the system works:

How To Remove Industrial Fallout and Rail Dust / Valugard A-B-C Neutralization Procedure - YouTube

[Coatingsarecrack]

If you plan to keep the vehicle for a long while I would personally use Iron remover. Did want hurt and doesn’t mar.

If your plan on claying I would still use. I’m in the camp the clay would remove all the iron and iron remover would but I want least amount of particles dragged across my paint. Less micro marring and longer clear coat preservation.

I’m sure clay would remove dirt from paint but that would scratch paint right? I think of it as kinda the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[opie]

I’m sure clay would remove dirt from paint but that would scratch paint right? I think of it as kinda the same.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like your analogy

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[opie]

IMO the short answer is no, not needed as long as you plan on clay barring the vehicle. The clay will do everything an iron remover will do and more.

This makes me think, back when products i.e. Iron X 1st came to market, was it mainly described for use on wheels? Or was it marketed for use on paint? I’ve got a hunch it had to be 1 before the other, and if it was wheels than that would explain alot, because most people never get around to claying their wheels, which in turn sort of makes using Iron X to clean your wheels a pretty good idea since how else would you go about removing iron particles and therefore preventing premature deterioration of the clearcoat on your wheels…

I believe acid based wheel cleaners also help remove iron particles, but alot of people are scared to death to use them, so that wouldn’t work for them.

My gut tells me that could’ve been the whole reason they decided to make Iron X in the 1st place. What do you guys think?

I think you make a good point. Look at 3d's iron remover for instance...BDX, i always have seen it more marketed for the wheels

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[capnp72]

It depends, are you planning to do a full detail? Detailers have been polishing cars for over half a century and there wasn't iron removers back then, but there was rail dust and brake dust. Does that mean they did an incomplete job?

Yes, I am planning on doing a full detail.

[tattooman]

I clay bared a 21 year old garage kept camry today that had never been detailed its entire life. the paint looked good after washing it, but when I began the clar bar cleanup, the paint was so rough with fallout that I was worried about the clay bar operation scratching the paint futher because of the heavy amount of fallout that the clay was dragging out. Anyway I stopped after the roof and back lid, and ordered some iron remover, since the fallout wasn't coming off easily with the clay - meaning there was lots of trash and it had been stuck in the paint a very very long time. So from this experience, I say for really heavily contaminated paint, I say use an iron remover FIRST, so that the subsequent clay bar procedure will be more productive with less damage during the operation. I suppose if I had a more coarse grade of clay it might have worked better, since a little marring I think is better than whatever amount of scratching created by the clay bar cleaning itself.