Review: Pinnacle Xmt#4

[nick19]

Very nice, thanks for taking the time to write the review Ed.

You're up early! Long day ahead?

I've been playing poker online all night, and winning... so I have an excuse

[justin_murphy]

Nick19,
I too have used polishes that "have got the job done". It's takes longer or looks different than XMT#4. This new compound will allow me to accomplish my task faster and with the desires results.

Plus, I simply love this line up.

[nick19]

Nick19,
I too have used polishes that "have got the job done". It's takes longer or looks different than XMT#4. This new compound will allow me to accomplish my task faster and with the desires results.

Plus, I simply love this line up.

I totally agree with that comment. I would rather use something less aggressive, especially just for some light oxidation and light swirl removal. It's not like his truck was COVERED in severe swirls.

We preach the "least aggressive product first" but it seems this is often ignored. I would have saved some clear coat, and taken additional time. But then again, I'm not a volume detailer. If I work on 4 cars a week, I'm happy. (Remember, I'm only 19 and still a FT student)

I hope you don't take this is a way it's not intended to be. Just merely a comment. I am sending a PM your way as well Justin.





-Nick

[AL417]

Nice write-up. Looks like XMT4 may be the go to product for tougher jobs. Thanks for taking the time to pass along this information and your thoughts. The truck looks really good.

[justin_murphy]

Nick19,
I took it as a conversation. That is all bro! LOL!

With more experience, one can start out with an aggressive combo and work it until the results are generated. This is done by speed, pressure and time.

This is how we detailers get a tough combo like this to finish down LSP ready with no more polishing.

[nick19]

Nick19,
I took it as a conversation. That is all bro! LOL!

With more experience, one can start out with an aggressive combo and work it until the results are generated. This is done by speed, pressure and time.

This is how we detailers get a tough combo like this to finish down LSP ready with no more polishing.

I didn't mean that. I understand that.

I meant why would you use a more aggressive product, when a less aggressive product will get the job done as well.


I'm pretty sure XMT #3 would have cleared up those minor swirls and oxidation just as good as XMT #4.

My point being, I thought we talk about using the LEAST aggressive product first, not most aggressive product.

And I understand going straight to #4 is common (or the most abrasive), and I myself will do it as well. But I almost always will test and see if a lesser aggressive product/pad will get the job done as well.

[justin_murphy]

I didn't mean that. I understand that.

I meant why would you use a more aggressive product, when a less aggressive product will get the job done as well.


I'm pretty sure XMT #3 would have cleared up those minor swirls and oxidation just as good as XMT #4.

My point being, I thought we talk about using the LEAST aggressive product first, not most aggressive product.

And I understand going straight to #4 is common (or the most abrasive), and I myself will do it as well. But I almost always will test and see if a lesser aggressive product/pad will get the job done as well.

It's simple.

Time.

I would have to take 5-10 minutes to test on a section. Then wipe off and inspect. This does not include the time it takes to get the product out and set up. Now I have 15-20 minutes invested in a process that might not work. I might have to step up after all. Then I would have to get another product out and start over. Easily 30 minutes of time. When you have 5 to do in a day and it only takes an hour for you to wash/vac a vehicle, you just lost half of that time which to me is 25.00.

I'd rather starte out with the most aggressive setup and learn to work it to save time. Then again, you become an professional estimater with time. You learn to evaluate the paint's condition and select the correct combo for it. Again, all of this comes with experience. You have to do "X" amount of vechicles a day to get this education.

Could Ed have gotten results with a less aggressive combo? I bet yes, but 90% of detailing is taking the plunge and learning. This is why you probably got the PC and stopped doing it by hand. Next will be the rotary. You have to try new things. When you do and the results are better and time is saved, you never look back!

[nick19]

It's simple.

Time.

I would have to take 5-10 minutes to test on a section. Then wipe off and inspect. This does not include the time it takes to get the product out and set up. Now I have 15-20 minutes invested in a process that might not work. I might have to step up after all. Then I would have to get another product out and start over. Easily 30 minutes of time. When you have 5 to do in a day and it only takes an hour for you to wash/vac a vehicle, you just lost half of that time which to me is 25.00.

I'd rather starte out with the most aggressive setup and learn to work it to save time. Then again, you become an professional estimater with time. You learn to evaluate the paint's condition and select the correct combo for it. Again, all of this comes with experience. You have to do "X" amount of vechicles a day to get this education.

Could Ed have gotten results with a less aggressive combo? I bet yes, but 90% of detailing is taking the plunge and learning. This is why you probably got the PC and stopped doing it by hand. Next will be the rotary. You have to try new things. When you do and the results are better and time is saved, you never look back!

Makes sense. I don't detail as many cars as you do, and I'm not on a time limit like yourself. So I guess I took a different approach.

Although your approach makes much more sense if you're doing 5 cars a day like yourself. I might do 5 a week. For some reason it just didn't stick, until now. I see where you're coming from.


Take care Justin, and keep up the good work.





-Nick

[budman3]

Makes sense. I don't detail as many cars as you do, and I'm not on a time limit like yourself. So I guess I took a different approach.

Although your approach makes much more sense if you're doing 5 cars a day like yourself. I might do 5 a week. For some reason it just didn't stick, until now. I see where you're coming from.
Take care Justin, and keep up the good work.
-Nick

No offense to this but just because he's a full time detailer doesn't mean he's right. I can see the time saving benefits for customers but in this case I agree with Nick. Use the least agressive approach first is a very good idea. I'm no full time detailer but I can look at a car's paint and know what product will get the swrils out. I wouldn't reach for the most agressive polish if I knew something lighter would do the same thing in the same amount of time. Sometime (more than not with customers cars) you need to be agressive but I really don't think using XMT4 'liquid sandpaper' on a vehicle with very light swirls was a good idea.

From the pictures XMT2 or SSR1 would have done the trick in the same amount of time and wouldn't have been as detrimental to the clear coat. Also the end pictures don't have any full sun shots to compare to the befores to see if the swirls are gone of if there is any micromarring left. Anyways good write up and good job AG for sending out the products fast.

[Meghan]

If I can jump into this thread and lend a hand on the polish questions....
First everyone is right in their own way -
We should use the less aggressive polish first, and go more aggressive as needed. But if you are a pro and doing this for the money and have the EXPERIENCE to know what and when is the time to go aggressive then you should. We have some guys here that have used many different combos; you find one that works for you and stick with it. Everyone has a different technique, stick with what you know and what works for you. That is the great thing about our forum, we all share our experiences. Enough said!