I can attest the filling of 106FF and RE5 too. I did some testing just for fun, with a bunch of finishing polishes (intentional fillers like
M80, or non-filling OEM like Scholl S40, etc.). I used 100 ppi finessing pads to minimize the pad abrasion issue, a Makita 9227CB rotary, a Bosch PEX270AE DA buffer, 1Z Acrysol+straight isopropyl alcohol wipedowns before and after polishing, 1150 watts of combined (4200K metal halide and halogen) lighting, plus an adjustable mirror to project sunlight directly to the spot. I did countless passes, varying working times, pressures, arm speeds, RPMs/OPMs. The paint itself was an extremely sensitive Honda black, so it showed perfectly what was going on on the micro level under the pad.
The results: where oils were deposited, aka an even buffing film was present, the surface looked 95-100% defect free after removal. However, after the Acrysol/IPA wipedown, using an extremely plush MF with 6 mm nap, the surface showed defects again. There wasn't even a need for a lighted magnifier. The soft paint helped to amplify the issue, and it was clearly visible.
Yes, we are talking about a very high level of surface preparation, which is pretty uncommon in the OEM/bodyshop/carwash scene. Now please suggest how the testing can be even more focused, or result oriented.
The buffing film gives proper lubrication to the powder package; the agglomerates and primer crystals. They do their work, break down, reach their extremely fine "final" state, grit size. The evenly distributed lube oils (usually higher viscosity) fill the microscopic imprefections and defects of the paint as intended, providing a nice lube film for the abrasives. When the powder finishes, you have to remove the residue carefully and voila, the surface is perfect. Is it? No. It just looks perfect. A towel won't remove the oils from the micropits and -valleys, because the strands are just too big to do that. But a gentle Acrysol/IPA wipedown will lift the oils hiding in the imperfections, showing the true state of the surface. And you have to look closer, much closer than OEM or whatever.
Soft paints therefore are a nice challenge. On hard paints, the lube oil/powder package may work more harmoniously, because the size, shape and hardness of the particle fits that window better. So Jeff, it is unwise to scream "itwon'tfill", because technically EVERYTHING fills what leaves something on the surface. We can mention waxes, sealants or polishes - if it leaves something behind, even 1-2 microns of protection, oils, buildup, etc., it fills. Using a thickener such as bentonite clay will increase the viscosity and improve the product consistency as well as reducing the phase separation - but it can fill to an extent too. OEM polishes and compounds are usualy very thick - because thickness improves the stability/storage characteristics. Such emulsions are made extra thick to reduce the mobility of the phases, so they won't oil out of the emulsion. Wonder if they fill?
The temporary filling effect of the majority of polishes is an observable fact. However it is easy to discover the true state of the surface by doing a proper wipedown, so it is not a big issue. I think a simple adjustment of your Customer Service would be sufficient, saying "The lubricating additives in our polishes may temporarily level out the microscopic imperfections after polishing. It is therefore recommended to perform a prep-solvent wipedown to reveal the true state of the finish. If necessary, repeat the process."