Quote:
Originally Posted by jfsully  Todd ...I attempted to stop this at my last post...I must have done a bad job at it.
on the corvette forum you said System One - Advanced Polishing System - Corvette Forum
"Terrible product. I recieved (sp) a sample from autogeek and throw it in the garbage.
It will do what it says kind of (behind the false claims and trick wording). I have never gotten it to finish 100 percent perfect, and it usually requires several passes to remove all of the defects."
Saying someone has "false claims and trick wording" is questioning that persons integrity (IMO)
I think you are a very good detailer and take pride in your work....I believe I was off base and made some personal character attacks...for that I apologize.
enough said about this subject? |
Fair enough and I accept your apology. Actually you are correct and I did type about 5 minutes after I threw the product in the trash (I picked it back up).
However, I will defend the false claims and trick wording comment.
Tom claims that System One is safer because it removes less paint while removing the defects. If you think about a cross section of the paint, you have scratches or swirls that penetrate into the surface. To make the paint "perfect" you have to remove all the paint above the bottom most part of the scratch.
It doesn't matter which product you use, the same amount of paint has to come off the paint (all the paint above the depth of the scratches). If I use another product and remove preciesly the correct depth of paint, how can his product be safer? We both removed the same amount of paint, it is impossible to remove the defects with out removing the paint above them, yet System One claims to remove "less paint". I asked Tom about this on autogeek and IIRC he did't respond.
So let's take this a step further, lets say the defects are deeper then what System One will remove on with a finishing pad (or in my case
Menzerna PO85rd or 3M UF-SE and a finishing pad) will remove. In my case, I would bump up the polish slightly or the pad slightly. With System One, your next step up in aggressiveness is a pretty huge step (from a finishing pad to an full twisted
wool cutting pad). In this case, I have just enough cut to get the job done and remove just the right amount of paint, where as with System One, you have over kill and are removing more paint then necessary. So in this case (quite common because a lot of times you can remove wash induced marring with a moderate polish and pad such as Menzerna IP or
Meg's 83 and a polishing pad) and do not need the aggressiveness to a product combination that claims to remove 1200 grit scratches! That is crazy.
So in this common case, The System One system is removing far to much paint and thus is far from safer. I believe his claim is false and I would have loved to discuss this with him in depth and get his take.
Taking one step even further, with a traditional abrasive, you have a built in buffer. As the polish breaks down, it looses cut, until the point where only the pad is providing any abrasion on the paint. With System One and the non diminishing abrasive techonlogy, the abrasives stay the same and continue to cut and cut and cut. They dont' break down in the traditonal sense, so the longer you buff the more "cut" you get. This means it has the potentinal to remove a very high level of paint, where as with a traditonal finishing polish, you can work it for several minutes (after the abrasives are gone and the product is no longer cutting) in ensure a perfectly level and hologram free finish (as well as a potentialy micro scopic "perfect") finish that will reflect maximum light.
While the comment you brought up was worded out of my frustration (and I can see how you could make assumptions based on that and cannot fault you for doing so), the majority of my posts on the manner have been asking questions I have and expressing the reservations I have.
Linear Mode
