DA a Required Step !

EdLancer · 06-17-08, 05:54

I was chatting with a well known detailer/paint consultant today who is one of the top technical reps and detailers for a major polish company for which I will not name and he says using a DA is a necessary part of a detail. He says no matter how experience anyone is with a rotary, you will not get perfection without passing it with a DA. Now just throw in someone with less expereince on a rotary you are just asking for trouble.

So passing it with a DA is a required step that most detailing shops or detailers forgo because of time ?

Comments ? I am just waiting for them ...LoL

SuperBee364 · 06-17-08, 05:59

Everyone's entitled to their opinions, for sure. I'd bet that for every pro detailer that has the opinion that every detail has to have a DA used, there is at least one that says just the opposite. Results, not machinery, matter. But that is, of course, JMO.

Saying a DA is a required step in detailing is alot like saying desert is a required course of dinner.... no, wait... it *is* a required course in dinner.. gotta think of a better comparison..

cushdrive · 06-17-08, 06:05

There are professional golfers that say it's best to play a cut because a cut has more backspin and therefore easier to control with longer ball flight. Other golfers swear that a draw is the best shot pattern because the ball has topspin and therefore you can keep the ball lower with less effect from the wind and more distance from roll once the ball hits the ground. Long story short, just because someone is a professional doesn't mean they're right, or that their technique is the end all for every person in every application. I disagree with the statement, but then again, that's just my opinion.

TTWAGN · 06-17-08, 07:04

If you are working fast and trying to skip steps using a DA is often required to make the surface decent.

However if you have unlimited time a rotary buffer can get better results than any DA polisher. The DA action has a high chance of providing very light marring and is very difficult to see but it is there.

If someone can get a better finish with a DA buffer is just proves they have an average skill level with a rotary. If their skill level was above average they would get better results than a DA buffer.

EdLancer · 06-17-08, 07:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by TTWAGN

If you are working fast and trying to skip steps using a DA is often required to make the surface decent.

However if you have unlimited time a rotary buffer can get better results than any DA polisher. The DA action has a high chance of providing very light marring and is very difficult to see but it is there.

If someone can get a better finish with a DA buffer is just proves they have an average skill level with a rotary. If their skill level was above average they would get better results than a DA buffer.

Thats is just the point, isn't using a rotary suppose to save you time ?

To me the rotary is the heavy machinary required to remove deeper paint defects "fast" so that the DA can do its job even faster "jewling" the paint !

The reasoning behind this is that most of the public don't look at their car's paint like us Autopians, as long as it is shiny its passable, new car dealers are a perfect examples of this, they all use rotaries by personnel who are less than skilled because it is fast, but passble for the average Joe Blow.

Also, if the rotary is such an easy machine to use, most detailers would be out of a job !, so of course they will not advertise the use of a DA machine.

Scottwax · 06-17-08, 07:41

I feel you get better overall gloss and shine using a rotary because it breaks down polishes better and removes more defects. However, a DA buffer is more goof proof despite the light marring/hazing it can leave behind, especially on A pillars and the curved edges of roofs.

I have decided, no matter how good Ultrafina is at leaving behind a hologram free finish 90%+ of the time, if I don't have adequate lighting to inspect the paint, I'll be going over the paint again with UF and a DA buffer to be on the safe side.

TTWAGN · 06-17-08, 07:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdLancer

Thats is just the point, isn't using a rotary suppose to save you time?

To me the rotary is the heavy machinary required to remove deeper paint defects "fast" so that the DA can do its job even faster "jewling" the paint !

If you are above average with a rotary you will save time. If you are average you wont save time. If you are below average then you'll take longer with a rotary as you'll be chasing holograms all day long.

An above average user of a rotary will be able to jewel the paint providing more gloss than any DA polisher could provide. An average rotary user will probably jewel the paint better with a DA buffer. A below average rotary user cannot jewel, they hologram and a DA will be much better for them.

My skill level is only average so like yourself i quite often finish with a DA polisher.

This is why i am a big fan of the Flex 3401. For the average or below average user a flex will provide quicker and better results than a rotary can due to their skill level. The only people who say a rotary is better than a flex are those who are above average users.

Working conditions also compound the difficulty of a rotary buffer. If you work outside, have poor lighting or have to do quick details then a rotary can be difficult to master. You'll either have to finish with a DA or user a flex which will hologram less.

EdLancer · 06-17-08, 07:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottwax

I feel you get better overall gloss and shine using a rotary because it breaks down polishes better and removes more defects. However, a DA buffer is more goof proof despite the light marring/hazing it can leave behind, especially on A pillars and the curved edges of roofs.

I have decided, no matter how good Ultrafina is at leaving behind a hologram free finish 90%+ of the time, if I don't have adequate lighting to inspect the paint, I'll be going over the paint again with UF and a DA buffer to be on the safe side.

Scott, are you saying UF is better at leaving no holograms than OP on a rotary ?

Accumulator · 06-18-08, 08:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by TTWAGN

...Working conditions also compound the difficulty of a rotary buffer...

Absolutely

A vehicle can look 100% hologram-free during a long, rigorous inspection...then the sunlight/viewing angle or something changes and *zap* ... for just a split-second you see a trace of hologramming after all. BTDT (for a long, long time just recently).

Those "easily caught on film" holograms, the obvious ones that everyone can see, well....those aren't really my concern. With the right products/pads, even *I* can run a rotary well enough to minimize/eliminate those

But IME spotting very fine holograms requires quite specific conditions, and sometimes two people (I can elaborate if somebody cares and/or hasn't seen my previous posts about what I went through inspecting my Denali XL, which most anybody else woulda thought was holo-free). If I can't do that sort of inspection I wouldn't even *try* to finish out 100% via rotary as I simply couldn't know if I'd done it or not and I could have a surprise later when the conditions just happened to be right.

FWIW, I've *NEVER* noticed a diminishing of gloss or other negative result from finshing via Cyclo. So I've simply quit worrying about finishing out 100% with the rotary; I assume I've left holograms and I Cyclo 'em away. Then I burnish/jewel with finishing pads and a near-zero-cut product. I *can* see how that might not work on certain paints with other RO/DA polishers, but the Cyclo's fine on the paints I have (and on gloss black plastic pillars).