Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Non-Diminishing Abrasives Test - Meguiars vs. GTechniq


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Dave KG

Dave KG

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 02:19 PM

From last week's testing session with Gordon, Allie and myself, this was one was one of the biggest tests! Gordon and myself spent time with the machine doing the sets for this test :)

Polishing technology that many of us are used to uses diminishing abrasives - abrasives that break down as you polish, where the cut gets less and less and you can then burnish the finish with the broken down abrasives to remove or reduce holograms depending on the polish.

However, polishing technology is now adopting abrasives which do no break down - known as non-diminshing abrasives, or constant-cut abrasives. In these polishes, the abrasives remain cutting to the same amount throughout the polishing set. The idea behind them is that you can change the amount of cut by changing the pad or the amount of pressure (or other factors), rather than changing the polish. Naturally, "standard polishes" can also have their cut varied by changing the pad and polishing style, however non-diminishing polishes take this flexibility to another level and respond to a greater degree to changes. With this in mind, this test compares two of the manufacturers who have taken this polishing technology to the market:

Meguiars
Replacing their #80-series polishes, Meguiars first came to the game with the Solo range, with Solo Polishing Cream and the pad kit... Later to the market are #105 Ultra Cut Compound and #205 Ultra Finishing Polish which use the non-diminishing abrasives (Meguiars' SMAT technology) which are tested here. #105 is the aggressive cutting product for severe defect correction while #205 is the light abrasive product designed for light correction and finishing.

GTechniq
Perhaps less of a known brand, but certainly coming to the fore in the UK market and beyond is GTechniq - and the popularity of the P1 and P2 polishes is a testament to them, as they are making waxes in a market dominated by Menzerna, 3M and Meguiars. P1 uses non-diminishing abrasives, designed to be the only polish you need capable of severe defect correction or lighter correction. P2 is designed as a finishing polish for the removal of any hologramming and sharpening the finish.


So - the test. Using a VW Golf door, solid red paint with clearcoat and known to be hard paint from removal rates test, the heavy cutting products were first of all tested by foam for correction of defects and possible refinement. They were also tested by wool for severe defect correction. The finishing products were tested for the removal of holograms, both from foam and wool. IPA was used throughout for wipedowns and we have had good success with this in tests for removing oils so long as you saturate the panel and wipe in straight lines with moderate pressure... rather than just a cursory wipe over with a light mist of IPA. Results of our tests:


Meguiars #105 and #205

First up, the Meguiars polishes. We started with a nicely marred door (courtesy of sand paper and a gritty cloth):

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

and a key used to inflict an X as a deeper mark to challenge the correction power of the product:

Posted Image

Posted Image

The first test was carried out using a yellow Hexlogic cutting pad. The product was spread and then worked up to around 1800rpm and worked with moderate pressure by rotary polisher, as shown in the video below. No refinement stage was carried out, and the product was worked until it seemed to dry and go slightly tacky:

Posted Image

The results of the first compounding set:

Posted Image

Posted Image

The finish looks good in terms of correction, however you can see light holograms formed as you can see under the Sun Gun. Using the strip light, which is better for looking at deeper marks as the Sun Gun can sometimes bleach out deeper marks through glare, we can still see the X in the finish, although it has been reduced:

Posted Image

Posted Image

A repeat of this set, with an extended set length, achieved the following results under the Sun Gun:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Good level of correction, and a nice sharpness to the Sun Gun reflection although as you can see there is some hologramming which I would expect with no effort made to refine the finish. The deep X has also been significantly reduced again:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Now - for a moment of truth... IPA wipedown, and check again under the Sun Gun and we can see more holograms revealed, suggesting that #105 has acted to mask the holograms to a degree:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

A good first blow here, good levels of correction achieved and the holograms were to be expected given the cutting pad and the pressure used during the polishing set. However, a point to note here was the masking that #105 achieved as well, something to definitely be aware of.

The next test was to look more at the flexibility of #105 - using it with a 3M polishing pad, and using a Zenith point application method, refining with light pressure and slow speeds. The aim here is to get the best finish from #105 in terms of clarity while still achieving a cut. The video shows the application method - note, at the end of the set, the pad is barely in contact with the finish in order to give as light pressure as possible with the weight of the rotary being supported with the second arm:

Posted Image

The results of this investigated under the Sun Gun:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Looks good to me so far, however a wipe down was then performed to really assess the finish - IPA has removed a filling effect from #105 above, so it was used again to check here. After wipe down:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Carefully examining the results, there was perhaps very slight evidence of faint rotary tails but it was hard to differentiate between this and glare on the camera lens... in the flesh, the finish was arguably hologram free, perhaps very faint tails, ultimately hard to call! However, bearing in mind that this is an aggressive cutting compound used here, the clarity of the finish achieved I regard as very impressive and is a true testament to the flexibility of this product. So far, #105 is impressing :)

The next stage of the test was to test the cut of #105 closer to its limit using an aggressive wool mop - a Makita cutting wool. The set, shown in the video below, works #105 at 2000rpm with firm pressure until the deep X was removed - no refinement attempted, and the product just worked until the deeper marks removed...

Posted Image

The results:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Deep mark removed, however, some lovely holograms left!:

Posted Image

Posted Image
"A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never pass into nothingness; .... "

#2 Dave KG

Dave KG

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 02:20 PM

This shows the cutting power of #105, and conveniently presents a nice challenge for the little brother in the range: Meguiars #205 Ultra Finishing Polish. The challenge here was to use the finishing polish, coupled with a finishing pad, to remove the holograms left. So - using a 3M finishing pad, and a long Zenith point set where the product was worked up to 1500 and 1800rpm. Firm pressure was used for the correction, and then the weight of the machine supported during the refinement stages to reduce the cut and burnish the finish:

Posted Image

The end results:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

IPA wipe down:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

#205 has long been one of my favourite finishing polishes for its ease of use, flexibility and finishing ability and on this test it performed well. It has also shown itself not to mask following bodyshop panel wipe wipe down as well, which gives me confidence in its use, and a good quality sharp finish is achieved from it.

Overall, an impressive performance from the #105 and #205 twins showing their cutting and finishing ability... more tests will follow showin how far #205 can be made to cut, but not for this test today :)


GTechniq P1 and P2

The gauntlet well and truly laid down by the Meguiars products. The GTechniq products get an equivalently marred door with the same X as a deep mark, keyed in using my Volvo car keys :D:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

As above, the first test involved the use of a cutting pad (Hexlogic yellow, same as above for consistency) to remove as many of the defects as possible. P1 is water based, and the set length can be prolonged using a light spritz of water as you polish. Unfortunately, I got the pad a touch wet at the start which left a bit of splatter so, in common with using G3, a damp pad rather than a wet pad is definitely recommended. However, the product was very comfortable and smooth to polish with... Gtechniq recommend slower polishing speeds and for this reason I used a maximum of 1200rpm working speed and used moderate pressure throughout. Video of the set, Gordon spraying the water when he saw the product drying:

Posted Image

The results of the set, under the Sun Gun:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Impressive correction, comparable to #105 above but with slower working speeds, and looking at the deeper mark, the correction from the P1 was arguably a little better:

Posted Image

Posted Image

In common with #105 above, the set was repeated, and the results assessed again for see if the correction has increased. Under the Sun Gun:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Again, a significant reduction in the defects, and the deeper mark is also notably reduced. The results are taken after an IPA wipedown, my apollogies I forgot to take pictures of the finish before the wipedown!

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

The correction so far has been impressive, but what has impressed me more so far has been the finish - despite using a cutting pad and making no effort to refine the product has left a finish which is very close to hologram free, with only light tails. Certainly less than Meguiars #105 above. So far, very impressed with P1!
"A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never pass into nothingness; .... "

#3 Dave KG

Dave KG

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 02:21 PM

However, to investigate the flexibility of P1, a 3M polishing pad was now used and a longer set where effort was made to refine was made to see what quality of finish could be achieved using the P1. Again, speeds kept below 1200rpm:

Posted Image

The end results, before the IPA wipe down, are looking very promising:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

And after the IPA wipe down:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Arguably hologram free, and for a product with the ability to cut severe defects out, the finish was again impressive. Alongside #105, it was nigh on impossible to tell the finishes apart in terms of clarity as both were showing a great amount of flexibility to be able to cut and refine finishes to a very good degree. So far, I was erring towards P1 over #105 as my choice as the slower speeds made for cooler running and the cut seemed a little better on foam with less severe holograms from the cutting pad. However, it was relying on the water spritzes for the set length which is a disadvantage over #105. Very close call so far.

But the test is not over, as the wool mop still needs to be brought out and the correction closer to the limit tested, using the set in the video and cutting until the X is fully removed, speeds up to 1200rpm:

Posted Image

End results of the correction:

Posted Image

Posted Image

As you'd expect, some nice holograms produced though again, not as severe as the ones produced by #105:

Posted Image

Posted Image

P1 showing impressive cutting ability here, and it has now set up the test for the finishing polish in the range: P2. Now, this is where things got interesting, as we initially went for a set with P2 similar to #205. That is, we used no additionally water, and prolonged the set length, reducing the pressure at the end of the set, as shown:

Posted Image

This was a mistake it would seem, as the product became a bit sticky during the polishing and did not feel as comfortable as P1 was feeling, and certainly nowhere near as smooth to use as #205. The results were also not impressive, with light holograms left:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

After IPA:

Posted Image

Clearly, this was down to my choice of polishing set and not the product, so we tried a different method, using water spritzes as shown:

Posted Image

This seemed to much better achieve the results from the polish, as shown:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

After an IPA wipedown:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Overall, the finish seems to be closely equivalent to that achieved by #205 in that it seems to be hologram free and a nice sharp finish. P2 looks to be able to compete finish with with the likes of #205 and PO85RD/E from Menzerna, although getting there with the water spritzes seemed a little more fussy than #205 and #205 felt a little smoother in use. For me, P1 was a hugely impressive product which I will definitely be ensuring I have in my armoury at all times. P2 was also very good, but perhaps the reason I am not raving about it quite so much is that it isn't as "revolutionary" as P1 - P1 seems to shift boundaries a little with its combined but and finishing ability whereas P2 just seems to match its competition. Its a good product, but for me, #205 is marginally more pleasant to use and arguably delivers a slightly sharper finish in my eyes thought with no glossmeter it is not possible to say for sure whether its just my eyes or an actual difference in the finish.



Overall

Both of these product ranges are very impressive and both would sit very well in anyone's machine polishing armoury... The most impressive product of the day for me was P1 with its combined cutting and refining power - many will want to refine P1 for certainty in the finish, I know I would because I am fussy, but for a product with the cut it has it finished impressively and for me pushes the boundary just a little further than #105 does. #105 is impressive too in my eyes, a product which I very much like, but in my humble opinion, P1 has stolen its crown. Just! However, #205 keeps its crown in my eyes - perhaps because P2 didn't make me sit up and take notice in quite the same way as P1 did. But for me, #205 (and 85RD) remains my favourite finishing polish when all things are considered.

The ultimate combination now: P1 and #205. Sorted!
"A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never pass into nothingness; .... "

#4 RaskyR1

RaskyR1

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 3,208 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 03:18 PM

Excellent write up Dave! I've had P1 and P2 for some time now but really haven't given them a good run yet. I had the P2 work really well on one car but it dried up on another like you experienced. Guess I'll have to dust them off and give them another try. ;)

#5 Accumulator

Accumulator

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 36,140 posts

Posted 23 June 2011 - 08:18 AM

Dave KG- Good comparison, thanks for posting it.

And that's a good point about different lighting being better/worse for showing different defects.
The most interesting man in all of Autopia Land. (<--I didn't enter that!)

#6 sal329

sal329

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,262 posts

Posted 23 June 2011 - 09:29 AM

Great write up I have been wanting to try P1
www.diamondautodetails.com

#7 JuneBug

JuneBug

    Super Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 3,691 posts

Posted 27 June 2011 - 05:01 PM

Couple things, 1st - thanks for posting! 2nd - you should try UNO v3, and lastly - I'd hit a bad scratch with 1500 grit first, then polish.
All I have in this world is my balls and my word, and I don't break them for no one.

Tony Montana

#8 SpoolinNoMore

SpoolinNoMore

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 612 posts

Posted 27 June 2011 - 05:23 PM

Couple things, 1st - thanks for posting! 2nd - you should try UNO v3, and lastly - I'd hit a bad scratch with 1500 grit first, then polish.


I'd be interested in a UNO v3 and M105/M205 competition. I plan on ordering some UNO to test the waters with a single polish to do multiple levels of correction and polishing.

#9 Legacy99

Legacy99

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 2,877 posts

Posted 27 June 2011 - 05:35 PM

Awesome write up, thanks for posting.

#10 Legacy99

Legacy99

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 2,877 posts

Posted 27 June 2011 - 05:40 PM

I believe the point of not sanding the scratch was to see what product did a better job removing the scratch with a wool pad. I consider Dave a master detailer and would know that sanding would have been easier.

Couple things, 1st - thanks for posting! 2nd - you should try UNO v3, and lastly - I'd hit a bad scratch with 1500 grit first, then polish.



#11 JuneBug

JuneBug

    Super Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 3,691 posts

Posted 28 June 2011 - 07:45 AM

I did a M105/300 vs UNO v3 and the UNO was better (IMHO) it worked longer, and finished a bit more glossy. But, both products are very good. My thing is you can find M105 and UNO easily - and price/shipping is good. While P1 may be a fine product, it's not as readily available here yet.

My comment about the sanding was not a dig at Dave, it was just a tip for anyone looking to correct paint a bit faster.
All I have in this world is my balls and my word, and I don't break them for no one.

Tony Montana

#12 salty

salty

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 2,152 posts

Posted 28 June 2011 - 09:35 PM

Nice write up Dave.
Mark
deluxedetailing

#13 Dave KG

Dave KG

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 04 July 2011 - 03:47 PM

Yup, in the "real world", if there was a deeper scratch then some form of spot-correction technique would be applied - this could be wet sanding if this is the preferred route :) But as mentioned, for the test, I wanted an isolated deep mark that would challenge the compounds to see them at their correcting limits by various methods :)
"A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never pass into nothingness; .... "

#14 Dave KG

Dave KG

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 04 July 2011 - 03:50 PM

Re: UNO, MarkV is not a popular brand in the UK though it is available from one source that I know of, so will have a look for it. I really liked Mystique from MarkV, it being an earlier unigrit style polish that was using this technology before it became more fashionable with Meguiars and GTechniq (in the UK) using it.
"A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never pass into nothingness; .... "

#15 SVR

SVR

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 2,769 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 10:50 PM

I thoroughly enjoyed reading and watching your write up
Your technique is much different to mine. I move the machine much slower than that and work each section for much longer. 40 odd seconds with that weird wool pad (is that a massive pile height or is it just a really tall recessed pad to protect from the backing plate?) is very much body shop like. there is no way I'd use a wool for that short amount of time
wool marks need to be refined down by less and less pressure and reduced RPM's over time.
Its all just personal choice. Most of the time now I'm doing correction via random orbital with surbuf pads.

We at both shops in SA, switched from P1 to Xpert recently after three years with P1 due to the following problems we have with it

Doesn't work well with sticky paint
Rounding effect of the abrasives means its hopeless on some rock hard paints like Lamborghini Gallardo LP Spider and ceramic paints, unless orange peel removal technique is used
Cuts much faster than the others and can take paint off panel edges by hand and machine real quick on aftermarket custom paints
Does not like the Australian summer climate - humidity, super high heat etc even when inside air cond polishing bay indoors.
Does not finish down as fine grit wise as Xpert
Lubrication is inferior.
Too dusty

In the UK and Europe, yeah go your hardest with it, its a good product but not in Australia.

I may just follow on from where Dave KG has left off and do a few videos showing the XPERT single polish products.
Both products contain five high tech abrasives and utilise non diminishing and diminishing abrasive technology in the one bottle and is totally waterborne with no masking oils and a much finer finish than I have ever seen.
good for orange peel removal too.
Today's leading system. water based, burnproof, compoundless, correct, polish, finish at the same time. use in any order with any pads. no thickeners or solvents

#16 porta

porta

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,411 posts

Posted 06 July 2011 - 12:25 AM

Re: UNO, MarkV is not a popular brand in the UK though it is available from one source that I know of, so will have a look for it. I really liked Mystique from MarkV, it being an earlier unigrit style polish that was using this technology before it became more fashionable with Meguiars and GTechniq (in the UK) using it.


The UNO they are refering to is made by 3D products, the company who now own Autopia.org.

I realy like the UNO from Mark V - a great polish.

Oh, nice write up, Dave :goodjob

#17 Dave KG

Dave KG

    Registered User

  • Members
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 06 July 2011 - 12:40 AM

I thoroughly enjoyed reading and watching your write up
Your technique is much different to mine. I move the machine much slower than that and work each section for much longer. 40 odd seconds with that weird wool pad (is that a massive pile height or is it just a really tall recessed pad to protect from the backing plate?) is very much body shop like. there is no way I'd use a wool for that short amount of time
wool marks need to be refined down by less and less pressure and reduced RPM's over time.
Its all just personal choice. Most of the time now I'm doing correction via random orbital with surbuf pads.
.


The technique, as described in the thread, was to remove the deeper marks only - that is, carry out the correction and leave the refining the a dedicated finishing stage... when you have an aggressive cut, in my eyes there is little point in trying the refine when you are going to follow anyway as you are essentially wasting paint with the aggressive stage of the polishing process... additionally, to challenge the finishing polishes, you would want to leave marring for the test to demonstrate what the products are capable of - hence the shorter work times. However, a bit like wet sanding, I wouldn't recommend carrying out the correction for any longer than you need to remove the marks - the wool pad here is very aggressive and will leave its own marring while it is cutting hard with the compunds: remove the marks and the stop wasting paint at that, and go to your dedicated finishing stages would be my choice rather than wasting paint trying to refine down a stage you will be following anyway. Personal choice of course, I tend to err on the side of paint conservation :)
"A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never pass into nothingness; .... "

#18 ThrillHo

ThrillHo

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 06 July 2011 - 11:07 AM

Great write up. One thing I noticed was that it looks like the P1 dusts/splatters terribly, and that's saying something after knowing first hand how bad M105 tends can dust. In comparing the surrounding panels, the P1's area was much dirtier than the M105's. That probably matters less to you pros who detail in garages and shops that are supposed to get dirty, but as a hobbyist when I'm detailing in my garage between our 2rd car, and my motorcycle, some audio equipment, extra furniture etc.. I'm going to want something that isn't going to dust up as bad.

#19 JuneBug

JuneBug

    Super Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 3,691 posts

Posted 09 July 2011 - 06:31 PM

That's the cool thing about 3D's UNO v3, it doesn't dust - I know, I tried to make it!
All I have in this world is my balls and my word, and I don't break them for no one.

Tony Montana




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users