I have questions about product usage on Single Stage.

[Stickman81]

Greetings,

I hope to be working on a detail in a couple of weeks that has a Single Stage finish.

It is a VW GTI in red with lots of swirls. The condition of the car otherwise is very good especially for being near the 200,000 mile mark. The owner is a car nut and does a great job taking care of his cars otherwise. Actually, I hope to be doing two of his cars.



I have done some research here and have found some good information. I do have a couple of questions and looking for confirmation on the polish aspect of the tenative job.



I have read lots of great information and standing out, which I took notes on was some information from "Scottwax", "Sweeting The Details" and "Accumulator".



I am thinking that I will approach the car with the Meguiars product line coupled with the Propel pads. (I already have Propel, but will have to purchase the Megs)



Some of the possible Megs combinations I read were -

1) #80 then #7, then topped with Natty`s Blue.

2) #82 then #9, then an LSP of choice. (EX)

3) #80 then #7, then topped with Vanilla Moose or Carnauba Moose.

4) Possible mix of #80 and #7 to reduce the aggresiveness.

#83 - Megs dual action cleaner polish.

#82 - Megs body shop professional swirl free polish.

#80 - Megs speed glaze.

#9 - Megs swirl remover 2.0.

#7 - Megs car show glaze.

I am a beginner and still trying to learn about the multitude of products, let alone "glazes".

It is my understanding that a glaze merely hides defects. If this is the case, why apply a glaze? Does it not "wash" off after a few wash cycles? I`m I thinking incorrectly?



For the single stage, I was thinking about the following -

*) #83 then #9, then topped with EX?



Any help with the "glaze" questions and thoughts about the above examples of attack would be greatly appreciated.



Thanks in advance,

Jim

[Accumulator]

Sounds like you`ve already received my $0.02, but I`ll add more anyhow:



Glazes do just hide and impart some gloss via oils. But *some* single stages *unlike b/c paints* actually absorb some of these oils and benefit from it (it retards the ongoing oxidation that plagues such paints). I`m a big fan of glaze/wax on single stage, in part for this reason and also because I like the look better than that of most synthetics.



Glazes wash away but not if covered with a wax. Meg`s #26 might be good for this one, or there`s always the very durable Collinite (not to criticize the waxes you mentioned, I`ve just never tried them).



If you use #83, plan on a follow up with a milder product like #80. After #80 you *might* see a benefit from using a milder product like #82 or the even milder #9. Maybe, maybe not.



I don`t think there`s a point to using #82 and then #9, pick one or the other (I`d pick #9, especially for ss).



I wouldn`t add #7 to a product to make it milder, I`d use another, milder product in the first place. #7 would just add more lubrication, it wouldn`t change the abrasives involved and those are the determining factor.



Don`t use VM after the Meg`s products; the VM would clean away the oils/etc. that the Meg`s stuff leaves behind (not what you want with ss paint).



That 200K mile GTI would be a true pleasure to detail! I`d try #80 (#83 if needed, followed by #80 or #9) and expect a nearly perfect finish. Then #9 if needed (doubtful). I`d follow with a Meg`s glaze (they call them "pure polishes") like #3/#5/#7/#81. The #7 would look best but is the trickiest to use. The #5 looks the "worst" (bad way to express it ) but is the easiest. The #3/#81 are in-between and both work fine by hand or PC. Then I`d top with wax.



Keep all this stuff off the black trim!

[Stickman81]

Thank you very much Accumulator for the excellent detailed reply.

All these Megs numbers are confusing and I am learning that glaze is not really a bad thing.



If I understand correctly, the minimum that you are suggesting above is:

1) #80.

2) #3, or #5, or #7, or #81.

3) LSP (being wax like Collinite or #26).



I`ve used the Collinite before and have access to some. I think I would chose that for an LSP.



Again, thank you for your time,

Jim

[Accumulator]

Yeah, all the products *are* confusing, especially IMO when it comes to Meg`s stuff, where they use words in, uhm, "inventive" ways Actually, that`s *why* I use the numbers when referring to their stuff, I can`t bring myself to use product names that I believe to be misleading.



Yeah, those three steps should be a good minimalist approach. You might find you need something more/less aggressive than the #80 but it`s a great starting point. IMO most of the time it`ll satisfy most people (well, except for the sort of people you find here ).



You might even do fine skipping the #3/#5/#7/#81 step as the #80 leaves pretty much behind all by itself (oils, etc.).

[Stickman81]

Thank you Accumulator for coming to the rescue.

I`ll let everyone know how it goes.

:woot: