Anyone use Meg`s #3 or #9?

**KEVINS** · 10-16-2017, 06:19 PM

I`ve recently discovered how to finish polish the black paint on my Mustang using a final polishing coat of Meg`s 205 and absolutely love the results. But I also see they make a #9 which is finer than the 205 then a #3 which is finer than the #9.

I have both the #9 and #3 on order for testing to see if I can see a difference compared to a finished 205 black surface. I`ve searched here and on Google but I don`t see anyone using either of these. Anyone have experience with either of these two? I`m curious as to why I don`t see many reviews on these two products?

ks

**Mike lambert** · 10-16-2017, 06:54 PM

I believe they were meant more for the older paint systems. Since modern clear is a harder substance the more recent products were designed with abrasive technologies to work better. You should try Griot’s perfecting cream if you think 205 is good!

**KEVINS** · 10-16-2017, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by Mike lambert

I believe they were meant more for the older paint systems. Since modern clear is a harder substance the more recent products were designed with abrasive technologies to work better. You should try Griot’s perfecting cream if you think 205 is good!

Thanks Mike. Their descriptions were pretty vague so I wasn`t sure what they should be used for. I can`t imagine anything actually looking better than the 205 but I thought I`d give them a shot on my new hood I made.

Based on some reviews from here Chem Guys V38 was supposed to be a bit better than the 205 but I didn`t notice any difference at all between these two when polishing the car last year. I may have to try the Griots Perfecting Cream next spring.

ks

**The Guz** · 10-16-2017, 07:23 PM

#9 uses the Meguiar`s older technology in diminishing abrasives. Unlike M205 which uses their newer SMAT abrasives.

Here is a thread I found where Mike Stoops goes into detail between the two.

M09 Swirl Remover 2.0 vs M205 Finishing Polish

Originally Posted by Michael Stoops

M205 uses the latest technology in abrasives while M09 is a bit more "old school" in the way it does things. What this means is that, although both are quite similar in overall level of cut, M205 will cut faster and usually leave a better finish both in terms of total gloss and clarity. M205 is even proving itself to be quite capable of removing pretty severe defects when used in a very aggressive manner. While that is outside the design parameters of the product, it does go to show the versatility of this new breed of abrasives.
On a modern clear coat finish, if you`re chasing the best gloss and clarity you can get, do yourself a favor and use M205 with a foam finishing pad after completing your full correction. Make sure to keep the pad very clean (ie, clean it often) and don`t buff for long periods of time - M205 does its thing pretty quickly and there is no need to "break down the abrasives". On some paints you may find that M205 on a foam polishing pad gives all the correction you need for minor defects, while leaving a beautiful finish at the same time.

If I recall correctly #3 is similar to #7 in being non abrasive.

**KEVINS** · 10-16-2017, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by The Guz

#9 uses the Meguiar`s older technology in diminishing abrasives. Unlike M205 which uses their newer SMAT abrasives.

Here is a thread I found where Mike Stoops goes into detail between the two.

M09 Swirl Remover 2.0 vs M205 Finishing Polish

If I recall correctly #3 is similar to #7 in being non abrasive.

Hmm.. I should probably cancel my order of these two Meg products b/c I don`t see where they are the next step better than the 205. Would you gents agree?

KS

**KEVINS** · 10-16-2017, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by Mike lambert

I believe they were meant more for the older paint systems. Since modern clear is a harder substance the more recent products were designed with abrasive technologies to work better. You should try Griot’s perfecting cream if you think 205 is good!

I ordered it. Should I use the Griot’s perfecting cream after I use the 205?

ks

**The Guz** · 10-16-2017, 08:44 PM

Originally Posted by KEVINS

Hmm.. I should probably cancel my order of these two Meg products b/c I don`t see where they are the next step better than the 205. Would you gents agree?

KS

If you have no need for them then I would cancel the order.

Originally Posted by KEVINS

I ordered it. Should I use the Griot’s perfecting cream after I use the 205?

ks

Use one or the other. They are both similar in what they are intended to do which is a finishing polish.

**KEVINS** · 10-16-2017, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by The Guz

If you have no need for them then I would cancel the order.

Use one or the other. They are both similar in what they are intended to do which is a finishing polish.

Will do.. Thanks for the quick reply..

ks

**Billy Jack** · 10-17-2017, 08:48 AM

I have all three on my shelves, M02, M09 and M03, but don`t use them much anymore. In the 80`s, M02 and M09 were good for the then-new clearcoat paints, designed to be used with a rotary polisher. M03 is kinda similar to the legendary M07, designed for single-stage paints with a high oil content, but machine-friendly, and just a slight bit of cut. I still use it on occasion as a fine polish on the old lacquer of my `87 El Camino and it excels in that role. As others have said, on a newer BC/CC paints, M205 with a few different pads more than covers the roles of all three. And there are numerous fine polishes and polishing waxes available here if you care to go finer than 205. If you`re really curious and want to try some of the old-school "M`s", I`ll send you sample bottles of all three for the cost of postage.

Bill

**KEVINS** · 10-17-2017, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by Billy Jack

I have all three on my shelves, M02, M09 and M03, but don`t use them much anymore. In the 80`s, M02 and M09 were good for the then-new clearcoat paints, designed to be used with a rotary polisher. M03 is kinda similar to the legendary M07, designed for single-stage paints with a high oil content, but machine-friendly, and just a slight bit of cut. I still use it on occasion as a fine polish on the old lacquer of my `87 El Camino and it excels in that role. As others have said, on a newer BC/CC paints, M205 with a few different pads more than covers the roles of all three. And there are numerous fine polishes and polishing waxes available here if you care to go finer than 205. If you`re really curious and want to try some of the old-school "M`s", I`ll send you sample bottles of all three for the cost of postage.

Bill

Thanks Bill for verification. I canceled the order for the #9 but the #3 along with my MF towels were already shipped. The Megs #3 was only $10 so not a big loss there.
I do have riots Garage BOSS Perfecting Cream coming so I can compare that to the 205 but my guess is that there`s not much more to do above the Megs 205.

I built two molds and molded my own fiberglass hood and will be polishing the hood this weekend so I thought I would try to go the extra mile and make it the best I can. Here`s a few pics right after painting it.

ks

Anyone use Meg`s #3 or #9?-img_9027.jpg

Anyone use Meg`s #3 or #9?-img_90017378-original.jpg

**Dan** · 10-17-2017, 09:07 AM

Skip both, find yourself a nice modern finishing polish. I don`t remember much about #3, but #9 was lies in a bottle. It wasn`t fun to use like 205, and it didn`t fill worth a crap. I personally love P085RD, the old version, yes it has oils but you can remove those afterwards.

**Billy Jack** · 10-17-2017, 10:11 AM

Nice work, Kevin!
BTW, here`s a relevant thread from the Meguiar`s forum that you may want to read:What Next after polishing with M205

Bill

**KEVINS** · 10-17-2017, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by Billy Jack

Nice work, Kevin!
BTW, here`s a relevant thread from the Meguiar`s forum that you may want to read:What Next after polishing with M205

Bill

Excellent! I`ll take a peak when I have some time.

ks

**Accumulator** · 10-17-2017, 01:08 PM

I`ve used those since the `70s. Well, at least M03, back then the M09 wasn`t the "v2.0" stuff that they`ve been selling for a while now but IME the diffs are minimal.

The M03 has always been functionally nonabrasive on auto paint for me, even on very soft single stage black lacquer. It was once described to me as being basically an oilier version of M07. IMO it`s more user-friendly than M07 and yeah you can use it by hand. But it was *always* an utter waste of time on b/c paint, period.

The M09 is another relative of M07, and the last I heard it contains the same TSO. While it technically contains abrasives, it was always functionally nonabrasive unless used via very aggressive methods (e.g., rotary, and/or mixed with some cornstarch). It does a bit of filling and, presumably because of those "abrasives", it`s much more user-friendly than M07, at least IMO. It (or rather the older version) was one of my early faves on ss black lacquer as it filled better than my *true* fave (M05). Topped with M16, it wasn`t bad for what it was back then.

Eh, I`ve only used them once this century (that was on old, and trashed, ss lacquer) even though I`ve recommended them to others for that kind of thing. I have plenty on-hand, keep thinking I`ll use one of `em on the Jag, but I never do.

I always found M02 way too harsh for early clearcoats myself, quit using it in the `80s. I used M80 for quite a while, mainly on fresh repaints, but not since better-finishing products came out. I`d be astounded if any of those products came out on top of a side-by-side with more modern stuff; IME they don`t even finish out as nicely as M205 (and regulars here know what I think of that one..).