First hand BOSS G21 experience

[52split]

Well to quote those others who kept harping on a warranty...the GG seems the better fit. I think it`s a little cheaper and the warranty is way better than the Rupes. A no brainier I suppose.

[Lonnie]

Waiting for the patent-infringement lawsuits to come from Rupes.

Seems to me we had this "discussion" before about copy-cat/knock-offs/reversed engineered polishing machines before. Looking at the Detailed Image`s Ask-a-Pro blog about Griot`s Garage`s G21 & G15 exploded view image of the components, from an engineering and appearance stand-point, it`s not a cheap imitation. It looks well-build and assembled. The machined mechanical drive pieces are just that: machined and not die-cast. The fact that its built in China to GG`s specs is just a cost-related business decision, like so many other USA companies have done. It looks designed with the professional detailer in mind. Just not sure how close in design-intent (lawyer- speak terms about similar engineering) the orbital-producing mechanism is to the Rupes, hence my first comment about patent infringements.

That said, after reading the above mentioned blog of the G15/G21, I will have to "change" my opinion about which large-throw DA I might contemplate purchasing and using. I am not sure that Rupes currently is producing enough LHR15ES/LHR21ES machines to meet current demand, either. Seems like many resellers/dealers are out-of-stock or coming soon when I look at availability. Maybe this is GG`s way to fill that void and capture some market share and sell some of the BOSS polishes as well. (By the way, the BOSS moniker initials for GG`s "Best of Show System" is an absolutely brilliant marketing idea of there existing detailing product lines.) Then again, I`m not a marketing and customer-demand forecasting guru, either.

[Setec Astronomy]

Just not sure how close in design-intent (lawyer- speak terms about similar engineering) the orbital-producing mechanism is to the Rupes, hence my first comment about patent infringements.

That`s presuming there are patents and they aren`t expired. I just looked at the manual and brochure and didn`t see any patent numbers listed; that doesn`t mean there aren`t any though.

[RaskyR1]

I`m sure Griot`s did their homework.

[Lonnie]

Having worked in the engineering, there are many ideas and designs that have "patent applied for" designations that means the patent has been filed with the US Department of Commerce Patient Office, BUT not granted approval, and hence, a patent number. It is still a legal entity which allows someone to sell the design as is, BUT if it`s not approved for whatever reason, it`s free game for anyone to copy and use the design. You are trying to protect your design and maximize investment and profit, which might include a business decision to start selling the item`s design before patent approval, which can sometimes be long-drawn out affair, especially if competitors or other interest try to tie it up in legal proceedings. The risk or caveat to selling something with "patent applied for" is the design/idea becomes public record and with the drawings and notation needed to explain the design and its intent, it`s now easier for someone to duplicate/copy/reverse engineer/modify the design for your own intent. This is one reason Coke-Cola never patented its syrup formula: it would have to divulge the contents,make-up, and processing of its very unique formula, so hence, it`s just kept secret and secure (supposedly). Many have tried to duplicate it; just look at all the "generic" cola sodas sold through the USA. (Boy, I DO sound like a lawyer!! Go back to the detailing discussion about the usefulness of the G15/G21 now)

[Setec Astronomy]

Having worked in the engineering, there are many ideas and designs that have "patent applied for"...

I don`t know where you`re going with this...there are" many ideas and designs" that aren`t patentable, or just aren`t new or unique. You`re implying the the Rupes machines have patents, and that those patents are germane to someone else making a similar machine, and that there aren`t other approaches that don`t infringe.

Do we even know if there are patents that apply to the Rupes long-throw machines? Even if there are, they could be expired, or they could be European patents. Even if there are applicable patents, as Rasky noted, I`m sure Griot`s did their due-diligence to not infringe.

[RaskyR1]

No Rupes patents found. Griot`s has trademark on the "THE BOSS" and Patent Pending on their tool design.

[Setec Astronomy]

No Rupes patents found. Griot`s has trademark on the "THE BOSS" and Patent Pending on their tool design.

Well, golleeee...does that make Griot`s the innovator here? Or just the ones with better lawyers?

[RaskyR1]

Well, golleeee...does that make Griot`s the innovator here? Or just the ones with better lawyers?

Ha! Not sure what feature of the tool it applies too. My guess would be the shape of the tool head and pistol style handle, but who knows. They both look like rotary tools to me.

[Lonnie]

Patent issues aside, hobbyist and professional detailers now have two manufacturers of long-throw DA machines to choose from. This particular thread is about Griot`s new BOSS G21 and its merits and comparison to the competition, the Rupes Big Foot.

I would like to say "thank you" to those of you who are professional detailers or hobbyists who know far more than I ever will about these two machines from your daily or frequent use and experience with them and are willing to post your candid and unbiased judgments/assessments/remarks about them. It`s the main reason I am a member of the forum and fellow Autopian whose decisions on buying and using detailing products and tools for my personal use are based on the comments I read (and discuss) here.