Diminishing abrasives better for the non experienced?

thanks everyone for the suggestions.

my problem was finding something that would keep the tall bottles from tipping over, esp. if i put them in the trunk...

but the milk crate idea ii believe is my winner.

cheap and solves most of my problems.

oh, and hilarious photos. thanks!

--thomas
 
I have most of the stuff in a laundry basket. When I do a car I have a little carrying thing for bathroom cleaners or something that I got at Target. I just load it up with what I need for the car. Milk crates may be my next thing though. I need to organize it all a little better.
 
I was thinking about it, with non-diminishing abrasives(M105) you don't have to "know" when they've fully broken down, it's the same cut throughout. On the flip side, if you really don't know when to stop, you could remove to much paint, increase marring etc...With diminishing abrasives, they're constantly breaking down smaller and smaller, to eventually nothing? So, you leave it up to the polish for how much paint will be removed, not necessarily the user overdoing it. I hope I haven't lost you beyond pluto? LOL On the other hand, I could be WAY off base. Just trying to use a little logic. :cornut:
 
I often see people concerned about non-diminishing abrasives. Although this sounds like a huge problem, it is hardly an issue. The fact is that the abrasives are very small. It's not like we're buffing with sand here.

Yes, there are going to be risks with using a non-diminishing product. But, there are risks with using a diminishing abrasive product, too. For example, you can polish way too long with M105 and take off an excessive amount of paint. Can you do this with M85, a diminishing abrasive product? Sure. The point being that you can have problems with any polish that contains an abrasive.

With non-diminishing abrasives, you can stop at any point in the buffing cycle. With a diminishing abrasive product, you can stop too early in the cycle and the paint will have a bit of marring because the abrasives have not properly broken down. Also, diminishing abrasives break down randomly. This means that you could be close to the end of polishing, yet some abrasive particles may not be at the same stage. Diminishing abrasive products are fine, and I still use a few, but non-diminishing abrasive products tend to produce more consistent results.

I have seen a few cases where some users have struck through by using UC by hand. However, one must take these cases with a grain of salt. It is obvious that the user made repeated passes of the same area with a lot of pressure. The user was determined to remove the scratch and could have struck through with just about any product.
 
Thanks!!! You really clarified my questions. I like the idea behind non diminishing abrasives.
 
07 z-oh-6 said:
I was thinking about it, with non-diminishing abrasives(M105) you don't have to "know" when they've fully broken down, it's the same cut throughout. On the flip side, if you really don't know when to stop, you could remove to much paint, increase marring etc...With diminishing abrasives, they're constantly breaking down smaller and smaller, to eventually nothing? So, you leave it up to the polish for how much paint will be removed, not necessarily the user overdoing it. I hope I haven't lost you beyond pluto? LOL On the other hand, I could be WAY off base. Just trying to use a little logic. :cornut:
Click to expand...

I have seen this posted before and I think it is a very valid concern, however I think that it really is over blown.

For example I have seen posts where Menzerna SIP was recommended over M105 because it has a non-diminishing abrasive so it is 'safer'. The reason that SIP could be safer is because it is a medium step polish and not a compound (like M105).

The truth about diminishing abrasives is that they only break down so far. Diminishing oxide abrasives are formed by clustering a bunch of fine abrasives together. These fine abrasives are referred to as the 'crystal' or the 'primary crystal'. For all intensive purposes (as it relates to polishing paint with a pad) this is primary crystal is the finest the polish will become.

As the polish breaks down, the abrasives fracture apart, and while they become finer, their numbers multiply. So SIP still is cutting paint several minutes in (provided the fine abrasives have not become loaded with paint, dusted away, etc.)

So when somebody states that SIP is safer because the abrasive used breaks down and creates a safety barrier since it no longer cuts, they are extremely misinformed about how abrasives actually work.

Non-diminishing abrasives, from my simplistic understanding, use the primary crystal only. They are not clustered together. The abrasives in M105 are extremely fine to begin with (they are already broken down for easy understanding).

One major benefit of non-diminishing abrasives is that they are very precise. You can stop at anytime the defects have been removed vs. continuing polishing to break down the abrasives.

For a better apple to apple comparison, compare 3M Extra Cut to Meguiar's M105. Both will remove near the same amount of paint, but Meguiar's will leave a better finish, requiring less overall paint removal to refine the surface. 3M Extra Cut also requires that it is broken down for the best finish, which may necessitate removing more paint then necessary.

Overall I really don't think either is more dangerous or better suited for the beginner, but with a little education, I think the new non-diminishing abrasives give the user a more precise and potentially safer polishing experience.

.
 
Excellent post with great information Todd, thank you!

I was a little concerned with M105 the first time I used it, due to the "non-diminishing" abrasives. The learning curve wasn't as steep as I thought it would be with the product and the results it gives are, at least in my opinion, unmatched.
 
I do not think that one is safer than the other for newbie.....

In fact, I think a newbie will have a much easier time with the non diminishing SMAT abrasives than I did at first because I had to retrain myself

When I 1st used non diminishing abrasives my mind was telling me "you are not done, you need to break it down", then I had to remind myself to trust the product as prescribed.. A newbie won't have to go through this retraining of the mind.

So no, in my opinion one is not safer than the other for a newbie
 
I found M105/M205 more predictable than other polishes on my DA (UDM). It seemed to work fast and finished quick. There was no question when to stop.

Now, once I used my Flex, even the diminishing abrasives worked more predictability.

My view is M105/M205 is less sensitive to pressure/pad selection than diminishing polishes so they are maybe more newbie friendly. I was just able to dial in the process faster. I have read about caking, etc. with M105 but never saw it except i switched to flat pads so M105 was less sensitive to how long you worked the polish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top