Does Meg's 105 Finish Buffer Trail Free with Foamed Wool??

[maesal]

I dry sanded the hood of my car, resprayed 1 month ago with CeramiClear, with 1500 grit and PC. After that, I removed the sanding marks with 105 and Menzerna wool (my preferred), in some areas it needed 2 passes. And then I finished with Megs 9006 and 85RD and the finish was superb and the process removed around the 95 % of the orange peel. The most important thing about 105 is that you could remove the swirls, rids, sanding marks, etc... quite fast and the finish will be good enough to just do a finishing stage.

 

[SuperBee364]

Just to clarify... when I stated I had worked 105 down woth no buffer trails I did not mean I was LSP ready.... IMO as weith any compound I have used 105 needs to be finished off to really bring the paint to it's potetntial... I would prefer to use two steps after 105 (mild polishing pad followed by a finishing pad) but sometimes that is not what the customer is willing to pay for in which case I go straight to finishing

Same here. If yu're lucky (and good) enough to have 105 finish without grams and trails *does not* mean that it's LSP ready by any means.

 

[David Fermani]

We keep forgetting this M105 is a compound we cant really expect it to finish down LSP ready.

Here's the main premise underlying this post: 105 seems to be a great compound and I really like the way it leaves a gloss compared to most compounds that leave a dull finish. I feel very strongly that after using 105 with ANY kind of wool pad, on dark colored finishes, it's virtually impossible to have a permanant swill free finish with just going right to Ultrafina. Ultrafina was created to be used after a medium polish on dark colored vehicles. It really doesn't have the capability to remove these types of swirls:

I tried using 106 with a white and an orange LC pad and after a Laquer Thinner wipe down, there were still traces of buffer swirls. I needed to step up to SIP to cut these out. There was no way UF would have been able to fill this huge void in the gloss that SIP took care of. In addition, I don't feel UF really compares to SIP/106ff in the way it refines the finish and adds depth and gloss. I like using it after the gloss has been burnished and to insure that very minor traces are worked out.



Can anyone relate?

 

[imported_Picus]

I am just about to try 105 and will let you guys know what I come up with. I do not think the holograms above (posted by David) could be corrected with UF. MAYBE with 106ff, but I doubt it. It looks like SIP would be needed in between.

 

[Todd@RUPES]

David of curiousity, before you did the lacquer thinner wipe down, how did the paint look? Did you notice any defect return?



For a compound, I think the finish looks amazing in your pictures (though maybe could have been slightly better if the product was worked slightly shorter IME). On some paints it might be possible to go from PWF/105 straight to Ultrafina or an equivalent, but I say that it would be on that very rare paint you come across every great once in a while that just seems to go perfectly. I don't think its worth chancing it though, unless you take all the steps necessary to ensure the defects have actually been removed (as you did by wiping it with lacquer thinner).



C5/C6 Corvette paint generally is pretty hard, which of course cuts down on the abililty of a finishing polish (such as UF-SE) to remove any type of defect and certaintly should not be trusted to do some, IMO.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

Here's the main premise underlying this post: 105 seems to be a great compound and I really like the way it leaves a gloss compared to most compounds that leave a dull finish. I feel very strongly that after using 105 with ANY kind of wool pad, on dark colored finishes, it's virtually impossible to have a permanant swill free finish with just going right to Ultrafina. Ultrafina was created to be used after a medium polish on dark colored vehicles. It really doesn't have the capability to remove these types of swirls:

I tried using 106 with a white and an orange LC pad and after a Laquer Thinner wipe down, there were still traces of buffer swirls. I needed to step up to SIP to cut these out. There was no way UF would have been able to fill this huge void in the gloss that SIP took care of. In addition, I don't feel UF really compares to SIP/106ff in the way it refines the finish and adds depth and gloss. I like using it after the gloss has been burnished and to insure that very minor traces are worked out.



Can anyone relate?

I can definitely relate.



I detailed my sister in laws GMC Denali this last weekend, which has a dark metallic green paint with lots of swirls.



It really kicked my a$$! This was the most difficult detailing job I have ever tackled in terms of removing swirls. The clear coat was hard as a diamond. :hairpull



I didn't even think I would need to use the M105, I thought SIP with a PFW pad would be sufficient. Not even close! Out came the M105, and even then it was a struggle!



In any event, my experience confirms exactly what you are saying.



The M105 did leave some minor holograms/swirls. I attempted to go straight to 106FF to remove them and be LSP ready. Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way.



Instead, I had to go over the entire vehicle (those Denali's aren't exactly small either!) again with SIP and the PFW. That did the job. But then I had to follow that up with the 106FF to truly get the paint LSP ready.



So I wound up doing three full polishing steps 1) Compound with 105 2) Medium polish with SIP 3) fine polish with 106ff.



18 1/2 hours later, it looked pretty good. I've never spent that long detailing a vehicle before. Like I said, the Denali really kicked my a$$!



I have not tried Ultrafina.

 

[David Fermani]

Todd - After buffing the trunk and both 1/4's with 106, I pulled it outside and saw a few isolated traces of swirls so I decided to wipe these panels down with thinner. Suddenly, I witnessed more scattered trails that were obviously reappearing. I tried determining if these were from the orange pad I used with the 106 or the 106 not completely removing the marring created by the 105? After trying different pad/polish combos, I realized that SIP with white worked best. I'm only assuming that this was caused by the 106 not being strong enough of a polish (even used with an orange pad) and SIP was the answer to remove the 105 marring. Again, only assuming for this application.



You're right about the finish after 105. I've never seen a product remove such deep defects (easily) and leave the finish super glossy. I love it! I pretty much did 2 passes of 105 on this car. I 1st worked the product in spots a little longer on the 1st pass and then followed over it (w/more product) with short 10-15 second blasts to refine things a little and clear out the defects 1 final time.



You're also right about this finish being pretty hard. I've heard that C6 clear marrs pretty easy with wool pads.

 

[joyriiide1113]

I am just about to try 105 and will let you guys know what I come up with. I do not think the holograms above (posted by David) could be corrected with UF. MAYBE with 106ff, but I doubt it. It looks like SIP would be needed in between.

Nope, he tried 106ff via orange pad as the median between Ultrafina and a Blue pad and nothing. It did not have enough bite to correct it.



Although I feel the fact that its corvette paint which is notoriously hard had a major role in it.

 

[Todd@RUPES]

Todd - After buffing the trunk and both 1/4's with 106, I pulled it outside and saw a few isolated traces of swirls so I decided to wipe these panels down with thinner. Suddenly, I witnessed more scattered trails that were obviously reappearing. I tried determining if these were from the orange pad I used with the 106 or the 106 not completely removing the marring created by the 105? After trying different pad/polish combos, I realized that SIP with white worked best. I'm only assuming that this was caused by the 106 not being strong enough of a polish (even used with an orange pad) and SIP was the answer to remove the 105 marring. Again, only assuming for this application.



You're right about the finish after 105. I've never seen a product remove such deep defects (easily) and leave the finish super glossy. I love it! I pretty much did 2 passes of 105 on this car. I 1st worked the product in spots a little longer on the 1st pass and then followed over it (w/more product) with short 10-15 second blasts to refine things a little and clear out the defects 1 final time.



You're also right about this finish being pretty hard. I've heard that C6 clear marrs pretty easy with wool pads.

SIP White (or Green German) is one of my favorite if not my favorite middle step. 106 can and will mask defects, as I am going to add you to my list of top detailers who have witnessed such effects in person. Unfortunately when I brought this to Jeff Silver's attention on autogeek and 6speedonline his response was nothing more than 106 cannot fill so there is no problem. On 6speed he went as far as to call me a liar, even though I offered to share with him the names of over 40 people who have told they have the same thing.



Honestly I would buy my Menzerna (favorite polish line) straight from Germany rather then put any money in his pocket if I knew how. To insult all the top pro's who have witnessed this and then call us liars really doesn't sit well with me.



I agree that 106FF/FA is not strong enough (on the hard Corvette paint) to remove even the light marring from M105. However it will fill it in nicely, so it was a great pick up, IMO.



Thanks for the great info David, I think this test and your applied knowledge shows very clearly why you are such a great detailer.

 

[baseballlover1]

SIP White (or Green German) is one of my favorite if not my favorite middle step. 106 can and will mask defects, as I am going to add you to my list of top detailers who have witnessed such effects in person. Unfortunately when I brought this to Jeff Silver's attention on autogeek and 6speedonline his response was nothing more than 106 cannot fill so there is no problem. On 6speed he went as far as to call me a liar, even though I offered to share with him the names of over 40 people who have told they have the same thing.



Honestly I would buy my Menzerna (favorite polish line) straight from Germany rather then put any money in his pocket if I knew how. To insult all the top pro's who have witnessed this and then call us liars really doesn't sit well with me.



I agree that 106FF/FA is not strong enough (on the hard Corvette paint) to remove even the light marring from M105. However it will fill it in nicely, so it was a great pick up, IMO.



Thanks for the great info David, I think this test and your applied knowledge shows very clearly why you are such a great detailer.

I 100% agree on the filling abilities. I feel like a fraud when i use it. Todd, ile bet there is a way to order the menz straight from germany. Ile do a little research when i finish this jag.



,Daniel

 

[imported_Denzil]

Todd, can you confirm if the entire Menzerna line has filling abilities or is it just 106? I can't remember from the last time using SIP if it actually masked some defects or not when I did Prep-All wipe downs.

 

[joyriiide1113]

Todd, can you confirm if the entire Menzerna line has filling abilities or is it just 106? I can't remember from the last time using SIP if it actually masked some defects or not when I did Prep-All wipe downs.

Why not just buff and wipe it down. If defects are more appararent after the wipe down with your solvent (prepsol, alcohal, thnner, ect) then it masks.

 

[imported_Denzil]

Why not just buff and wipe it down. If defects are more appararent after the wipe down with your solvent (prepsol, alcohal, thnner, ect) then it masks.

I'm not in the position to do that at this point in time unfortunately due to time constraints. :nixweiss

 

[imported_DetailDan]

I feel like a fraud when i use it.

Why? If you're using it correctly then it wont hide anything. But if you're trying to use it as a 1 step, or even to correct very minor imperfections, then thats a different story. That wouldnt be using it correctly.

 

[imported_Picus]

I 100% agree on the filling abilities. I feel like a fraud when i use it. Todd, ile bet there is a way to order the menz straight from germany. Ile do a little research when i finish this jag.



,Daniel

Does that mean people that do finish with 106 are frauds, or that you just can't finish down clean with it?



I've got to agree with D&D. I've seen 106's filling ability. I also know it's a very good finishing polish. If people are using it to one step or are trying to correct moderate to severe holograms, then are surprised it's filling, that's their own fault. It's designed as a finishing polish, if you use it like one it works wonderfully.

 

[Accumulator]

While I certainly appreciate saving time and effort (especially for you pros!), there seems to be a bit of a trend towards trying to get products to do things they aren't designed to do.



Really aggressive compounds aren't designed to finish out all that well; finishing polishes aren't designed for (real) correction. There's a huge middle ground between the two that can't always be bridged by inventive uses of the two.



I *will* say that, in my limited experience, the 1Z Intensive/High-Gloss twins do a pretty good job of making for a two-product system, but they're supposed to work that way and even then, you have to use 'em *just* right or you make for too big a jump between the two.

 

[SuperBee364]

While I certainly appreciate saving time and effort (especially for you pros!), there seems to be a bit of a trend towards trying to get products to do things they aren't designed to do.



Really aggressive compounds aren't designed to finish out all that well; finishing polishes aren't designed for (real) correction. There's a huge middle ground between the two that can't always be bridged by inventive uses of the two.



I *will* say that, in my limited experience, the 1Z Intensive/High-Gloss twins do a pretty good job of making for a two-product system, but they're supposed to work that way and even then, you have to use 'em *just* right or you make for too big a jump between the two.

I guess I (and probably some others ) were hoping that Megs was able to jump some previously unsurmountable hurdles with their new M95 and M105 products; a compound that was capable of serious correction that would also work fast and finish out to a level previously unheard of in heavy compounds.



IMO, they came close with 105. Sometimes it finishes very well, sometimes it doesn't. They did, however, break new ground with this one with the speed at which it works.



IMO, they pretty much nailed the finishing goal with 95. I'm pretty sure they didn't have any sort of speed goal with 95. That was left to 105. So far (and the jury is still out...I need to have alot more experience with this stuff to say for sure), it finishes better than any other compound I've used. It successfully blurs the lines of distinction between how a heavy compound and how a medium polish finish. In my limited experience with it so far, it finishes out as well as SIP. I honestly don't think this is a case of "trying to get products to do things they aren't designed to do", but rather a successful design goal of 95.



I think that Megs really wanted to break the compound stereotype with these two products (especially the level they finish down to), and they did a very good job of it.

 

[Junebug]

OK, let's all agree that 105 and 95 are very good products. For me, I think that 95 would be a much better choice. Now, it's the next step(s) that everybody switches to Menzerna, 1Z, or 3M. IF - you wanted to follow up 95 ( car needed heavy correction ) and you wanted to stay with Meguiars polishes - what would you get and what pads would use?



Thanks - I have a Megs Distributor right in town and it would be so easy - not to mention NICE to have a one stop shop.



JB

 

[Accumulator]

SuperBee- Yeah...if I somehow have to do so much serious correction that I use up what I have now, I'll just have to try those two Meg's products. But I'm pretty certain that *I* would need that intermediate step Now if they could just make an aggressive compound that's Accumulator-proof they'd *really* have something :chuckle:



JuneBug- What about good ole #83, or even #80 if the paint was really soft? Don't forget the PrepSol wipe

 

[Todd@RUPES]

OK, let's all agree that 105 and 95 are very good products. For me, I think that 95 would be a much better choice. Now, it's the next step(s) that everybody switches to Menzerna, 1Z, or 3M. IF - you wanted to follow up 95 ( car needed heavy correction ) and you wanted to stay with Meguiars polishes - what would you get and what pads would use?



Thanks - I have a Megs Distributor right in town and it would be so easy - not to mention NICE to have a one stop shop.



JB

Depends on your goals of course. I think you have mentioned that your clients are not intrested in perfection, so the new D151 would probably make a nice comprimise and finish the paint nice for a while (until the oils bleed out).



The other choice would be a combination of M83 on a rotary followed by M80 and a PC but this could be rather time consuming.