Iron X, truly a safe product for finishes?
- Thread starter imported_RedlineIRL
- Start date
Accumulator
Well-known member
pwaug said:
For the best possible outcome, I'd be all about chemical decontamination, which would pretty much eliminate the need for clay (absent special circumstances).
Jesstzn
New member
TOGWT said:
I'm not jumping into the foray here but I find this statement very difficult to fathom. I can't see how something as soft as clay can "abrade" an iron particle that is somewhere around 4 - 5 on the Mohs hardness scale. I would have more of a tendency to believe the stickiness of the clay pulls the iron particle out of the surface.
If it can abrade iron why can't it abrade a fine speck of tar from the surface using the same logic? Thats because the speck of tar is stuck to the surface and can't be pulled out like the iron particulate.
As for the product changing color as it does its job.. Is the color change created when the product reacts with the iron or the iron oxide (rust stain) ?
togwt
The Old Grey Whistle Test
Jesstzn said:
Of course your'e right, what was I thinking, detailers clay 'pulls' particulates from the surface, they only include abrasives to mar the paint
imported_PiPUK
New member
Jesstzn said:
The purple colour is an iron complex - contrary to what some will tell you, purple colour is indicator that iron is present AND the reactant are present. If you don't get colour, either iron or reactive chemical are low.
As to what 'iron' is reacting, it is the iron salts, the oxides here, not the metallic iron. This are is well documented with the method having been used in chemical labs for the better part of a century.
Jesstzn
New member
TOGWT said:
Thank you .. maybe you should change your data base to reflect this
Jesstzn
New member
Thank You .. so basically if I clayed the panel and it pulled the iron particulate out the brownish stain left can create the purple reaction.PiPUK said:
Accumulator
Well-known member
TOGWT said:
You needed to do something a bit more blatant, like [sarcasm]...Of course your'e right, what was I thinking, detailers clay 'pulls' particulates from the surface..[/sarcasm] to get your point across
The point being that clay works via shearing not by "pulling". Clay glides along on top of a film of lube until it bumps into someting, like contamination, which it then shears off. Yeah, *sometimes* that shearing action will also yank the contaminatin out of a depression/pore/etc. in the paint, but that isn't the norm. So *usually* the clay leaves a bit of contamination behind, the little bit that's below the surface of the paint. That's why rust-blooms are *MUCH* more likely to "come back" after claying than they are after chemical decontamination (I like clay and use it all the time, but this was exactly my experience).
IMO (based on IME
) clay seldom causes significant marring IF (and it's a mighty big "if" indeed) you use gentle clay, lots of lube, minimal pressure, and you keep kneading/replacing the clay often enough to keep contamination from turning it into sandpaper. I'll sometimes knead/replace clay afte moving it across the paint *one time and one inch* and I doubt that many people bother doing that.Clay might seem nice and soft, but some clays (overspray clay and stuff like that one odd batch of Sonus gray a few years back) are indeed very abrasive and will, even through a film of lube, mar up paint something awful. BTDT with that Sonus! Looked like I'd wetsanded, and I'm about as careful/gentle about claying as somebody can be. Usually the more gentle clays have gentle abrasives that merely assist in the "shearing" action and won't mar the paint as long as lube/pressure/etc. etc. are used right, but oh man are there a lot of variables in play.
togwt
The Old Grey Whistle Test
I answered this question on another website that Jesstzn is a moderator on and got very put out about it so I hoped someone else would enlighten him.
The English are probably too conservative when it comes to sarcasm, sometimes ours ‘good manners’ get in the way (thanks Accumulator)
Thirty year old simplistic abrasive technology and its still missunderstood - wow
The English are probably too conservative when it comes to sarcasm, sometimes ours ‘good manners’ get in the way (thanks Accumulator)
Thirty year old simplistic abrasive technology and its still missunderstood - wow
Jesstzn
New member
Accumulator said:You needed to do something a bit more blatant, like [sarcasm]...Of course your'e right, what was I thinking, detailers clay 'pulls' particulates from the surface..[/sarcasm] to get your point across
The point being that clay works via shearing not by "pulling". Clay glides along on top of a film of lube until it bumps into someting, like contamination, which it then shears off. Yeah, *sometimes* that shearing action will also yank the contaminatin out of a depression/pore/etc. in the paint, but that isn't the norm. So *usually* the clay leaves a bit of contamination behind, the little bit that's below the surface of the paint. That's why rust-blooms are *MUCH* more likely to "come back" after claying than they are after chemical decontamination (I like clay and use it all the time, but this was exactly my experience).
IMO (based on IME
I guess we will really never know unless a clay manufacturer chimes in and I doubt they will. The shearing theory is wonderful but that's like telling me that I could take clay and run it over an iron file and shear off the teeth because they are sticking up. And if it shears off something it bumps into why doesn't it shear of the fine particles of tar that protrude from the surface?
My theory regarding clay and rail dust ( iron particulate ) ;
A) Clay pulls the iron particulate out of the spot that its imbedded in.
B) Clay doesn't do much for fine tar particles because 1) It can't dissolve it, 2) It can't shear it off even tho tar is no where near iron on the Mohs hardness scale. 3) Tar is adhered to not imbedded in the surface.
C) Clay has abrasives in it to abrade away the iron oxide stain left after the particle has been pulled from the surface.
I could buy the abrading theory if the abrasives in the clay were on an unforgiving media like the media in sand paper or the likes but the abrasives in clay move over or around a piece of iron, because the media is pliable, not cut it off. Path of least resistance.
A compound on a yellow pad will cause marring on paint where properly used clay won't BUT the yellow pad/compound combination won't shear off iron particulate sticking out of the paint surface.
As far as claying and rust blooms coming back , unless you plotted every bloom you had on some form of scale you will never know if it came back .. or its a new one.
Maybe one day a clay manufacturer will chime in ... not a reseller with their opinion.
togwt
The Old Grey Whistle Test
Jesstzn said:Thank you .. maybe you should change your data base to reflect this
Absolutely not
Jesstzn
New member
TOGWT said:
Trying to figure out which thread / site, the only time I question you or anyone is when the answer doesn't make sense or in a lot of cases with your cut and pastes don't even apply to the OPs question.
Accumulator
Well-known member
Jesstzn said:
Don't take any of this reply as an :argue I just kinda like discussing this stuff, and I've been using detailing clay since it first hit the market around 1990, often with results that differ from the conventional wisdom. When my experiences differ from somebody else's...well, it's not like one person is right/wrong; I'm not gonna tell somebody that they can't believe their own eyes (and nobody can tell me that I can't tell what's going on with *my* cars either :grinno: ).
Here's the diff as I see it- the teeth on the file are *an integral part of the file* as opposed to something that's "stuck to the surface of the file". Leaving aside that the file (due to its teeth) is not a smooth surface (clay requires a certain "flatness of the surface being worked" in order to do its thing), the teeth aren't "bumps of contamination" that can be "knocked loose". Heh heh, notice all those scare-quotes...this stuff can be tricky for me to explain clearly!
It *does* do that, at least for me. I spot-clay to remove tar all the time, almost every time I wash. Can't even remember the last time I resorted to a solvent/tar remover to do this, I just clay the tar off (yeah, it sure trashes my clay pretty fast).
a) I've had rust-blooms "come back" even though the clay appeared to get all the ferous contamination. I figure that's because there was still some stuff left in the pores/etc. of the paint. Chemical decontamination worked better for me in this regard; the rust-blooms never "came back".
b) Again, clay works perfectly for tar removal *for me*, and does it without stripping my LSP (at least it works that way 99% of the time).
c) They way I do it (lots of lube, minimal pressure), the clay doesn't actually contact the paint; it glides along on the film of lube. It doesn't remove "staining" for me very well as it doesn't get down into the texture/pores/etc. of the paint.
The compounds do remove contamination for me that way, though not perfectly. That's basically how we did this stuff back before we had clay. That and sanding (4000 grit paper). The sanding would generally work better, maybe for the exact reason you mentioned, that "least resistance" and the way sandpaper isn't so pliable.
Maybe I'm just weird (heh heh...oh boy I opened myself up for some ribbing there, huh?!?), but I find it easy to keep track of stuff like that. I see some imperfection like that on one of my vehicles and I remember it. And in some cases I do keep notes about such stuff (and I review/study those notes as needed). It's like remembering where my vehicles have marring, I wish I *could* forget such stuff!
I hear ya on the "reseller" with regards to accurate info, but I've discussed this stuff with a vendor who "special ordered" clay made to his specs and that's where I first heard most of the info that I repeat (and which as proven to work out that way *for me* in practice).
Again, I sure hope I'm not coming across as an argumentative [jerk], and there are just *SO* many variables, especially ones related to how different people do/experience/etc. etc. things differently. At the end of the day (and at the end of this discussion), it's what works for the individual that counts. "Subjective" stuff really only oughta matter to the subject who's experiencing it
And experiences sure do vary all right!
Jesstzn
New member
Accumulator said:
The tar I speak of is on customers cars not mine .. tar on mine is taken off within 24 hours and most the time with an AIO. It never sets up.
Accumulator
Well-known member
Jesstzn- Ah, *customer cars*, that would explain a lot. Now, I *do* let my cars go for quite a while between washes without having trouble using clay on tar, but still...yeah, it's a whole 'nother subject when you Pros talk about the customer cars you do.
Here's something strange regarding iron decontamination that I don't understand: My 07 Passat was from the days when they still built them in Germany. It was special order since it had the Sport Package which most dealers don't stock. So it came over on the boat, directly to the dealer with no "lot time." Dealer did no exterior prep and allowed me to be there when they removed the protective wrap and then take delivery. So ofcourse I took it home -- washed, clayed and applied LSP (I think it was Z2 at the time). It's been well cared for--clayed once a year, always protected with a durable sealant, but never chemically decontaminated until about a month ago. Washed it with a strong solution of CG Citrus Wash (just to get it squeay clean) and dried the car. Applied IronX per instructions in the garage (hadn't been clayed for a year) with plenty of dwell time, spreading and agitation as per instructions. Since it had never been chemically decontaminated I expected to see plenty of purple, but there were only 2 or 3 purple spots on the entire car. Gave it a light claying after the IronX and it was very slick so the clay only picked up a little contamination on the rocker panels.
What would account for the appearance of only a few purple areas???
What would account for the appearance of only a few purple areas???
Jesstzn
New member
pwaug said:
Simple... You take too good care of your stuff..:bow:bow
Accumulator
Well-known member
Yeah, sounds like it just never got very contaminated and the little bit that was on there caused the minimal color-indication.
Jesstzn
New member
pwaug said:
Lol some things are just too simple .. :ca