Newbie needs HELP choosing the right polish!

[quote name='Mike Phillips']My favorite body styles to buff out are the classics, compared to many, (not all), but many new cars the classics have much larger and smoother and even flatter panels. Compare the panels on a 1952 Chevy Belair to a Hummer.

Can we ask what it is you're specifically working on?





Thanks all for this info...seems that Megs is REALLY the one to go to for SSpaint on classics.



Mike,

I’m working on a ’57 Chevy, so lotsa curves, dips and hood rocket ridges. You can see what I’m talking about in my other thread “Can the Flex do it all or do I also need a PC too?” Should be a nice challenge...but fun too.
 
David Fermani said:
Mike - Looks like Meghan scooped up some road kill off the Turnpike and threw it on your desk! What they heck is that thing?



That's the new Dodo Juice Supernatural Wash Mitt aka Wookie's Fist, it does look like some kind of animal. I'll give it a try tomorrow on our project car.



fins&chrome said:
Mike,

I’m working on a ’57 Chevy, so lotsa curves, dips and hood rocket ridges. You can see what I’m talking about in my other thread



I've buffed out at least a dozen of these and they're actually an easy buff-out. Since it's single stage paint you want to be very careful around any hard body lines and edges. Also don't buff on the little gold emblem things on the front, side of the fenders as it's real easy to burn the coating off the edges.



If you can, remove the chrome V emblem on the trunk lid too so you don't have to worry about catching the edge with your pad. The speed nuts usually need to be replaced with new ones after you take them off and try not to break the pot metal studs used to affix them to the trunk.



Tape off around the windows so you don't get splatter on the fuzzy strips between the glass and the door. Lot's of real-estate on a 50's era Chevy, unless you feel like Superman maybe tackle it in two day instead of one, either way start early. I have pictures somewhere of how I taped one of these off somewhere, can look if you want me to, might take a while as I have a lot of car photos from past details.



:)
 
Mike Phillips said:
I have pictures somewhere of how I taped one of these off somewhere, can look if you want me to, might take a while as I have a lot of car photos from past details.



:)



Thanks Mike, would love to see those pix! I guess the area that worries me most is from the centre ridge of the front fender to where it curves downwards and up again to meet the hood. Yikes!



Also, how did you handle the two hood rocket ridges...did you do those by hand? If so, can these Meg products (M80 + 09 or 82) be applied by hand with satisfactory results?
 
Mike Phillips- Hey, welcome back! Thanks for commenting on my post.



I gotta admit that I don't know how you folks get results with the 6" pads on the PC. Well, OK...I've done some OK work with them but nothing that really satisfied me (hence my old preference for the Cyclo, for one thing). I mean, it's not rocket science and the combos cut or they don't :nixweiss Anyhow...



Oh, and the Benz cut-through was at the Autopia g-t-g in St. Louis a few years ago. Heh heh, I can't expect you to remember every event by a long shot, but that one stuck in my mind as it was a pal from here (the now MIA Lynn) and I'd thought she'd be OK with my PC (as in, "nah...you won't hurt anything" :o ).



I'll be interested to hear what you think of the Flex 3401. You and I have historically been of different preferences when it comes to polishers, maybe we'll agree on this one :D



How do the 7207 pads differ (functionally) from the 7006? Besides the size...



Oh, and your suggestion of "maybe the M205 after the M80.." surprised me. Similar initial cut, right? The M205 finishes out better IME but I woulda been leaning towards ending with the M80 on single stage :think: I suppose a Pure Polish follow up would accomplish the same thing...but could you please elaborate on the M80-then-M205?



And I was surprised to hear M80 is heavier on TSOs than M09! I woulda thought it went the other way.



Heh heh, first thread where we run into each other again and I'm peppering you with Qs :D





fins&chrome said:
.. can these Meg products (M80 + 09 or 82) be applied by hand with satisfactory results?



Yes, absolutely.
 
Accumulator said:
Oh, and the Benz cut-through was at the Autopia g-t-g in St. Louis a few years ago. Heh heh, I can't expect you to remember every event by a long shot, but that one stuck in my mind as it was a pal from here (the now MIA Lynn) and I'd thought she'd be OK with my PC (as in, "nah...you won't hurt anything" :o ).



Thanks for jogging my memory, I do remember the incident and the GTG at Brad's house. That was back in 2004 wasn't it? Or 2003?



Accumulator said:
I'll be interested to hear what you think of the Flex 3401. You and I have historically been of different preferences when it comes to polishers, maybe we'll agree on this one :D



Will be posting on it in the future.



Accumulator said:
How do the 7207 pads differ (functionally) from the 7006? Besides the size...



The W-7207 foam formula is less aggressive than the S-7006 and W-7000 foam cutting pads. When the W-7207 was first introduced it was going to state that it could be used with DA style polishers and then it was decided to only officially recommend using it with rotary buffers. The copy for the into thread has a caveat about using it with DA style polishers you can read it here.



W7207 Washable Foam Cutting Pad























Accumulator said:
Oh, and your suggestion of "maybe the M205 after the M80.." surprised me. Similar initial cut, right? The M205 finishes out better IME but I woulda been leaning towards ending with the M80 on single stage :think: I suppose a Pure Polish follow up would accomplish the same thing...but could you please elaborate on the M80-then-M205?



The M80 would be the work horse, removing the oxidation and gorging the paint with the TS oils and leave the paint in most cases looking great, but M205 will tend to finish out a little more clear and smooth, kind of like putting the frosting on the cake. The cake is good, (M80 and the results it creates as the first step product and M205 to make the end result even a little sweeter. M09 would probably be a good second step for final finish polishing or jeweling also, sometimes for me it would be what's in the garage that I already have and can use in the moment.



:)
 
Thanks Mike for your answer! Your kinda like EF Hutton...... when he speaks people listen. Am I showing my age???? :cooleek:



MDRX8 said:
Are there other products that contain TS oils ??? #7, #81 ????
 
Thanks for all this encyclopedic advice!

So, just to make sure I got this straight. On my SSpaint I would start off with 1) M-80, then follow this with either M-205 or M-09. Right? What about M-82 after M-80 —*or is M-205 still the better choice as a follow up?



Second question...and perhaps a most important one: What will I see after my first pass of M-80? Just want to be forewarned so I don’t panic. Will it be hazy?

“D-hazed“ and confused!

thx.
 
As long as you work the polish correctly, ie-slow overlapping passes until polish goes clear- then the paint may look quite nice.



If the paint is on the softer side then you will probably see some small light tick marks all over the paint, it will look slightly hazy under certain lighting as well.



If it is hazy, never fear. It would just mean that you need to follow up with a less aggressive polish and/or pad.



After the M80, M82 or M09 ( 205? too)) would both work OK on a finishing pad to add more gloss/clarity to the finish.



On SS paint M09-->M07--M26(paste wax) is wonderful. I had a 1970 Mustang that was a S orange and that combo was what got me into detailing today.
 
scary bill said:
After the M80, M82 or M09 ( 205? too)) would both work OK on a finishing pad to add more gloss/clarity to the finish.



On SS paint M09-->M07--M26(paste wax) is wonderful. I had a 1970 Mustang that was a S orange and that combo was what got me into detailing today.



Wow, a 1970 Stang! Now THAT must really have been a labor of love! :xyxthumbs
 
fins&chrome said:
So, just to make sure I got this straight. On my SSpaint I would start off with 1) M-80, then follow this with either M-205 or M-09. Right?

Correct.



It could be that after the M80 the paint will look so nice that you can go straight to your choice of LSP.



If you don’t already have a Brinkman Xenon Light you might consider getting one. This flashlight will expose swirls and things like micro-marring to your eyes better than normal garage lighting. It’s a handy tool for checking your results to make sure you’re getting the results you want so you don’t waste your time. It’s also a handy flashlight to have around the house.





Last time I was in Pep Boys the had the exact Brinkman Flashlight you want to get for around $30.00



Here's what you're looking for...



Brinkman.jpg




Be wary... the Xenon Flashlight aka The Swirl Finder... is a Cruel Master
angry.gif








fins&chrome said:
What about M-82 after M-80 —*or is M-205 still the better choice as a follow up?



Again, M80 might finish down really nice on your car’s paint system and you won’t need to do second polishing step but you won’t know until you do a little testing and then inspecting in good light. On softer paints, the M80 can leave some very light micro-marring or tick marks. Applying a wax over them will conceal them and for some people that’s okay, for others they want perfection before applying a wax or paint sealant so that’s a choice you’ll have to make and the Brinkman will help you to see what’s taking place at the surface level.



If you do see some micro-marring then following M80 with a less aggressive product and pad will remove it. M82, M09, M205 could all work but again, you won’t know until you go out into the garage and do a Test Spot.



Originally posted here, How to do a Test Spot



Before going over the entire car, see if you can make just one small section look good, that is apply the product you're planning on using over the entire car to just one small section about a foot squared or so. Work it in and then wipe it off, then apply the polish, work it in but not as much as the compound because now you're not trying to remove paint, just spread the product out, then immediately wipe it off, then apply the wax and let it fully dry and then wipe it off.



Now inspect our results. Make sure you can make one small section look GREAT before going over then entire car. If you can't make one small section look GREAT you won't be able to make the entire car look GREAT.



Make sense?



It should look like this,



test_spot1.jpg






And if you're having any problems, the post back here after the test section and we'll help you tweak your technique to insure you get it right.







fins&chrome said:
Second question...and perhaps a most important one: What will I see after my first pass of M-80? Just want to be forewarned so I don’t panic. Will it be hazy?

“D-hazed“ and confused!

Thx.



Depends upon how much oxidation you have but single stage paints after your choice of pad and the diminishing abrasives chew off all the dead paint and expose a fresh base the polishing oils will gorge the paint and bring out the full richness of color. You'll be happy.





scary bill said:
As long as you work the polish correctly, ie-slow overlapping passes until polish goes clear- then the paint may look quite nice.

Just don't buff to a dry buff. When you buff to a dry buff you lose lubrication and friction increases and you could start to mar the finish.



Usually with M80 you want to work a section about 2 feet squared or less, (never larger when removing oxidation), and then make anywhere from 4 to 6 pases. A pass in this context means going over the section you're working with overlapping passes one time. So 4-6 passes would mean going over this section 4-6 times if that makes sense. You always want to see a wet film on the surface as you're working the product. If the paint becomes dry and shiny as you're buffing you've buffed too long.



Sure would be fun to help you with you and show you this all first hand as it's a lot easier than most people think and just a little hands-on training goes a long way to reduce the learning curve.



Also, as you finish one section, be sure to overlap into this section a little when you move onto a new section so you don't have strips of paint between sections that didn't get as much attention as this can show up as a splotchy tiger stripe effect. So overlap your sections a little. The goal with any paint correction process no matter what kind of paint, products or tools is UMR



UMR = Uniform Material Removal





scary bill said:
If the paint is on the softer side then you will probably see some small light tick marks all over the paint, it will look slightly hazy under certain lighting as well.



If it is hazy, never fear. It would just mean that you need to follow up with a less aggressive polish and/or pad.



Correctamundo...





scary bill said:
After the M80, M82 or M09 ( 205? too)) would both work OK on a finishing pad to add more gloss/clarity to the finish.



M80 doesn't usually finish down very well with a soft finishing pad, stick with a polishing pad and if you find you need a second step then switch to a softer finishing pad with your next step product. A cleaner/wax like ColorX also works well with a finishing pad to remove the tick marks. The question some will ask or challenge is, won't the wax in the cleaner/wax fill or mask the micro-marring or tick marks instead of removing them and yes of course that's possible but correctly used, key word here being correctly, the cleaner/wax will remove the tick marks and then leave a protective coating. Just a different way to reach the same goal. If you're into perfection then opt for a less aggressive polish and create a show car finish with polishing and wait to apply your protection product after you've polished the paint to perfection.





scary bill said:
On SS paint M09-->M07--M26(paste wax) is wonderful. I had a 1970 Mustang that was a S orange and that combo was what got me into detailing today.



M09 is a very light cleaner/polish but also for light oxidation a very effective cleaner/polish and it will work really good on single stage paints. You can increase the cut or decrease the cut by using different pads too.



M07 has been around since probably the mid-1920's and I've been told the formula has been unchanged all these years. M26 has been around since the mid-1980's and is very popular for single stage paints and clear coats.



M07Collection.jpg




With a car as big as a 1957 Chevy, you might want to just tackle a panel a day otherwise you might get burnt out. That's a lot of real-estate to restore, tackling just a panel a day or a couple of panels, (like a door and the hood), and working all the way through the process is very doable in one day and will give you the encouragement to stick with the project over the course a few weekends.



Pro detailers have to do everything in a day or two and that's a lot of work by yourself.



:)
 
Mike Phillips- Thanks for explaining about the 7207 and the "whys" of using M205 after the #80, now I get you.



That was a good caveat about the 7207 (in the link you provided), not too adamant but still enough to make (thoughtful) people think.



On some paints I kinda prefer the slightly "softer" look that #80 leaves over the "sharp" result from M205, and I kinda thought that maybe fins&schrome would see it that way on his car. Yeah, more of my Autopian Heresy again :o



Oh, and I agree 100% about #80 working better with a polishing pad. Seems like various finishing pads are all the rage these days but IME they don't always work so great with every product.



Yeah the St. Louis g-t-g was in either '03 or '04, I can't remember which either...gee, how time flies.



Oh, and thank *you* for jogging *my* memory with the pics of good ol' #7. The two on the left really take me back :D
 
Great, I REALLY appreciate all this info. This is a great site and I am amazed at the wealth of collective info here. Here’s to the Brotherhood of Detailers!

Now I think I’ve built enough confidence to get my products on order and tackle this. I really love this car and would very much like to bring the paint to the best it can be.
 
fins&chrome said:
Wow, a 1970 Stang! Now THAT must really have been a labor of love! :xyxthumbs





I really liked the car, but I sold it and got a 2004 f-150 Lighting instead. Much faster and better all around.



To clarify my statement above:dig; I meant to use 80 with a polishing pad, the follow up (82,205,09) to be used with a finishing pad if needed. It turns out that sometimes when you read your post back to yourself it makes perfect sense, yet the next day.... :think:
 
fins&chrome said:
Great, I REALLY appreciate all this info. This is a great site and I am amazed at the wealth of collective info here..



This thread was perfectly timed, what with Mike Phillips's recent return.



It turns out that sometimes when you read your post back to yourself it makes perfect sense, yet the next day....



Heh heh, you too? :D
 
Attended a car show this weekend and met a classic car owner who swears by Meg’s #3 after his paint cleaning process. Haven’t seen many posts with #3 around here. Did this product fall off the auto detailer’s map or has it been made obsolete by a newer generation of Meg polishes?
 
fins&chrome said:
Attended a car show this weekend and met a classic car owner who swears by Meg’s #3 after his paint cleaning process. Haven’t seen many posts with #3 around here. Did this product fall off the auto detailer’s map or has it been made obsolete by a newer generation of Meg polishes?



Everyone has his preferences, but you heard from the horse's mouth. MP knows his stuff since he used to work for Megs and has probably done more work with classics than anyone around here.
 
fins&chrome said:
Attended a car show this weekend and met a classic car owner who swears by Meg’s #3 after his paint cleaning process. Haven’t seen many posts with #3 around here. Did this product fall off the auto detailer’s map or has it been made obsolete by a newer generation of Meg polishes?



#3 was designed to be used by machine, even a rotary. By hand or PC (even a flex) 5/7/etc all work fine. I have never used #3 so I can't comment on how it performs. I have used 80/7/9 and heard good things about 5.
 
yakky said:
Everyone has his preferences, but you heard from the horse's mouth. MP knows his stuff since he used to work for Megs and has probably done more work with classics than anyone around here.



Yeah, MP knows his stuff! Happened to catch a video of his on another forum. It was about the basics of washing your car. Not only does he know the stuff but he’s also a great communicator.

Heck, if I wasn’t that far, I’d drive down my Chevy over there and get him to show me the ropes!
 
scary bill said:
#3 was designed to be used by machine, even a rotary. By hand or PC (even a flex) 5/7/etc all work fine. I have never used #3 so I can't comment on how it performs. I have used 80/7/9 and heard good things about 5.



Thanks SB, was just wondering and as Yakky just said, everyone will have their opinion as to what works best. The feedback on this thread has been pretty clear about what to use as a polisher/cleaner with the #80. I see that there are a many other choices for a follow up just before waxing: #9, #7, #5, #205...and that’s IF after using #80 I still need to do a follow up. Accumulator has even thrown in Deep Crystal #2 as another possibility. So I’ll start off with #80 and take it from there.

But by looking at many Newb posts, it is clear to me that Meg should do something about how they market and label their products. The numbers don’t mean much and even the names don’t properly describe the product well. Even a chart with relative abrasiveness or recommended uses would be good.



Oh, well...good thing there’s Autopia.org to sort things out.:2thumbs:
 
Back
Top