Polish Range Comparision Chart

07 z-oh-6 said:
According to Mike Phillips, SwirlX has more cut than M205. You have it the other way around. Hmmm?
Click to expand...

My testing is that M205 is far more aggressive then what is touted on the bottle and in direct testing against SwirlX I found it to remove the majority of 2500 sanding grit scratches in one pass vs. SwirlX.

It is my opinion that M205 is far more then a cut of '4' on Meguiar's scale, far more aggressive then M80 Speed Glaze and closer to M83 DAC/P in actual results.

Also products like M105 and M205 (and SwirlX) are very hard to range because they don't breakdown. The longer and more aggressively they are worked the more paint is removed, so we have to consider the method of application. SwirlX is designed to be used by hand or orbital buffer by the enthusiast. M205 is designed to be used by the avid enthusiast or professional with a variable speed orbital or rotary polisher.
 
Puckman said:
Yes, I agree. Many of those products I've used I would put exactly where they are on Todd's scale.
Click to expand...

Thank you. A lot more thought, time, and experience went into making these vs. reading some manufacturer's specifications. One of the beauties of being a full time detailer is that I am constantly putting these products to work, testing them, and hopefully using that information to provide more accurate, more true to life results.
 
th0001 said:
My testing is that M205 is far more aggressive then what is touted on the bottle and in direct testing against SwirlX I found it to remove the majority of 2500 sanding grit scratches in one pass vs. SwirlX.

It is my opinion that M205 is far more then a cut of '4' on Meguiar's scale, far more aggressive then M80 Speed Glaze and closer to M83 DAC/P in actual results.

Also products like M105 and M205 (and SwirlX) are very hard to range because they don't breakdown. The longer and more aggressively they are worked the more paint is removed, so we have to consider the method of application. SwirlX is designed to be used by hand or orbital buffer by the enthusiast. M205 is designed to be used by the avid enthusiast or professional with a variable speed orbital or rotary polisher.
Click to expand...
Thanks. :thumbup:
 
I am interested why D151 is actually so low on your cut scale. According to Mike Phillips it sits right above M83 DACP. Also, in my small amount of experience I would have to agree with Mike. I was able to take a moderately swirled Solara down to it's RIDs in just one short pass with D151 and and orange Edge pad on a PC.

I actually did not try anything else, as I needed a one-step due to it being pro-bono work.
 
aerogt01 said:
I am interested why D151 is actually so low on your cut scale. According to Mike Phillips it sits right above M83 DACP. Also, in my small amount of experience I would have to agree with Mike. I was able to take a moderately swirled Solara down to it's RIDs in just one short pass with D151 and and orange Edge pad on a PC.

I actually did not try anything else, as I needed a one-step due to it being pro-bono work.
Click to expand...

I think that was Mr Phillips opinion, Which eveyone is entitle too. I have notice that it's close to what he say's. But IMO Meguiar's D151 leaves an great finish. Because it uses the new SMAT stuff that they call it and it also cuts and the finishes great. But the M205 will finish out better IMO. M83 has gave me many problems so I don't use it that much anymore.
 
aerogt01 said:
I am interested why D151 is actually so low on your cut scale. According to Mike Phillips it sits right above M83 DACP. Also, in my small amount of experience I would have to agree with Mike. I was able to take a moderately swirled Solara down to it's RIDs in just one short pass with D151 and and orange Edge pad on a PC.

I actually did not try anything else, as I needed a one-step due to it being pro-bono work.
Click to expand...

This article was designed to compare the cutting power of the various products. I have tested D151 against Meguiar's M205 and have found that while D151 appeared to do more correction, this was short lived, as D151 has a lot of filling ability.

What I mean is that the waxes in D151 will hide a lot of swirl marks that where not polished out. This is a good thing as the product is designed for quick work, not perfect work, so the filling is a benefit.

So when I tested the two products side by side, I noted the same as you. The D151 looked marginally better. However, I wiped both sides several times with alcohol and found that not only did M205 look better (in terms of finish) but it also removed a noticeable number of greater defects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top