SSR2.5 vs. IP - The Showdown (w/pix!)

It isn't a big deal man it was just this dudes findings
Click to expand...



It's a big deal to me for a couple of reasons..first, I think SSR is winning here in the photos and second I think it is simply not correct to say that SSRs contain fillers which then cause swirl marks to reappear later. An abrasive polish PERMANENTLY removes swirl marks. If they reappear you are seeing NEW marks.
 
BillyBarou said:
It's all about final results no?



I'm not sure I understand your post though...there is no wipe down in these pics right? Wasn't it followed by RMG plus the wax?



The smoother surface should be more clear then.
Click to expand...



This is post wipe down and then glaze and wax are added. The glaze is filling the remaining marring. The wax is helping the glaze. When these are both weathered/dried away the marring will return but the customer is not likely to have YOU return.
 
please, let's keep this civil.



Yes, my final result shot of the first quarter (IP/FP2) is not particularly good because of camera shake - it's blurry because it was a long exposure (even on a tripod, i shook it a bit).



And yes, I agree that 2.5 seems to work better via PC as well it should - that's what its designed for... Unfortunately, I didn't post the PC wipedown pix. I'll see if I still have them. I really needed to label the hood because the photos are a little confusing :)



I'm happy if you're getting the results you expect from your polishes. I don't quite know how I could make this scientific enough to be considered completely accurate...
 
BillyBarou said:
An abrasive polish PERMANENTLY removes swirl marks. If they reappear you are seeing NEW marks.
Click to expand...



An abrasive polish might just do that but a compound isn't likely to. All the cars that have had lackluster results with 2.5 were done with the PC.



I'm not seeing new marks as you can see the trails.
 
This is post wipe down and then glaze and wax are added. The glaze is filling the remaining marring. The wax is helping the glaze. When these are both weathered/dried away the marring will return but the customer is not likely to have YOU return.
Click to expand...



??? But my comments still hold. If this process is being done on all panels then the final results in the pics are still showing that SSR2.5 has the sharpest reflection. That is indicative of the smoothest surface.



I have a challenge to prove my point: take SSR2.5 to a black panel with swirls and remove the swirls. Do a wipedown of the final results and then take a picture. If the SSR is filling swirls then these will be exposed by a wipedown and the picture will tell the difference. If not then there are no fillers and there are no re-appearing swirls.
 
True Animes but how acurate do we need it to be? It's just a detailing forum and too often people seamed to get corn____ed for doing a simple comparison or test for discusion sake. Again, I appeciate your test and everyone else who tries new things whether I agree with them or not.
 
Spoiled Man,



I think we should let the test taker speak for himself since animes2k did the process himself. You both seem to on different coast as well so it seems that maybe you did not observe the test firsthand...or do I have that wrong?



I really don't mean to criticize the attempt as I think it is generally a good review but I would like to see a more scientific test if we are going to make claims that a popular product like SSR2.5 contains fillers.



I don't want to mislead anyone here but I do want to find the truth...
 
It's just a detailing forum and too often people seamed to get corn____ed for doing a simple comparison or test for discusion sake.
Click to expand...



Burly, we are keeping this civil so far. It is not appropriate for you to use bad language because some of us are making comments on the test procedure. That is within the bounds of the forum. This place is to get to the truth of matter after all. Autopia is designed for civil discussion of what works and what doesn't.
 
BillyBarou said:
Spoiled Man,



I think we should let the test taker speak for himself since animes2k did the process himself. You both seem to on different coast as well so it seems that maybe you did not observe the test firsthand...or do I have that wrong?



I really don't mean to criticize the attempt as I think it is generally a good review but I would like to see a more scientific test if we are going to make claims that a popular product like SSR2.5 contains fillers.



I don't want to mislead anyone here but I do want to find the truth...
Click to expand...



I can see the pictures and they mirror what I have seen for myself. I'm not relying on his results. If you go back to the beginning of this thread you will see my comment early on.
 
BillyBarou said:
Spoiled Man,



I don't want to mislead anyone here but I do want to find the truth...
Click to expand...



Do I ever have a truth for you buddy, lol. Anyhow your probably right Billy have a good day and happy detailing. I've just been working way to hard lately and I'm hell of grumpy to tell the truth. I read to much into your arguments, forgive? I've been detailing a car for twelve hours today with only a few breaks and I'm just now ready for the finishing touches, a coat of z8 and z16. The interior was wasted and the swirls were a pain, I'm going to sleep good tonight. Tommorow I have two cars, Thursday I have another car in bad shape, and Friday yet another.
 
BillyBarou said:
??? But my comments still hold. If this process is being done on all panels then the final results in the pics are still showing that SSR2.5 has the sharpest reflection. That is indicative of the smoothest surface.



I have a challenge to prove my point: take SSR2.5 to a black panel with swirls and remove the swirls. Do a wipedown of the final results and then take a picture. If the SSR is filling swirls then these will be exposed by a wipedown and the picture will tell the difference. If not then there are no fillers and there are no re-appearing swirls.
Click to expand...



Anime has already done this. I quoted his pictures with the wipe down. You said that in those pictures you saw better results from 2.5 and it seems that you're definitely in minority in those thoughts.
 
i never claimed it had fillers (directly) :D

my information is admittedly anecdotal.



Here we go...

SSR2.5 before wipedown (PC)

ssrPC.jpg




SSR2.5 AFTER wipedown (PC)

ssrPCISO.jpg




IP AFTER wipedown (PC)

ipPCISO.jpg




*shrug*

make of it what you will...
 
Billy, go back and look at the pictures that indicate the wipe down that I quoted. It's as plain as day that the 2.5 has revealed some hazing after the wipe down. If you can't see this I'd really rather not discuss it as it would seem that you have some kind of agenda here.
 
Animes,



In those pics the wipedown does not seem to change the surface a whole lot...how do you draw a conclusion that the SSR2.5 is adding a filler. Wouldn't the pics be wildly different in that case.



In that picture, the IP with PC shot looks good but you could be at a more abrasive strenth as well. Maybe the comparison should be SSR3 vs. IP....in all three photos the polishes are leaving deep scratches behind. I'm not sure you can conclusively say one is better than the other...



The truth may be that IP+rotary is good for one thing and SSR2.5+PC is good for another...
 
It's as plain as day that the 2.5 has revealed some hazing after the wipe down. If you can't see this I'd really rather not discuss it as it would seem that you have some kind of agenda here.
Click to expand...



Sure it's a bit hazier in the photo, but how do we know that is not due to some chemical reaction between the wipedown chemical and the SSR? I have used several QDs after an SSR2.5 polishing and have never seen haze that bad...
 
IP is nowhere near SSR3 in cutting ability. IP is a medium polish and SSR3 is a compound. You really don't want to put PG against SSR3 as the difference between them is night and day once again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top