UDM thoughts from a normal guy....Dissapointed

My initial impression is that it is definitely smoother than the PC and harder to bog down. Running the pad over my hand with the UDM on 6 actually made my hand hot.



I'll be using it for a detail tomorrow (weather permitting-they've now got chances of rain in the forecast the next 3-4 days) but I doubt I will have any comparison time. Hopefully after a Porsche detail on Sunday, I can try both the UDM and PC out on my own car before my neice's birthday party. I think my brother has a set of halogens, if not, I will bring mine. My car definitely needs polishing.... :nervous2:
 
Scott, please run it with the 5" backing plate provided. I belive you also picked up a set of DAS pads. The 5" backing plate is ideal.



Would appreciate your feedback on the SwirlBuster and ScratchBuster pads with your favorite polishes.
 
tdekany said:
Finally!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Thanks so much Scott. I can't believe no one was willing to compare the 2. How difficult can that be?



I'll be looking for your results, since I trust your opinion.



Can't wait.
Click to expand...
+1



I can't wait!!
 
ZoranC said:
... like many reported before.
Click to expand...



Still doesn't automatically mean the UDM will remove defects faster than the PC. It also seems to have less throw so I don't know how that affects removing swirls and scratches.



When I get the halogens on my car and can use both machines side by side (I'll use the DAS pads with both machines) than I can know for sure.



What I am really hoping is the UDM is at least equal to the Cyclo. I love my Cyclo but it can be awkward to use on some vehicles and the back end of most cars. I might even include the Cyclo in the test.
 
Scottwax said:
What I am really hoping is the UDM is at least equal to the Cyclo. I love my Cyclo but it can be awkward to use on some vehicles and the back end of most cars. I might even include the Cyclo in the test.
Click to expand...



I look forward to your review. I just picked up a Cyclo and already have a PC. I'm interested in finding out how the Cyclo corrects paint as compared to the UDM and PC.
 
Scottwax said:
What I am really hoping is the UDM is at least equal to the Cyclo. I love my Cyclo but it can be awkward to use on some vehicles and the back end of most cars. I might even include the Cyclo in the test.
Click to expand...



Please include the Cyclo in the test if possible. I have a PC and have been waiting to pull the trigger on a Cyclo pending a comparison between it and the UDM. Your observations would be quite helpful in my decision-making.
 
Scottwax said:
Still doesn't automatically mean the UDM will remove defects faster than the PC.
Click to expand...

Of course not. My comment was not meant to imply anything in that direction. It was just to say those two facts (smoother and less bogging down.) have been already established



Scottwax said:
It also seems to have less throw so I don't know how that affects removing swirls and scratches.
Click to expand...

I was under impression DavidB said somewhere it has larger throw. :nixweiss



In anay case, it is my understanding shorterr throw results is "finer" result but that it requires more "power" to compensate to achieve same "correcting ability".



Scottwax said:
I might even include the Cyclo in the test.
Click to expand...

Please, please, please do! I just love my Cyclo and use it whenever I can so I would love to see how it stacks up.
 
A shorter does not work. That's why the PC has worked where all other DA sanders have failed as polishers. The UDM throw is 1/16th greater than the PC.



db
 
DavidB said:
A shorter does not work. That's why the PC has worked where all other DA sanders have failed as polishers.
Click to expand...

Then why companies like Flex feel that 8mm does work? Could it be that it is combination of throw and OPMs that matters and that if you don't have powerfull motor you compensate by increasing throw?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top