Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

[Michael Stoops]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

PS:
Any solution re the PM problem?

Could be that he has PM's turned off or he's not getting notified of them? Try emailing him directly - click on his username in any thread and if it gives you the option to email you'll be given his email address.

Oh, another thought - if you're sending the PM through his profile page then he's almost certainly not being notified of it. I get these from time to time and always end up responding months later because I just never check my own profile. Send me a PM directly (click on my username and select it from the dropdown) and I'll be notified AND I'll see it when I log in. Just, please, don't PM me through my profile page! That could be his issue as well.

[gmck]

Re: Differences between Ultimate Compound and M105

Mike,

M105 on 2008 Astra

This car was one of the reasons I purchased a DA some weeks back. I had used UC by hand on the bonnet and the result was very ordinary. I then used UC with the DA and while it was a big improvement it still had problems in my opinion. Whenever you wiped the residue away you could feel it cling to tiny pieces of the surface and you had to wipe vigorously to remove the residue from those bits. I also tried Menzerna P0203S, but with similar results, but I suppose that should have been expected as P0203S has less cut than UC. I thought at the time that I needed a compound with even more cut. I had previously tried re-claying the surface, thinking that maybe my first effort wasn’t good enough, but that didn’t help.

This time around, I decided to make two test sections (400mm x 400mm) deliberately smaller than what I had used earlier in the week on the Mazda. The test was to be M105 (yellow against orange pad).

I started with M105 (yellow pad, KBM, speed 5-6). Your story about the Cobra/Ferrari really hit home. Straight away on this paint M105 was working. No grabbing or trying to walk the panel and I completed 6 section passes before it dried up, but the best thing was that it felt workable and I was back in control. There was no powdering and it was relatively easy to wipe off and the finish was really good. I then completed the other section with the orange pad. I wiped down both sections and cleaned up with IPA and came to the conclusion that both pads had produced a similar result. I therefore thought that I’d continue but with the less aggressive orange pad.

I got about half way through the left half of the bonnet, about three sections and the process became more difficult. I was cleaning the pad after each section, just spinning it on a MF. So I started more vigorously cleaning and using a brush on the pad. This improved the process on the next section and I completed the first half of the bonnet. As I moved onto the second half of the bonnet I had to slow down and spend even more time cleaning before proceeding to the next section. At the same time it became increasing more difficult with each section to remove the residue after each pass and I had to revert to IPA to clean the residue off. In retrospect, I think it would have been more appropriate to swap to a new pad before I started the second half of the bonnet.

My conclusions and please your comments and suggestions re improving the technique I used.
1. Only works on certain paints.
2. When it does work, the performance is impressive as all the swirls were removed.
3. Becomes much more difficult to work with as the pad becomes contaminated.
4. I’d estimate that I need about 10-12 orange pads to complete the vehicle in one session.

What are the chances that Maguire’s could change the formula of M105 to make it more workable? My definition of more workable would be a wetter product with more play time? Just today I noticed on Autogeek a guy using a Flex having exactly the same problems, so it does appear to be also a problem for rotary users as well.

To extend the test some and get some feedback, I then completed the left side with M205 and the right with another pass of UC. I then asked family members to comment on which side looked better. The response was a mixed bag, so I think I’d conclude that the extra step with UC wasn’t required. I’m going to complete that test in the morning and finish the right side with M205.

Next I’m going to tackle the really bad dealer inflicted swirls on the doors of this Astra. This time I’m going to test Menzerna PowerGloss versus M105, plus I think I try out the yellow pad with M105 for a longer period to see if the contamination on that pad occurs as swiftly.

One last observation you might like to comment on. I noticed that the orange pad with UC tends to accumulate polish/residue around the centre of the pad, where as the orange pad used with M105 has the polish/residue distributed evenly over the pad. Both pads were original primed the same way (KBM) and the same amount of polish, 4 small drops were added for each sectional pass.

BMW

Further to a previous post I finished off the panels that I’d done with M205 with Menzerna P085RD on a blue pad. That really lifted the gloss another notch, so I think that is a worthwhile step for anyone looking for the ultimate gloss. This next bit may seem strange or it might even be my imagination, but after finishing off with the P085RD, I then applied a coat of Nxt manually for protection, but in my opinion I think that took something away. For the lack of a better word, I’d call it sterile. It lost the real depth it had when just finished with 85RD. I was just wondering if others have noticed that effect with Nxt.