PDA

View Full Version : Rubbing & Polishing Compound



Michael Stoops
Oct 11th, 2011, 12:24 PM
Rubbing & Polishing Compound
New Packaging

http://archive.meguiarsonline.com/forums/photopost/data/1910/RubCmpnd_Liquid_digmock.gifhttp://archive.meguiarsonline.com/forums/photopost/data/1910/PolCmpnd_Liquid_digmock.gif



Product attributes:


Rubbing compound: Removes heavy oxidation
Polishing compound: Removes light swirls & adds gloss ("clarity")
Clear coat safe
Non-scratching
Same formula as tubs, which are being discontinued
Part Number: G18016 (Rubbing Compound); G18116 (Polishing Compound)
Size: 16 ounce each
MSRP: $6.99 each

As noted above, this is essentially a repackaging of our existing Rubbing Compound and Polishing Compound in the tubs. Even though these are now packaged in bottles, they are still not suitable for machine application - hand use only!

GhOsT1321
Oct 31st, 2011, 01:16 PM
Why are these products hand use only? Aggressiveness?

Michael Stoops
Oct 31st, 2011, 01:44 PM
The hand use only recommendation is due to formulation. These are really the same thing we had in the tubs the past couple of years, just to be clear, and in that container they were a bit thin in consistency. They just don't play well at all on a DA. There are plenty of cases where we don't officially recommend a product be used a certain way yet many people report excellent results. For example, we don't recommend Ultimate Compound on a rotary but we've heard from a lot of people who use it that way with great results. So we're always fine with people experimenting a bit, but we know that something is a serious no-no we'll flat out tell you. Chrome wheel cleaner on a bare, high polished aluminum wheel is one since the chrome wheel cleaner will always stain the polished aluminum surface. These two products by machine are another as they turn into a gummy mess that you will not enjoy using at all.

To show you what can be achieved with these two products, check out Wolf-Stong's review from April 2010. (http://www.meguiarsonline.com/forums/showthread.php?41648)

Slicked
Nov 2nd, 2011, 05:02 PM
Good to see the repackaging - reintroduces cohesion to the Meguiars range by bringing these products into the maroon bottle range. The tubs didnt seem to fit into any existing line and probably got overlooked as a result.

Hopefully there's some maroon bottle caps available for the Polishing Compound at the time of shipping :) .

seckinb
Nov 2nd, 2011, 11:10 PM
Great to have products made solely for hand use. I always felt guilty when I used an advanced polish/compound only by hand. But now I can assure I did my best :) And great results in the other thread, by the way. Never liked tins as they never fully close airtight and I never can measure the amount I took on the pad, but a fliptop is the best to shake and pour.


Oh and a question, I already have Ultimate Coumpound and SwirlX at home. I understand UC and SX being DA friendly, are a bit more lubricated. So, does this lubrication tend to cover the abrasives and give a more marring free but slow action than these two maroon products? Or do they give the same results in the same time-frame?

Michael Stoops
Nov 3rd, 2011, 11:56 AM
Oh and a question, I already have Ultimate Coumpound and SwirlX at home. I understand UC and SX being DA friendly, are a bit more lubricated. So, does this lubrication tend to cover the abrasives and give a more marring free but slow action than these two maroon products? Or do they give the same results in the same time-frame?Not sure if we fully understand the question here but here goes: the lubricants in the other products are part of what makes them more tool friendly, but UC via DA is going to give much faster results than this rubbing compound will by hand. But even this product won't scoure and mar the paint like some of the old school paste rubbing compounds still on the market today.

Murr1525
Nov 3rd, 2011, 12:14 PM
I think the question was more "do the extra lubricants in UC/SwirlX make them less effective by hand?" So what is better for hand use only?

seckinb
Nov 3rd, 2011, 12:22 PM
I think the question was more "do the extra lubricants in UC/SwirlX make them less effective by hand?" So what is better for hand use only?

Exactly! Thanks for clarifying. I'm pretty sure a DA will make everything faster but I were asking if UC and SwirlX would be the less effective by hand.

Michael Stoops
Nov 3rd, 2011, 12:31 PM
Exactly! Thanks for clarifying. I'm pretty sure a DA will make everything faster but I were asking if UC and SwirlX would be the less effective by hand.OK, gotcha. UC is still going to cut faster by hand as overall it's more aggressive. But UC is almost double the price and that is a big deal for many.

seckinb
Nov 3rd, 2011, 12:36 PM
OK, gotcha. UC is still going to cut faster by hand as overall it's more aggressive. But UC is almost double the price and that is a big deal for many.

I think UC has a very reasonable price already. Can't think of how you guys managed to reduce the cost to the half, really :)

Murr1525
Nov 3rd, 2011, 12:46 PM
They use diminishing abrasives, which is older technology. You'll notice the #80, #9, etc are a little cheaper than the newer technology products also.

seckinb
Nov 3rd, 2011, 01:18 PM
Won't argue about it. Though, I know a UK manufacturer claiming that their diminishing abrasives are the best technology to get a hologram free finish, as they say their uberly harsh abrasives brake so well that they give a nice finish in a single step. I would listen to this with a grain of salt. :) As far as I know, everybody who has used #105 and #205 swear by the effectiveness and the finish they give. But I also believe that there is no bad product, but there are difficult products and easy product to achieve a job. And Megs have never been on the difficult side.

Michael Stoops
Nov 8th, 2011, 08:53 AM
I think UC has a very reasonable price already. Can't think of how you guys managed to reduce the cost to the half, really :)


They use diminishing abrasives, which is older technology. You'll notice the #80, #9, etc are a little cheaper than the newer technology products also.It's less about it being "older" tech than it is about it being "less expensive" technology. There are times, and processes, where a diminishing abrasive might be a better choice.


But I also believe that there is no bad product, but there are difficult products and easy product to achieve a job.This is very true, and something a lot of people lose sight of. No one product is perfect for every job, and that includes M105/M205. Anyone who has tried M105 on a badly dried out clear coat knows this. And no matter how good the stuff in the bottle is, it won't make you a master detailer on its own. You still need some skills to back it up, but that's true of anything - bowling, target shooting, golf, auto racing, skiing, painting, etc.

polaris
Jan 9th, 2012, 09:28 PM
how does the polishing compound compare to aggressiveness between the scratchx and ultimate compound.

Michael Stoops
Jan 10th, 2012, 07:53 AM
The Polishing Compound is milder than either of those and is designed as a follow up to the Rubbing Compound. As with anything, though, how you apply it (ie, amount of pressure, time, size of work area, type of applicator, etc) will have an impact on the results and level of total cut.

polaris
Jan 10th, 2012, 01:35 PM
so is more like m205 and would work to remove defects by hand

Murr1525
Jan 10th, 2012, 02:09 PM
Well, very mild, would have to be very fine defects, very soft paint, etc.

Sort of like using #205/Ult. Polish by hand.

Michael Stoops
Jan 11th, 2012, 08:37 AM
Perhaps similar to M205 in cut, but not even close to it or Ultimate Polish with regard to polishing oils, and certainly not close to M205 as far as the level of clarity it can impart on a paint. But it is designed to be the follow up, refining step to our Clear Coat Safe Rubbing Compound, so it will still leave a nice finish. But any light hazing that CC Safe Rubbing Compound might leave is very, very light compared to even fine swirl marks.