Tweet
#83 dual action cleaner/polish, type for a reformulation, or am I off my rocker?
It's no secret that I personally dislike #83(Meguiar's Customer Care did a good job of making me happy though, thanks Brian!), but it's not that it doesn't perform, it's that it doesn't perform consistantly for me, and I know that I am not alone.
My biggest problem was that being a mobile operator(part time) #83 seemed to be affected greatly by ambient heat(surface was cool, but temperature and humdity were high), gumming up and basically turning into glued on residue on the paint, moreso with the DA than with the rotary, but the results were equally bad. Now for a long time I thought it was the heat because when I used #83 with Alan at Everglo, I never had any of these problems at the temperature was always cool because we were working in a parking garage, I only had these issues outside.
Well I can't remember where I saw the post, but someone posted that their local Meguiars dealer said that #83 wasn't supposed to be used on a surface that still has wax or sealant on it, as it would cause it to gum it. Well I'm not sure who said this, and can no longer find the post in question(could've been one of any of the many detailing boards I browse) but it sounded interesting, and a friend left about 6 oz. of #83 at my house and didn't care for me to return it so I thought I'd do some testing.
I made sure to do the test on a day where the weather conditions were similar to what I had experienced before. I decided to cut my hood(2 week old sealant on it) into two halves, on one side I would wash and clay, on the other side, I washed, clayed, and wiped down with APC(at an appropriate dilution to remove wax/sealant). The side that was not wiped with APC had significant gumming(polished with the rotary btw) and while the side wiped with APC still had some gumming, it was far less and the little gumming I experienced could be wiped off with QD as opposed to the other side. I did the test several more times(until I ran out of #83, which I didn't have much of to beginwith) on other cars, and the results were almost always the same.
So I started thinking, 90% or more of the cars I did with Alan hadn't seen a wash in months, much less a wax or sealant, the temparute was cool, and #83 performed flawlessly. On cars I worked on(most of which are newer cars, many being show cars or weekend only cars that saw some type of waxing/maintenance by their owners fairly regularly) in the heat, #83 was impossible to use, but on my few test panels, ensuring their was no residual wax/sealant improved the performance quite a bit.
I've been using a lot of #2 lately because it is available locally, but it's not very cost effective being available in only 16 oz bottles, but I find it to outperform #83 in almost every aspect(#2 seems to dust a bit more than I would get with #83). I never experience any of the problems with #2 that I had with #83, and they perform very closely as far as cut and finish go, so my question is, what about #83 makes it so finicky to work with? Is there anything about it's formulation that can be changed to act more like #2?
I really like Meguiars products, and the Meguiars company as a whole, and I would like to continue supporting Meguiars by using them for all of my polishing needs, but if I keep having to buy #2 in 16 oz. bottles, I will have to start looking elsewhere for my medium duty polish.
I know that Meguiars listens to their customers wants and needs, the recent issue with #21 being resolved as quickly as possible, as well as the release in smaller sizes is clearly evident of this. So here is my special want, please look at #83s performance in less than ideal conditions, and if possible, re-evalute the product.
My biggest problem was that being a mobile operator(part time) #83 seemed to be affected greatly by ambient heat(surface was cool, but temperature and humdity were high), gumming up and basically turning into glued on residue on the paint, moreso with the DA than with the rotary, but the results were equally bad. Now for a long time I thought it was the heat because when I used #83 with Alan at Everglo, I never had any of these problems at the temperature was always cool because we were working in a parking garage, I only had these issues outside.
Well I can't remember where I saw the post, but someone posted that their local Meguiars dealer said that #83 wasn't supposed to be used on a surface that still has wax or sealant on it, as it would cause it to gum it. Well I'm not sure who said this, and can no longer find the post in question(could've been one of any of the many detailing boards I browse) but it sounded interesting, and a friend left about 6 oz. of #83 at my house and didn't care for me to return it so I thought I'd do some testing.
I made sure to do the test on a day where the weather conditions were similar to what I had experienced before. I decided to cut my hood(2 week old sealant on it) into two halves, on one side I would wash and clay, on the other side, I washed, clayed, and wiped down with APC(at an appropriate dilution to remove wax/sealant). The side that was not wiped with APC had significant gumming(polished with the rotary btw) and while the side wiped with APC still had some gumming, it was far less and the little gumming I experienced could be wiped off with QD as opposed to the other side. I did the test several more times(until I ran out of #83, which I didn't have much of to beginwith) on other cars, and the results were almost always the same.
So I started thinking, 90% or more of the cars I did with Alan hadn't seen a wash in months, much less a wax or sealant, the temparute was cool, and #83 performed flawlessly. On cars I worked on(most of which are newer cars, many being show cars or weekend only cars that saw some type of waxing/maintenance by their owners fairly regularly) in the heat, #83 was impossible to use, but on my few test panels, ensuring their was no residual wax/sealant improved the performance quite a bit.
I've been using a lot of #2 lately because it is available locally, but it's not very cost effective being available in only 16 oz bottles, but I find it to outperform #83 in almost every aspect(#2 seems to dust a bit more than I would get with #83). I never experience any of the problems with #2 that I had with #83, and they perform very closely as far as cut and finish go, so my question is, what about #83 makes it so finicky to work with? Is there anything about it's formulation that can be changed to act more like #2?
I really like Meguiars products, and the Meguiars company as a whole, and I would like to continue supporting Meguiars by using them for all of my polishing needs, but if I keep having to buy #2 in 16 oz. bottles, I will have to start looking elsewhere for my medium duty polish.
I know that Meguiars listens to their customers wants and needs, the recent issue with #21 being resolved as quickly as possible, as well as the release in smaller sizes is clearly evident of this. So here is my special want, please look at #83s performance in less than ideal conditions, and if possible, re-evalute the product.
Comment