Why discontinue DC1?

[ca_999]

IMO DC step 1 is a good product. I use it to clean light contamination and light water spot that QD or UQD cant do.

A Cleaner Wax actually can be used as subtitute. But not of all need the extra wax.

SwirlX is the next least agresive product for paint cleaning, but in my opinion it is too agresive for cleaning light contamination.

So, why discontinue DC Paint Cleaner?

thanks.

[Fly Bye]

Re: Why discontinue DC1?

[Murr1525]

Re: Why discontinue DC1?

I think in the Average Joe consumer market, they expect a cleaner to do some swirl removal. Have to have your products do what the consumer wants.

You'll notice #205 is milder, as would be #9, #81. So I think Meguiars is aware that people who know a bit more may still want a milder product.

[EPHIOS]

Re: Why discontinue DC1?

I just used my DC1 on the trunk of my old car (well, 2004). I do not want to waste it. I think Meguiars is replacing it with SwirlX, which is more aggressive, yet safe enough for the consumer.

[akimel]

Re: Why discontinue DC1?

So, why discontinue DC Paint Cleaner?

My guess--poor sales.

Applied by hand with a foam applicator, SwirlX would seem to be an adequate, perhaps more than adequate, substitute for DC1. You aren't removing much paint, so you can probably use it forever on your car without ever endangering the clear coat protection.

Those of us who want a non-abrasive paint cleaner will just have to turn to other brands--and there are several. Most of them, though, need to be purchased through online stores. I am not aware of a non-abrasive paint cleaner that is available through regular retail stores.

[Murr1525]

Re: Why discontinue DC1?

Even DC1 had very mild DAT.

[ca_999]

Re: Why discontinue DC1?

Even DC1 had very mild DAT.

That's the point, "Very Mild".