bretfraz

Thanks for the reply.

You still haven't told us why this is so important to you. As I said, we are getting the results we want, what else is there? I'm waiting on an answer from you.

As for the rest of it, I'm not getting between your ego and your opinion. If you have facts, state them. Otherwise, everything you've said is just your opinion, which is fine, if misguided IMO. ( I know... that sentence even drove me a little crazy...)

I'm glad you've got so many years from a PC. I hope mine lasts as long. But if it doesn't, I won't lose sleep over it, I will just buy another one and go back to work.

I have two rotaries that I take everywhere and don't use. If I felt I could get the same results (or better) using the rotaries than the PC, I'd use them. I've been using rotary polishers for over 25 years, so they don't scare me. But with current techniques, they aren't delivering results. Why use them if they aren't getting the job done?

I await your response.

Thanks.

ASPHALT ROCKET

Dave, I am not calling you hack at all nor am I calling Bryan and Todd one. All I have said is I disagree with the way the pc is used, not saying anyone is hack or they are a crappy detailer at all. You guys are taking this off course. I also stated in an earlier post that it will remove certain defects without issue without having to use excessive pressure.

gmblack3

Thanks for making me waste my time...I go over to db, look in the PC forum and see one guy who had an issue with a new PC.

Dave1

That's what I normally do with Menzerna products.......

If the pressure and speed are about the same the big difference seems to be pad saturation with 105 vs. smaller amounts with Menzerna........


I've been using M105 with a white LC pad and a Makita 9227 with medium to light pressure set at 2 on the dial (900 )and was wondering if a PC with heavy pressure might be a better option. I guess the pressure is not as big a deal as I thought. Thanks for clearing that up.......

Are the PC technique results similar using a Flex in general......?




Thanks for the tips fellas..........

David Strum

Dana - so how exactly are you thinking that the PC is being used incorrectly?

When one primes a pad with non diminishing abraisives?

When one applies pressure as needed to remove defects? I also apply pressure as needed with the rotary?

The fact that one uses a PC on a car, and not just for woodworking?

What exactly is it about the KBM method is it that you feel is "improper use of a PC"?


EDIT - Dave 1...Bryan had a Flex, and sold it because he could get just as good of results with the PC and KBM. I kept mine, because I can use the KBM with the Flex, on even a hard clear like a C5, and knock defects out more quickly than with a PC. I would say the only way you'll see any significant time savings with a Flex vs a PC/KBM, would be on a hard clear.

ASPHALT ROCKET

Once again I have stated numerous times my reasoning, I can't help that you can not see that. If you are getting results that make you happy go for it, I never was taking that from you. My only point was the way the pc was being used, plain and simple. You can get those same results with a rotary and better. If you can not with your 25 years of experience I am sorry you haven't learned anything, theres that ego thing.

Nothing is misguided at all, you have your opinion. I have stated a fact, even Porter cable has it in there manual not to force their tools and move up to the tool that fits for that given job.

I even use the porter cable for light work, it has it place but not for severe defects .

0TH0001@properautocare.com

Given your vast experience with a rotary and realitive lack of experience with a PC using these methods, I don't find your results superizing. When you 'it will not do as good as a rotary' it is important to point out that this is in regards to your experience and the gap in skill level and understanding you have.

I would counter that in many cases it will equal a rotary, in some cases it will not, and in other cases it will surpass it. Way too many variables to make concrete statements, although I do not doubt that is your experience.


.

You can tell me you are overworking the PC, but according to Porter Cable and the vast majority of users, I am not.

Those are 100% the diagrams posted as well as your reponse which was (and I quote) "See those pictures prove my point you have to force the pc to work."


It was not in Luster's thread. I have the thread, as well as your post (which I believe that you deleted?)...

I 100% agree that they could put me to shame regarding sanding wood, I don't even know how to do it. Just as I would hope to put them to shame when it comes to polishing paint with the same machine.

You have repeatedly said this, but I challenge you to prove it. I have numbers that clearly show that the PC is the most purchased and LEAST returned polishing tool available to the end user. I am not talking about less than handful of people on an Internet forum, I am talking about looking at sales records, complaints, and returns. It is not even a close margin and your opinion is strongly strongly refuted by the most reliable facts.

In fact I will say that the Porter Cable 7424 is one of the most durable polishing tools available. Please post the numbers, or call any of the major sellers of these tools and ask them.



Hold on, if the Porter Cable 7424 is wood sander and Porter Cable makes a rotary to pick up where 7424 left off... Your saying that the Porter Cable rotary is used for wood work only as well...

The problem is that Porter Cable doesn't make a rotary polisher anymore...

You are making a strong (and very incorrect) assumption about Porter Cable's reasoning for having (at one time) an angle grinder along side a wood sander.

For example Dynabrade sells upwards of 10 different pneumatic dual action random orbital polishers, and none is designed to pick up where the other left off. Dynabrade also sells a rotary polisher, again not designed to pick up where the other left off. In fact the pneumatic DA's are often more powerful then the rotary...

You are inventing logic based on assumptions to support your arguement. Porter Cable made a rotary because there was a market for them and they thought they could sell them and make money. That is what I was told. When they merged with Flex, Flex continued the rotary line. I could twist this around, base it on my assumptions, and say ,"Porter Cable stopped making a rotary because they where so impressed with the performance of the 7424" and it would be the same.


You are right and I do appericate you noticing the time that I put into my posts. I agree that they are theory, as everything is theory until it applied (to one degree or another). But my concepts are theory as much as your are, because I have experience as well.

I do prefer to support my theory with a solid foundation and facts that support it. Given my embaressingly terrible English, it can be difficult for me to express this with out becoming long winded, using excessive superlatives, and making it legiable.

I have read your opinions on it, but I have yet to read any facts or science behind your theories. If you are going to consantly say that we are using the PC beyond its ability then you should be able to back this up with facts. Otherwise your opinions are supporting your logic and it becomes a circle of agreement with yourself. I can tell you and further tell you how to find out that the PC is an extremely durable machine that has a better track record then anything else out there and I can prove it.

I read your opinion on how heat makes abrasives breakdown and allows you to polish the paint better, but you haven't supplied any facts or science to back up your finding.

So while my long winded responses which cover science and facts, as well as theory may be nothing more then 20 pages of pretty pictures to you, I am pround of the research (100s of hours) I have done into this subject as well as the 100s of hours polishing to test the theory. I would hate if what I was typing couldn't be proved past me shrugging my shoulders and stating "Well its just my opinion".

I would only agree that with your vast experience with a rotary you have been able to create flawless finishes and your relative inexperience with a DA has not afforded you the same result. I could show you that I am able to produce perfect, micro marring free finishes (with no visible marring with a 60x's microscope) with either a rotary or a PC.


The problem is that until you support your opinions with facts I am kind of done with this arguement, although these discussions are hopefully benefical to those who take to time to read them.

Well that is fine, but unless you they are using foam pads and the different dynamics that foams of various thickness produce one the machine and are adjusting for those dynamics, their scope is very limited to what we (I) are (am) discussing.

I will say it and I feel I am 100% correct in saying it. Using a flat sanding disk vs. a 1 1/4" thick piece of foam is completely different and changes the dynamics and techniques involved almost completely. To not understand the HUGE difference that this makes almost rules out any understanding of how the machine works when it comes to polishing the paint and thus would explain poor results.

This is according to you, not Porter Cable. The sales and return numbers on PC's sold for paint polishing certainly refute your statement.

I don't recommend, nor have I have I ever recommended making the machine spin backwards. Although it is not directly related to the amount of total pressure being applied, but rather how much pressure is focused over a small area.

If you haven't achieved great results with the Porter Cable, maybe you are not using it as correctly as you believe.

You can put the PC on speed 1, slightly tilt the pad, and make the machine spin backwards. Hardly abuse...


Perhaps if your experience was more equal with Porter Cable and your understanding of how it works greater, you would have a different opinion.

I know you made this in jest, but in all seriousness, the amount of pressure required to make this phenomenon occur is HUGELY variable. Again on speed one I can make it happen by touching my finger to the pad in the right place. With the huge variety of pads, sizes, thicknesses, and curves of body panels, it is completely wrong to assume that just because the pad rotated backwards that the machine was being abused.

As it stands I never recommended that anybody abuse their machine.

ASPHALT ROCKET

Dave, when you are applying pressure to were you are making the pad go backwards that is way too much. The pc was not made to do that whether working on wood or paint. Plus it is the same concept whether working on paint or wood.

I already said for minor defects the pc is a great tool and also use it with my details. I agree with Todd on this also that it's fun to be able to change up when you can. I am with you on applying pressure with the rotary, but a rotary is alot stronger tool and it takes alot more pressure to bog down a rotary. The pc is a finishing wood sander that has been re-badged as a polisher to sell more units. A polisher is just that, polish the paint, not to remove major defects.

If I was Bryan I would have sold my Flex also and bought a Porter Cable, they are a great tool brand. That is why I own so many of their tools.

Dave1

Cool........

I've taken my Flex apart and lubed everything up and really didn't think heavy pressure was a good option with that pad base using 105 considering some of the chafing issues they've had in the past......

My C5 is in need of an anual and I'll try the Flex with the new version M105......

ASPHALT ROCKET

Todd, I guess when I come down there we can go over all this and show each other our views on this. We can go back and forth on this till we are blue in the face.

I never deleted any posts on TID, you did if anyone has. You should be able to check that. If it wasn't Luster's and I should have said it might of been on that thread, but I know it was on one of them.

Todd alot of what you disagree with me on is in the manual of the pc about holding the pc and using it, not me just spouting off. I would agree my experience with the pc isn't nearly as much as with a rotary on paint. Since having this experience with polishing and after using pc several times I will say I do not feel the results are as good with the rotary. Maybe since you started with the pc you might feel this way and maybe that is my feeling since I started with a rotary, who knows but that is what I have found.

I have never disputed the quality of Porter Cable tools, that is why I probably own almost everything they sell, they are one of your top tool makers. The pc paint polisher is an after thought since the orignal was a 7336 wood finishing sander than the 7424 became a paint polishier, only difference is the counter weight. Nothing wrong on their part to change the part number and make it a paint polisher.

Once again I am glad you and I can see that we are joking with each other at times and are not taking this as serious as others are. You have your views and I have mine. Like others have said it is all about making the cusotmer happy with the results you have provided them and getting paid. I never once was trying to take that away from anyone, but it seems people are trying to twist what my point was.

ASPHALT ROCKET

For one you wanted proof of one and you got it and secondly there is a post in the polishing section that has more. Funny that is exactly how I feel when reading your little sarcatic posts on here.

bretfraz

It's unfortunate for all of us that you are unable or unwilling to support your opinion with facts. You've stated your one point over and over and over, too bad you haven't thought past it.

My results are not my opinion, they are real. Whatever the Porter Cable manual states has no bearing in this discussion. The PC is a tool, a means to an end, which is a happy customer, a finely polished car, and a wad of cash in my hand. Anything else is immaterial.

With 25+ years of detailing experience, I may not be as smart and wise as you, Dana. However, one thing I have learned is to never stop learning, and NEVER think my opinion is the only one that matters. It's unfortunate you are unwilling to open your mind and take your knowledge to the next level.

There is so much more to detailing that just one point of view, one technique, and one belief system. Like with most things in life, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

It's just a tool, Dana. That's it. Use it, break it, fix it, replace it when it dies, move on to the next one.

ASPHALT ROCKET

Bret, I do not disagree with you. Just as you said your results are your facts that is what I was saying also. If your results make you happy awesome. I was not taking anything away from anyone, just how the tool was being used.

I never said I was any smarter than you, but since you were being sarcastic I figured I would throw one in there also. I am not closed minded at all. If I could have seen the benefit in my results with the pc I would be all for it. If I didn't want to grow in knowledge I would have never started using 105 and say keep using the old 3m compound you got in the gallon paint cans.-lol. Trust me I never think my opinion is the only one but if I feel my point is correct I will defend it just like I would expect you or anyone else to do the same.

I understand it is just a tool, but why destroy if you don't need to. That is just the way I am about tools. Maybe it is because I have spent so much on tooling between detailing, wood working, machines for engine machining/metal work and automotive repairs.

bretfraz

And we are back to Square One, which comes down to two simple words...... So What??

I don't know anyone who has destroyed a PC using these polishing methods. Do you? I think you are being irrationally alarmist without reason. If you have proof that these methods destroy PC's, then reveal it.

In the end..... what difference does it make? Why should I let fear limit my detailing? I'm not afraid of destroying a PC. Why are you? It's just a tool, Dana.

ASPHALT ROCKET

It is all about using the tools correctly, if tools or anything else for that matter is used corretly they are going to last that much longer. As far if there is proof , I mentioned it above in another post.

How would fear come in to limiting your detailing, nor when has it been discussed. Fear should come into play in destroying a tool if used incorrectly, that is why I never had any fear of one breaking,if it does for some odd reason, then it will either be repaired or replaced. Then again it is all about the brand of the tool, Bret.

bretfraz

Thanks, Dana. I think I understand where you are coming from now.

I do not agree with nor subscribe to your beliefs about PC usage. While I like Porter Cable products, I do not share your faith in them. To me, they are just tools. Clearly, they are much more than that to you.

If you have verifiable proof that these PC polishing techniques shorten the lifespan of the machine, I'd be interested in seeing that. I don't expect you to deliver that as I'm convinced you have no proof, only your beliefs. That's fine, I understand even if I don't share them.

I do not believe these polishing techniques will shorten tool lifespan because I have not experienced it, nor has anyone I know. I think this fear is unfounded and has no basis in fact. I consider the Porter Cable's owners manual a guide, not a bible.

In the end, I'm not afraid of using the PC in a manner in which the mfr may not have intended. In the off chance the PC fails due to this usage, I will just replace it with a new one. It's a very good machine and comes highly recommended. I encourage everyone reading this to buy one if they are interested in taking their detailing to the next level.

Kevin Brown

A new show that finally replaces the Sopranos.

Hold on... gotta get a Pepsi.

Okay. Well, I will stay out of this one because I am enjoying the reading.
I will add this, though... the "missing diagrams on TID" are not missing. See post number 8:

http://truthindetailing.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=1289

By the way- I did not make the diagrams to teach someone how to "drive" the random orbital and cause it to rotate backwards. I never said it WAS or WAS NOT desirable. I simply wanted to show how I think it happens.

allstar14

The "misinformation" I posted about pressure was from reading posts from people like Bryan. So if that is wrong, well, then I dont really know what to tell you.

TOGWT

[I used this pad yesterday for the first time and I noticed this ring on the outside. Is this normal after 1 use? Did I get a defective pad?]

I trust that the OP had his question answered and hopefully (we all) learned something from this thread

Detailing also takes willingness to experiment, which usually means deviating from the product manufacturer’s directions, making objectives observations based upon the results obtained, and adjusting the techniques and products used as necessary.

My professional background as a Chemical Engineer was more scientific theory than the practical day to day, hands-on of detailing automobiles. Many things that are suggested on detailing forums have very little merit from a theoretical viewpoint, although many produce the desired results (although some uses that some chemical are used for borders on stupidity).

I will be the first to admit that when I first heard of using a PC and a non-diminishing 12/10 abrasive to remove serious defects from paint I was very sceptical (read bordering on disbelieve) But when respected professional paint renovation detailer’s like TH0001, gmblack3, et al published the results obtained my standby reminded me “The more I learn, the more I realize what I don’t know”

Suffice to say, if a polishing system (machine, pad, abrasive and methodology) gives you the results that both you and your clients are satisfied with, then use it until something better comes along.

My only comment, and it is comment not criticism, that the confusion on the use of this method is that there is not write-up by the person who instigated the system, rather piece meal ‘extracts’ that have tended to raise questions that some have taken a guess at an explanation rather than have the original methodology to reference. I'm certain that once the 'paper' is posted much of the misinformation that is so prevalent will be clarified

gmblack3

Your posts sound very familiar to someone else that is from VA and is also posting in this thread.

Your claim that I am misinforming anyone is nothing but a bunch of