# Finishing Polish Gloss test: Menzerna, Meguiars, Dodo Juice



## jeroens

Today was the day for the first Gloss test.
Following up on thread: http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=109881

Products tested were:

Menzerna Final Finish (PO 85RD)
Menzerna Final Finish (PO 106 FA)
Dodo Juice - Lime Prime
Meguiars #205 - Ultra Finishing Polish
Meguiars Deep Crystal Paint Cleaner

The test was performed on a BMW E30 scrap Bonnet, which was washed, clayed and half (per test area) was pre-polished with Menzerna Intensive Polish (PO85RD 3.02).










The Bonnet was divided into 5 test areas where each of the products were worked with a new pad. The Pad chosen was a Sonus SFX-3 Spot Pad (4"), used on a Meguiars G220 DA.










After Polishing the individual areas they were cleaned with some Ultimate Detailer and than measured with a Gloss Meter.

Multiple Angles were measured, but the 20 degrees was used to determine the winner.










20 degrees is used to measure high-gloss which is what we are after.










Per area several samples were taken and put into excel.

Upon visual inspection all products, except for the 'Crystal Paint Cleaner', demonstrated that they were able to remove also all defects/swirls in the un-pre-polished areas.

Finally the min, max and average reading calculated and recorded in the chart below.










as you can see the differences between some products are fairly small, especially between the two two Menzerna products.

But surprisingly (at least to me) the Menzerna Final Finish (PO 106 FA) showed even a bit more gloss than the Menzerna Final Finish (PO 85RD).

Therefore, allthough with a very small margin, the winner of this first test is...

*The Menzerna Final Finish (PO 106 FA)*

However I think it is fair to say the differences are small, also with the #205 and Lime-Prime, and you are probably of best just using the product you enjoy working with best.

I will repeat this test again in two weeks or so but than using a Makita Rotary...

Hope this was helpful

Jeroen


----------



## Matthijs

Very nice test. Interesting to see more. Like testing waxes, or AIO's.
How were the readings before the products?


----------



## jeroens

I unfortunately do not have exact readings on the Menzerna Intensive Polish (PO85RD 3.02), but I actually expect it would be fairly close.

The original bonnet after clay and wash, was reading around 50 to 51.


----------



## ahaydock

Interesting - thanks for sharing.


----------



## jeroens

Just so you know... The trained professional (eye) can barely (not) see any difference in gloss smaller than 5 GU... (so 80 and 85 will look the same to most people...)


----------



## Vyker

This completely appeals to me, great to see such tests conducted and would love to see more.

Thanks for taking the time and sharing this.


----------



## [email protected]

Good test


----------



## pete001

Great test there and thanks for sharing :thumb:.


----------



## Porta

Nice test, but I guess that the ultimate detailer could have added some extra GU:s.


----------



## DAVEE46M3

Good test, there should be more tests like this instead of people wasting money on products that do not work:thumb:


----------



## caledonia

Thanks for conducting this test and posting your findings.

Only concern is that it would have been better if there was an average reading after the 3.02 in each of the test areas. This way you could have subtracted this reading from the final score and this would have given you a plus reading. This would have made the test more conclusive and would show the amount of correction and gloss achieved for each product.

Eg. Panel = 50
3.02 = 65
Test product = 85
So product would have a +20 rating.

As it is very hard to say that the hole panel had a reading of X prior to finishing, There would have been variable and when the test is as close as it is. Very had to attain the correct information.

But once again thank for the time and effort.
Gordon.


----------



## Toolman

DAVEE46M3 said:


> Good test, there should be more tests like this instead of people wasting money on products that do not work:thumb:


So if I choose to use M205 or PO85RD I would be wasting my money since the test conclusively prove that these products clearly does not work, right?  :lol:


----------



## ads2k

Thanks for the review, interesting results.


----------



## jeroens

Porta said:


> Nice test, but I guess that the ultimate detailer could have added some extra GU:s.


I agree, plan is to also measure after ipa wipe


----------



## MAXI-MILAN

Nice test :thumb:
:speechles can use gloss meter for wax test 
I have no idea about gloss meter how to use?Is it easy to use?


----------



## rapidseven

Would have like to have seen the test performed with a rotary not an orbital, but nicely written none-the-less.


----------



## jeroens

rapidseven said:


> Would have like to have seen the test performed with a rotary not an orbital, but nicely written none-the-less.


is up next...


----------



## jeroens

MAXI-MILAN said:


> Nice test :thumb:
> :speechles can use gloss meter for wax test
> I have no idea about gloss meter how to use?Is it easy to use?


very easy, just put on the surface and press a button 

Wax-test is planned after the next test (rotary polish).


----------



## jeroens

caledonia said:


> Thanks for conducting this test and posting your findings.
> 
> Only concern is that it would have been better if there was an average reading after the 3.02 in each of the test areas. This way you could have subtracted this reading from the final score and this would have given you a plus reading. This would have made the test more conclusive and would show the amount of correction and gloss achieved for each product.
> 
> Eg. Panel = 50
> 3.02 = 65
> Test product = 85
> So product would have a +20 rating.
> 
> As it is very hard to say that the hole panel had a reading of X prior to finishing, There would have been variable and when the test is as close as it is. Very had to attain the correct information.
> 
> But once again thank for the time and effort.
> Gordon.


Good idea... on the other hand there were, except for the Crystal Paint Cleaner, no real differences between the pre-polished area and the plain one. All polishes (except the one) were able to correct the swirls on the un-pre-polished area....


----------



## ianFRST

nice test mate, looking forward to the others


----------



## north007

nice test very simple to understand:thumb:


----------



## MAXI-MILAN

jeroens said:


> very easy, just put on the surface and press a button .


I do not want to be disturbing you now but i hope you give some information
about gloss meter ... after finish your work :thumb:
i found this http://www.rhopointinstruments.com/Default.asp?Page=4&gclid=CN_RhIXk65kCFQMFZgodcEYFQg



jeroens said:


> Wax-test is planned after the next test (rotary polish).


:argie: Dont make us wait too long .


----------



## jeroens

MAXI-MILAN said:


> I do not want to be disturbing you now but i hope you give some information
> about gloss meter ... after finish your work :thumb:
> i found this http://www.rhopointinstruments.com/Default.asp?Page=4&gclid=CN_RhIXk65kCFQMFZgodcEYFQg
> 
> :argie: Dont make us wait too long .


For some initial reading in English you could start here... 
There are several sources online if you google..

http://www.gloss-meters.com


----------



## MAXI-MILAN

jeroens said:


> For some initial reading in English you could start here...
> There are several sources online if you google..
> 
> http://www.gloss-meters.com


very usefull link:thumb: icant sleep to night :lol:

Thank you very much , dont worry i will use google translate some times
tell me its very hard to understand me when i write english? .

sorry my english not soo good!


----------



## MAXI-MILAN

in my eyes high-end wax such as zyrnol swissvax and souveran really bring 3-dimensional perfect gloss on the paint
form different angles ,other waxes can bring best result from one angel only but from other angel the result is poor "no clarity & gloss".

do you think gloss-meter nice idea to check this point ? 
maybe you can check the durability also :speechles beacuse evrey week the wax lose Glossiness .


----------



## Curley89

Great test, thanks.

Ive got a question..

Say i used lime prime after the menz final finish, will i in effect be dulling the finish or have i confused myself?


----------



## jeroens

Curley89 said:


> Great test, thanks.
> 
> Ive got a question..
> 
> Say i used lime prime after the menz final finish, will i in effect be dulling the finish or have i confused myself?


Each test area was divided 50-50 in an un-pre-polished and Menzerna Intensive Polish (PO85RD 3.02). So not final finish but the intensive polish.
Turned out that also without the intensive polish lime-prime would be able to remove the defects on this BMW E30 paint.

hope this helps... J.


----------



## Curley89

I understand that but say i used lime prime to prime for a sealant AFTER finishing with final finish will it 'dull' the finish from the final finish?


----------



## Dave KG

Its a very interesting test with very interesting results. I agree with Gordon above about having a "control" reading at the start, but it is a very good test to undertake and adds yet more to the information available.

It would be interesting to see if different people see the same ratings as others: ie, do we all get best results from PO106FA? My suspiscion is that we dont, given all methods vary slightly (or dramatically in some cases), and some people will thus achieve the better results from one polish while others achieve better results with another... The key really is to hone one's technique, and learn the polish you have - there is no "wonder product", its all in how you _use_ the polish.

Did you IPA wipe the panel before measuring the gloss? As residues from polishes (some use oils, waxes etc that may not be removed fully by a quick detailer) can also affect the results I would imagine.

Be interested to see what results you achieve from the rotary.

Also, if Epoch or L200 Steve see this, I remember they carried out a similar test with Gloss Meters? (Or is my memory playing tricks on me?) ... Be intrigued to see comparable results, and whether my prediction above of different people getting different results holds


----------



## Clark @ PB

Yep, jon and steve have a gloss meter 

I also think that readings could differ from one person to the next, depending on how long each product was worked, how long for etc. Also DA and Rotary application could produce different readings too...


----------



## Dave KG

Clark said:


> Yep, jon and steve have a gloss meter
> 
> I also think that readings could differ from one person to the next, depending on how long each product was worked, how long for etc. Also DA and Rotary application could produce different readings too...


I fully expect that...

As is sommon with Meguiars abrasives of old, we saw a difference in using #205 by DA and rotary. By DA it was a bit underwhelming, on a par perhaps with PO85RD3.02 interms of finish quality. On a rotary, it was right up there with PO85RD Final Finish for me, perhaps even slightly better on the softest of paints... and that is what is noticed by human eye, not a gloss meter. But that was me, and my technique. I fully expect you, or Steve, or John, or *insert name here* would get different results!


----------



## jeroens

I'll do a side test with #205 with different techniques than, just as bonus 

I currently have have a soft 4" pad.

Which techniques/combo;s would you advice based on your own experience?


----------



## maesal

Dave KG said:


> I fully expect that...
> 
> As is sommon with Meguiars abrasives of old, we saw a difference in using #205 by DA and rotary. By DA it was a bit underwhelming, on a par perhaps with PO85RD3.02 interms of finish quality. On a rotary, it was right up there with PO85RD Final Finish for me, perhaps even slightly better on the softest of paints... and that is what is noticed by human eye, not a gloss meter. But that was me, and my technique. I fully expect you, or Steve, or John, or *insert name here* would get different results!


I agree 100 % with the comment of #205, with the rotary you could achieve an amazing finish :thumb:
Cheers Dave.


----------



## jeroens

Added the rotary version of this test:
http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=1459025


----------



## willd0g

Thanks for conducting the test. I will keep this information in mind when tackling the next job.


----------

