# Light wipedown vs Full wipedown



## Dodo Factory

Following on from the 105/205 thread earlier in this section, I was chatting to Kelly at KDS about the difference strengths of wipedown and how these can conspire with the filling effects of compounds to mask the true finish of the paint.

The popular belief has perhaps been that a wipedown, whether IPA or dedicated wipedown spray, will reveal the truth and remove fillers. The reality is that the strength of the wipedown, the pressure applied and the number of passes all play their part. Some wipedowns can be very effective, others won't be at all. And some products may even increase the filling effect rather than expose it. You simply have to experiment and be open to the possibilities rather than what is pronounced on a forum. For example, sometimes the filling agents can bond better to hotter panels than colder ones, so drop back may occur after a different machining process, even if the wipedown product and technique you use is consistent.

Remember, the filling properties of certain products can be played to your advantage and can make some products your best friend, but they can also catch you out. You just need to know that they can be present and that the wipedown needs to be carefully carried out if you want to reveal the true finish (which may not be necessary, of course, especially if the finished is to be waxed or sealed).

The complete series is here:
http://s288.photobucket.com/albums/ll168/kdskeltec/compounds/?start=all
But I will post up some of the pics to tell the story here.
And big thanks for Kelly at KDS for going to the efforts he has.

OK, we start with some dark, swirly, BMW paint.










This gets machined with a 'silicone-free' medium-heavy cut compound (according to manufacturer info). Being silicone free you may expect it to fill less as silicone oils and resins tend to be very good fillers.










A slightly hologrammed finish is achieved, perhaps to be expected considering the relative aggression of the cut promised by the product, the pad used and the claimed lack of silicone...










This then gets wiped down with a bodyshop final wipe style product.










After a wipedown, this is the result. It looks better - not worse!!! Holy Milwaukee, Batman... what is going on?










In the interests of fashion, erm, science, Kelly then masked off half the panel.










Out with the big guns... no messing with IPA.










You obviously need to be careful with solvents of this strength and volatility, they can soften or damage paint if used incorrectly. Light wipedown with heavy solvents, or heavy wipedown with light solvents is a fair guide.

The result:










And from another angle...










Et voila... the underlying finish of the clearcoat is revealed, clearly visible to the naked eye. You may, of couse, get different results; different machining techniques, working times, clearcoat hardness etc.

But if you get drop back after a 'wipedown' that you thought revealed the true finish, maybe this post will help with the head scratching.


----------



## Sonic

Good info and example, thanks.


----------



## Dipesh

Great post Dom. Will the dodo be creating a new wipedown product??!


----------



## empsburna

Interesting results.

Need to be VERY careful around smart repairs though, so unless you have a good PTG I wouldn't be wiping down with it.

Excellent test all the same.


----------



## Dodo Factory

Yes, never use thinners around SMART repairs, or do so with the utmost caution. Well pointed out MD.

We may do filling and 'true wipedown' style products when we do a full machine polishing range. I certainly think there's room for both


----------



## Clark @ PB

Great post guys! I played about with a test panel and 3M fast cut plus before Xmas as I've found this to be the worst for drop back (in my experiences) and found that even a strong-ish solution of IPA still didnt fully prevent drop back depending on how you applied it - you could still see a slight cloudiness on the surface of the clear coat that smeared if you swiped your finger through it after a couple of hours.


----------



## Porta

Mario aka _Maesal_ did a thread about this a couple of years ago, but then it was the drop back from 3M.

Anyway, let the pictures do the talking


----------



## Dodo Factory

Great additional info, thank you all


----------



## Dave KG

Nice post - valuable information for professional and enthusiast detailers alike


----------



## Tunero

Very interesting...


----------



## -Kev-

thanks for posting Dom :thumb:


----------



## Porta

Could we guys do some more tests? I wold like to see how other compounds like FC+, POS100 and #105 are behaving.


----------



## maesal

I did more tests with 105 and Farécla Total Dry Use Compound, but did some minor filling. Menzerna RD3.02 did not fill at all.


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

Clark said:


> Great post guys! I played about with a test panel and 3M fast cut plus before Xmas as I've found this to be the worst for drop back (in my experiences) and found that even a strong-ish solution of IPA still didnt fully prevent drop back depending on how you applied it - you could still see a slight cloudiness on the surface of the clear coat that smeared if you swiped your finger through it after a couple of hours.


Hi Clark,

I have played with the 6 big guys with regards to compounds over the last year 3M , Scholl , Meguiars , Menzerna for filling properties and i was shocked :doublesho

The reason for the long testing came about last year ,i think due to myself becoming more know on forums a started getting new customers coming to me for inspection/quotes and even a couple of times to inspect poor detailing workmanship .

What i found was nearly all problems were on hard paints (Bmw/Merc/Vag) and dark colours , when viewing them had horrid buffer lines and holigrams now one of these cars was shocking .

The owners of these cars told me that the car looked good for around a month or so then started to show buffer lines , so of course my reply was i guess they machined corrected with heavy cut then used a filler heavy wax and now the wax is breaking down leaving behind the true cut .

some of the customers said no was watching the detailier using 3M FCP and when they wiped down the car it was really good finish almost perfect , i have even read a few posts on a lot of different forums saying they can correct a bmw in 8 hours using FCP and then glaze and wax job done ( and i dont not mean this forum) .

Had a few phone calls of late with detailers saying to me there is NO fillers in FCP at all :wall:

The biggest bad boy of all the compounds i have tested so far is FCP, done a test on the hearse detail before Dom arrived to help me

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=154290

The hearse was used to test the 6 major heavy cut compounds all down one side with myself and 2 staff on a sunday while the gates to estate were shut so not to get distrubed .

we tested a panel each and used 6 brand new green 3M compound pads to keep the variables down for each compound , machined corrected as close as possible to the instructions and Zenith method ie changing speed and pressure and working for a long time on each section until broke down and we all decided that was going to be the best finish form each compound before refining .

then each panel was masked 50/50 one side just wiped down with new soft microfibre while the other side of each panel was wiped down with some kind of inspection/ quick detailer progressing through to extremely strong solvents .

The out come was ALL of the heavy compounds filled some more than others , and some compounds only truely were fully removed with using Tradis or thinners with only one gentle wipe.

Tried some 10 differenty types products , this was from inspection wipes to thinners .

we found some of the inspection wipes actually helped improve the finish and not removed the oils left from compounds , and even some so called solvents diluted down 50/50 did not remove much of the oils .

I have also found that 3M yellow compound to be one of the most truthfull compounds out there from just wiping down after correction .

On the hard paint surfaces when i used FCP i found if you made one or two passes with 3M yellow of 3M blue after FCP that you dont even remove the filling properties left behind from heavy (warm ) long machining times on a panel , its only when you put alot of pressure and time machining with a fine cut do you really remove the bonded on FCP .

What is happening is over time in UV light heat and washing of the paint,this is when the bonded on residue starts to break down and leaving behind buffer lines for people to see .

It was while training my staff to machine correct when i first noticed this , i would let them do the heavy machine correction and i follow with a refining stage . I would inspect there work and it would pass so on to me with refining and while doing so i would start to see marring , holigrams etc after many passes with fine or extra fine cut . At first a guessed it was something wrong with foam pad or compound , but it was none of them i was slowly removing the left over products in the heavy cut compounds which have bonded to the paint .

This problem only really comes to light as said above on the hard dark colours (due to having to use heavy cuts and alot of pressure which causes local panel heat) and you can only fully correct such cars by at least 2-3 stage correction over 20-30 hours depending on how bad the paint is before hand .

The next stage when i have time is to test the same with wool pads as they run alot colder to see if changes how strong the compounds then bond to the paint surface

Hope this makes sense and for tech words alike dom can fill in , no pun intended :lol:

Kelly

www.kdskeltec.co.uk


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

I may add that the quick write up of pics that dom used the picture showing this










is before any wipe down just slowed down the machine and lifted of the paint surface and the compound residue left before a wipe with clean dry cloth, then with inspection spray as the next photo

here is another photo after the whole process , remember all of the panel in the shot has been machined and only half wiped down with strong solvent and the over with a expensive so called inspection spray wipe just for the job of inspecting paint work after machine correcting , no tricks just fair and square










The buffer lines are only on view on the side with real solvent wipe down , and after i wiped the other side which then showed marring and buffer lines

Kelly


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

maesal said:


> I did more tests with 105 and Farécla Total Dry Use Compound, but did some minor filling.


To add to that had a play with G3 and why not the 2 above as you say and G3 filled if slightly less than FCP :thumb:

Kelly


----------



## ianFRST

crikey. i didnt realise it could be so bad!! 

ive not properly done a full on compund of a car for ageeeees, as i jsut prefer to make a couple of passes using 3.02. but one ive never really done is a wipe down to remove the polish... think this just prove i might have to start doing so


----------



## ajc347

Very interesting post guys. :thumb:

This would explain the issue I had on my test panel (VAG paint), when trying out Megs Compound and Swirl X via DA.

The panel looked really good at first, especially after I applied some sealant samples on it. 

I applied some pre-wax cleaner at a later date and noticed some light swirling on the surface and couldn't work out how they had been caused. 

I presumed that there must have been some grit on the applicator pad or that the pre-wax cleanser was quite abrasive in nature, but this thread seems to suggest that the cause may have been fillers in the polish being removed by the pre-wax cleaner.

Thanks for sharing the results of your investigations Dom & Kelly.


----------



## maesal

kdskeltec said:


> To add to that had a play with G3 and why not the 2 above as you say and G3 filled if slightly less than FCP :thumb:
> 
> Kelly


I'll try the test with G3 and Menzerna S100 :thumb:


----------



## Dodo Factory

maesal said:


> I did more tests with 105 and Farécla Total Dry Use Compound, but did some minor filling. Menzerna RD3.02 did not fill at all.


I found 3.02 filling quite a lot when worked for a short period on a medium-to-hard paint with a wool pad.

Paint and pad combo, plus technique all play their part in the results. This is why ********** pronouncements are so bad on forums. They get set in stone when two people can be right in reporting differing results 

I would personally use 3M yellow as a medium polish now, rather than 3.02, if I was worried about filling. But I actually prefer 3.02 in action for some strange reason :driver:

FCP does seem to be probably the most 'filling' from all reports.


----------



## maesal

Dodo Factory said:


> I found 3.02 filling quite a lot when worked for a short period on a medium-to-hard paint with a wool pad.
> 
> Paint and pad combo, plus technique all play their part in the results. This is why ********** pronouncements are so bad on forums. They get set in stone when two people can be right in reporting differing results
> 
> I would personally use 3M yellow as a medium polish now, rather than 3.02, if I was worried about filling. But I actually prefer 3.02 in action for some strange reason :driver:
> 
> FCP does seem to be probably the most 'filling' from all reports.


Well, I think that 3.02 must be worked until it becomes clear, if not maybe it will fill.
I have to try the filling of FCP. Fast Cut and 50077 filled a lot.


----------



## JoeAVS1

Thanks Dom & Kelly, this is what makes DW so interesting! Keeps us pushing the boundaries


Regards, Joe:thumb:


----------



## Clark @ PB

kdskeltec said:


> The next stage when i have time is to test the same with wool pads as they run alot colder to see if changes how strong the compounds then bond to the paint surface
> 
> Hope this makes sense and for tech words alike dom can fill in , no pun intended :lol:
> 
> Kelly
> 
> www.kdskeltec.co.uk


Certainly from my experiences you'll find FCP still fills a fair amount even with wool mate.

Personally it's not a major problem as long as you know how much you need to wipe down a panel and what with. As long as you thoroughly break the polish down you *should* only be left with minor filling as the abrasives will have done their job in actually removing the defects.

When I machine a badly swirled panel with the likes of FCP or 105 and after wiping the residue away, if it looks 99% perfect I know there's a good chance it may be 75/80% after a thorough wipe down - this is why a 2nd or even 3rd hit is often needed in order to be 99%+ after a thorough wipe down and is what contributes to such massive amounts of hours correcting paint for me personally.

I've played with white spirit/IPA/Tardis and have found that a rough 60/40 (IPA/Water) wipe down with a couple of slow passes of the MF removes everything in order for me to see the true correction levels so I'm 100% confident in everything I now machine - untill the next new polish arrives which will then require further testing and playing about with 

As stated already, alot of it will come down to technique and how hot you get panels when machining etc, I have found that when using foam, FCP does seem to run slightly hotter than say the likes of 105. As Dom says, there are too many variables for certain things to be taken as gospel from a forum.


----------



## Clark @ PB

Dom - have you got an e-mail address I can contact you on? I cant PM you as I turned mine off a year or so back!

E-mail me at [email protected] if you dont want to publically post it, I've got a quick question for ya


----------



## chillly

Great post DoDo:thumb:


----------



## spooks

Clark said:


> . As long as you thoroughly break the polish down you *should* only be left with minor filling as the abrasives will have done their job in actually removing the defects.
> 
> .


A great point, could it be possible that people experience polishes filling more due to incorrect use as well, in general - not in this particular test.

Interestingly, when 3m came to our bodyshop to do training, they advised us to polish multiple times and used a glass cleaner of all things to check between passes, despite claiming it had no filling abilities!

They do however recommend that fcp is followed by extra fine which is followed by ultrafina. I often wonder if alot of product problems can be traced back to not following the guidlines of the manufacturer who formulated it in the first place?


----------



## Dodo Factory

Clark, it's dom - at - dodojuice - dot - com. Email me if still around and I'll give you the landline no. if you need it.


----------



## Clark @ PB

spooks said:


> A great point, could it be possible that people experience polishes filling more due to incorrect use as well, in general - not in this particular test.


If you take 3.02 for example, I agree that it can possibly fill (only slightly though, nothing like the heavier compounds ocassionally can) if you dont fully work it for the length of time it really needs to gain the best possible finish, however I tend to work polishes for a long time, probably longer than they possibly need to so when I use it I never find it fills. From memory I think DaveKG says he works polishes for a long time too so this is probably why he has similair findings as me.

Everyone's experiences are going to be different as techniques vary greatly from one detailer to the next, but its worth playing about with the polishes you use regularly and find what they do/dont fill if you havent already done so


----------



## Clark @ PB

Dodo Factory said:


> Clark, it's dom - at - dodojuice - dot - com. Email me if still around and I'll give you the landline no. if you need it.


Ta - e-mail on it's way, just a quicky


----------



## Dodo Factory

spooks said:


> A great point, could it be possible that people experience polishes filling more due to incorrect use as well, in general - not in this particular test.
> 
> Interestingly, when 3m came to our bodyshop to do training, they advised us to polish multiple times and used a glass cleaner of all things to check between passes, despite claiming it had no filling abilities!
> 
> They do however recommend that fcp is followed by extra fine which is followed by ultrafina. I often wonder if alot of product problems can be traced back to not following the guidlines of the manufacturer who formulated it in the first place?


This is a good point spooks.

The problem is that bodyshops do use products in a certain way, and it ain't how amateur detailers are using them. The end results that are being aimed for may be different as well... who wants to finish down an insurance job on a Fiesta to Clark's ne plus ultra if you're paid 25 GBP an hour by the insurance co and given the parts?!! So the reality is that even the pros won't work a compound for however long may be needed. That's why I presumably see more filling than maesal with 3.02 - I work the compound a short to average amount of time only. Boredom then sets in. I do another set or start finishing down. I think Kelly will testify to my short attention span :wave:

If you work a polish for longer, it will potentially cut more, the abrasives may become smaller so it will cut finer, and the panel will become hotter - helping fillers bond. This is the missing part of the jigsaw. Wipedowns aren't always as effective at one panel temp than another.

In effect, if you step down perfectly without wipedowns then perfect correction can be achieved, because these products will have a diminishing cut and increasing refinement. But commercial pressures have seen detailers offering one day machine correction and that is difficult to achieve on some paints. One day paint enhancement is easy. But proper correction... the jury is out unless it's soft paint  What is possible is a semblance of proper correction in a day using a reduced number of steps and an increased reliance on fillers - inadvertenly, not deliberately, I am sure.

The revelations are 1) don't believe the finish you see, 2) don't believe the wipedown unless you are sure of its effectiveness and 3) don't believe compound manufacturers if they say products don't fill unless you have found the same result IN PRACTICE using your techniques. If you want to change your technique to one that the manufacturer claims results in less filling, great, but the oils, waxes and resins in these products may have some effects in some situations and other effects in others. They are often in the product to begin with, but get worked to death and have less effect with longer working times. It could catch out the 'quick compounder'.


----------



## Clark @ PB

Dodo Factory said:


> This is a good point spooks.
> 
> The problem is that bodyshops do use products in a certain way, and it ain't how amateur detailers are using them. The end results that are being aimed for may be different as well... who wants to finish down an insurance job on a Fiesta to Clark's ne plus ultra if you're paid 25 GBP an hour by the insurance co and given the parts?!! So the reality is that even the pros won't work a compound for however long may be needed. That's why I presumably see more filling than maesal with 3.02 - I work the compound a short to average amount of time only. Boredom then sets in. I do another set or start finishing down. I think Kelly will testify to my short attention span :wave:
> 
> If you work a polish for longer, it will potentially cut more, the abrasives may become smaller so it will cut finer, and the panel will become hotter - helping fillers bond. This is the missing part of the jigsaw. Wipedowns aren't always as effective at one panel temp than another.
> 
> In effect, if you step down perfectly without wipedowns then perfect correction can be achieved, because these products will have a diminishing cut and increasing refinement. But commercial pressures have seen detailers offering one day machine correction and that is difficult to achieve on some paints. One day paint enhancement is easy. But proper correction... the jury is out unless it's soft paint  What is possible is a semblance of proper correction in a day using a reduced number of steps and an increased reliance on fillers - inadvertenly, not deliberately, I am sure.
> 
> The revelations are 1) don't believe the finish you see, 2) don't believe the wipedown unless you are sure of its effectiveness and 3) don't believe compound manufacturers if they say products don't fill unless you have found the same result IN PRACTICE using your techniques. If you want to change your technique to one that the manufacturer claims results in less filling, great, but the oils, waxes and resins in these products may have some effects in some situations and other effects in others. They are often in the product to begin with, but get worked to death and have less effect with longer working times. It could catch out the 'quick compounder'.


Really good post and many good points - I'm loving this thread!


----------



## spooks

Clark said:


> Really good post and many good points - I'm loving this thread!


Agreed, very useful info.

If we take fcp as an example, as its a product I know well, If its used as I do with a long working time, the heat bonds the fillers to the panel. This would be corrected by the next stage being extra fine? This in turn corrected by ultrafina? - all in theory of course!

I also agree with your point about not believing everything the manufacturer says, but if they recommend that we use their products in a certain order in order to get a certain finish, ie fcp followed by ef followed by uf, then surely someone who uses fcp as a one step has only themselves to blame!

As a manufacturer yourselves Dodo, your product must work in a particular system, if someone chooses to alter that system that cant be down to the product.

So again, could the problems be related to how we use them , as we all agree there are so many variables, i suspect we will never know. Unfortunately, someone reading this post probably now thinks fcp is a poor product


----------



## Clark @ PB

That's probably somethign we should clarify, there's absolutely nothing wrong with FCP,105,3.02 etc etc - as long as you're aware of how they should be used and what should be used to follow them up with after thorough wipe downs etc. 

It will depend greatly on the person using them, possibly(probably?) the heat they generate whilst using them and if they wipe the panel down when it's hot or cold - in my opinion of course


----------



## Dodo Factory

FCP is a great product. But it can fill.

That is the take out. The whole point isn't that filling is bad, as it can be fantastic in practice and the bodyshop industry loves it for this very reason. But we all need to be aware of how products work and the variables at play. What I thought interesting was the way we (mainly amateur) detailers had latched onto a little bit of the bodyshop and claimed it as our own. Even poor old Kelly at KDS who is bodyshop trained from way back was starting to doubt what he'd learned and seen when viewing the posts here...

Regarding a product range, it is true and a fair point what you say. But people will use a product in any which way they want. We advise and write instructions for our stuff, but still we try and make them as easy to use as possible by minimising user error and maximising performance from minimum user input. If someone was unkind they may say making it 'idiot proof' is the aim, but consumers aren't idiots - they just don't have the time or inclination to read the label 

Finally, I do think there is a certain case of maximising the look of a compound by adding glaze oils, minimising hologramming through filling characteristics and then slapping 'anti-hologram' or even 'bodyshop safe' on the bottle. That is marketing at play. It doesn't make it a bad product but it may make a guy in a bodyshop pick it up and start using it. Just look to the product, not the label.


----------



## spooks

And we all agree that it can fill more or less based on a host of variables, is that down to the product or the user?

Awareness of how products work and the variables, will come from posts like this but it would be nice to see some compound manufacturers contribute , to give the consumer gets the facts they need, if we take any number of compounds as examples, how many come with instructions?

Compound manufacturers - Marketing at play!! from the Dodo Factory!!!!lol

When is the announcement regarding your new range of non filling , non glazing, no hologram Dodo compounds:thumb:


----------



## Clark @ PB

spooks said:


> When is the announcement regarding your new range of non filling , non glazing, no hologram Dodo compounds:thumb:


I've made my own, it's just a bottle of sand from the local beach - just add water


----------



## Dodo Factory

We are working on compounds at the moment, James B has had a very quick play of one of them.

But when we do them we will do them Dodo style - maybe put a fill guide as well as cut guide on the bottles perhaps???!


----------



## spooks

Dodo Factory said:


> We are working on compounds at the moment, James B has had a very quick play of one of them.
> 
> But when we do them we will do them Dodo style - maybe put a fill guide as well as cut guide on the bottles perhaps???!


And based on your earlier post, we should believe not a word of it!!!

I still cant figure if filling is a by product of compounding - full stop, or if it is a result of incorrect useage or poor technique.

Its always easier to blame a product, there arent many posts on here showing poor methods

If filling is indeed a by product of compounding, what does a consumer do to minimise it, and what do they look for when buying a product?


----------



## DSW

Really good information. :thumb:
I find it very interesting also this thread on Autopia:

http://www.autopia.org/forum/machin...spective-paint-defect-return-interesting.html


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

spooks said:


> A great point, could it be possible that people experience polishes filling more due to incorrect use as well, in general - not in this particular test.
> 
> Interestingly, when 3m came to our bodyshop to do training, they advised us to polish multiple times and used a glass cleaner of all things to check between passes, despite claiming it had no filling abilities!
> 
> They do however recommend that fcp is followed by extra fine which is followed by ultrafina. I often wonder if alot of product problems can be traced back to not following the guidlines of the manufacturer who formulated it in the first place?


Spooks,

I have never used FCP WITHOUT then using extra fine (yellow top) and then ultrafina (blue top) , this is how i have always got the perfect finish as so many people ask on BMW's and AUDI's etc .

Its when just FCP has been used with a quick pass (refining) were i have seen problems a few months later 

As clark wrote i can be 2-3 whole days just compounding with FCP many passes before moving onto refining even when a DRY wipe down could look corrected after one hit , i started testing myself due to the one day claims and seeing some horrid work from so called detailers a few months after machine correcting just to satisfy my interest .

Has anyone ever looked at the 3m bottle of FCP , the chart showing how heavy each cut is ?

As Fast Cut Plus shows less cut than Fast Cut , so why Is it called PLUS and why have the RED box around the triangle for FCP only is this to show thats what is in the bottle or is it something added which is not in the other compounds , would love a 3M rep to clear this up some more

Kelly

www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

Clark said:


> That's probably somethign we should clarify, there's absolutely nothing wrong with FCP,105,3.02 etc etc - as long as you're aware of how they should be used and what should be used to follow them up with after thorough wipe downs etc.
> 
> It will depend greatly on the person using them, possibly(probably?) the heat they generate whilst using them and if they wipe the panel down when it's hot or cold - in my opinion of course


clark,

This is why i have been testing so much as , nothing wrong with any of the compounds and use all that have been spoke about plus many more .

I wanted to see how much of an affect there was with regards to different tech's from different detailers and hobbists to the filling and wipe down stage .

While wet sanding a car done some experiments, with the car left in 3000 grit slightly matt finish i then applied dozens of waxes / sealants and even cleaning fluids / quick detailers to small square test sections, they all improved the finish a great deal even thou saying "contains no fillers" , of course what is term fillers ? , if a product has to stick to the paint then its got to grab as such the paint surface and this will mean its filling in mircoscopic marring .

The wool pad comment i post to you was regarding the lower heat from heavy cutting with wool only to see if the left overs from compounding would wipe away easier (slightly less heat so maybe slightly less of a strong bond to the paint) needing less wipes or such a strong solvent .

Myself have not noticed the drop back or should i say Marring swirls and holigrams returning on our repeat customers , and took a while to see why i had customers coming into me for advise with such defects from other body's work .

I bet you would be surprised how many people dont and did not realise to wipe down properly before inspection and then moving onto next panel or cut , and just because a wipe down on one paint surface with one compound does not always mean the perfect wipe down on another paint surface using different compounds with different techniques for that compund .

My tests were to highlite what could happen and be happening out there on a daliy basis for guys who a fresh to machine correction and on the learning curve

Whats was the saying measure twice cut once with wood and metal work 

Kelly

www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


----------



## maesal

You should try 1z Acrysol:










It will remove all the oils, fillers, etc... in 1 pass easily and it will not damage the paint or clear coat.
Cheers.


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

maesal said:


> You should try 1z Acrysol:
> 
> It will remove all the oils, fillers, etc... in 1 pass easily and it will not damage the paint or clear coat.
> Cheers.


Cool will have a play with that then

thanks Kelly :thumb:

www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


----------



## maesal

kdskeltec said:


> Cool will have a play with that then
> 
> thanks Kelly :thumb:
> 
> www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


You'll enjoy it for sure :thumb:


----------



## spooks

kdskeltec said:


> Spooks,
> 
> I have never used FCP WITHOUT then using extra fine (yellow top) and then ultrafina (blue top) , this is how i have always got the perfect finish as so many people ask on BMW's and AUDI's etc .
> 
> Its when just FCP has been used with a quick pass (refining) were i have seen problems a few months later
> 
> As clark wrote i can be 2-3 whole days just compounding with FCP many passes before moving onto refining even when a DRY wipe down could look corrected after one hit , i started testing myself due to the one day claims and seeing some horrid work from so called detailers a few months after machine correcting just to satisfy my interest .
> 
> Has anyone ever looked at the 3m bottle of FCP , the chart showing how heavy each cut is ?
> 
> As Fast Cut Plus shows less cut than Fast Cut , so why Is it called PLUS and why have the RED box around the triangle for FCP only is this to show thats what is in the bottle or is it something added which is not in the other compounds , would love a 3M rep to clear this up some more
> 
> Kelly
> 
> www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


Thats exactly the point I was trying to make earlier, you have used the product as prescribed by the manufacturer, ie fcp followed by ef followed by uf, and had no problems.
The problems are caused by someone trying to use fcp as a one step which we know it isnt and the manufacturer certainly doesnt claim.
I too use the system as prescribed and have no issues, yet other techs in our shop have had marks re appear, due to their technique, or missing out ef or uf.

Thats why I asked if its more down to the detailer rather than a fault with any product, yes the products can fill, but will you have any issues if you use them in the correct manner?

I will ask our 3m rep regarding your other point.

Great post, thanks for kicking it off with your tests on the hearse


----------



## Dodo Factory

spooks said:


> And based on your earlier post, we should believe not a word of it!!!
> 
> I still cant figure if filling is a by product of compounding - full stop, or if it is a result of incorrect useage or poor technique.
> 
> Its always easier to blame a product, there arent many posts on here showing poor methods
> 
> If filling is indeed a by product of compounding, what does a consumer do to minimise it, and what do they look for when buying a product?


It's the stuff physically in the compound that causes it. However, the effects of these ingredients can be diminished by the technique.

There is no 'blame' going around so it saddens me to see you using these words. Filling is as good as it is bad  I thought I had made that pretty clear in previous posts.

The only blame can be on anyone claiming true correction when it hasn't taken place, and that will depend on individual circumstances. It is also often entirely accidental to make such a claim, due to the filling properties masking the true finish so expertly.

As for whether you believe what we say or anyone else, I would suggest you always look to the product first of all. If it conforms with the marketing claims then maybe some trust can be established. Maybe you need to chat to a few compound manufacturers and get their take on it and see what they say?


----------



## Dodo Factory

kdskeltec said:


> While wet sanding a car done some experiments, with the car left in 3000 grit slightly matt finish i then applied dozens of waxes / sealants and even cleaning fluids / quick detailers to small square test sections, they all improved the finish a great deal even thou saying "contains no fillers" , of course what is term fillers ?


And this is the 64000% carnauba question.

It is technically true that something like our Lime Prime contains no dedicated filling agents (silicone resins) but yet it does fill. Likewise, it is 'bodyshop safe' because the type of silicone oils within are easily removed and not dispersed in a way to cause trouble in bodyshop environments. Yet it still contains silicone.

So there will always be a grey area with marketing claims - is it right for the same product to sell less than an identical competitor because it doesn't have 'bodyshop safe' on it, when it is bodyshop safe in practice? Most bodyshop guys know very little about modern silicones (usually by dint of them using silicone products and not even realising it) due to a historical (and hysterical  ) hatred of aerosol oil based silicones which will quite surely be the bane of your life if you spray for a living. But the more I learn about fillers or ingredients with filling properties, the more I quite like them. You just need to know how to use them to your advantage and not be caught out by them.


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

What i have tried to point out is that , IF you dont wipe down correctly after heavy correction and some compounds more than others will mask or fill what ever the correct term is , hiding some marring etc with different styles of correction . 
Then you use a product like lime prime to clean of compound residue and "prime paint surface" ready for LSP (which dom will admit used to say has no fillers early on due to it was not engineered with fillers) this will FILL or MASK and then you put a wax or sealant over that adding to the filling affect so leaving a stunning finish that many may think is perfect , when as all of the products sitting on the paint surface degrade down in time Thats when you see the real correction .

Lime prime on 3000 grit surface of new M3 ,

I have just wiped down the surface with panel wipe first after wet sanding , then masked 50/50 used lime prime by hand and NOT as a cut method just one wipe as thou its wax left for 3 minutes then wiped of very gently .

Now lime prime has not fillers ???





































This i found to be the same with many waxes including the very expensive top end ones and including dodo supernatural , i will try and add more pics as i go of such waxes .

now i am sure dom will say there is no fillers in supernatural .

I found using a gloss meter over and over again postioned in the same place everytime that most products slightly improve the readings on what you may think is fully corrected paint , but when you refine with many passes and what some would call over the top 20+ hours refining , then repeat the same tests the valves go down slightly from fresh clean refined panel to one which has 2 coats of LSP over the top .

but the valves i am talking about for gloss reading are very small but there , also found Z2 to be the least Filling of all LSP's so far and not affecting the gloss readings either way (not improving or dulling down perfect paint) just my findings

Kelly

edit to clear me and dom are not sitting next to each other :lol: even thou we have just posted a lime prime post with in minutes of each and neither knew we were going to

www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


----------



## Dodo Factory

spooks said:


> Thats exactly the point I was trying to make earlier, you have used the product as prescribed by the manufacturer, ie fcp followed by ef followed by uf, and had no problems.
> The problems are caused by someone trying to use fcp as a one step which we know it isnt and the manufacturer certainly doesnt claim.
> I too use the system as prescribed and have no issues, yet other techs in our shop have had marks re appear, due to their technique, or missing out ef or uf.
> 
> Thats why I asked if its more down to the detailer rather than a fault with any product, yes the products can fill, but will you have any issues if you use them in the correct manner?
> 
> I will ask our 3m rep regarding your other point.
> 
> Great post, thanks for kicking it off with your tests on the hearse


The gist of this is correct, but it's not about people using FCP as a one step. It is about getting a better result than you think you have got on harder paint, or with shorter work times. It is not something that only catches out idiots and the unwary. It could catch a seasoned pro out on tricky paint.


----------



## Dodo Factory

It is true that Supernatural wax contains no dedicated fillers, but it could fill 

HDWax by Autoglym and Bilt Hamber Autobalm are also good at 'enhancing' the finish in a similar way. HDWax on a dark coloured car can darken it noticeably because of the oils within. It can be used to your advantage


----------



## spooks

Dodo Factory said:


> It's the stuff physically in the compound that causes it. However, the effects of these ingredients can be diminished by the technique.
> 
> There is no 'blame' going around so it saddens me to see you using these words. Filling is as good as it is bad  I thought I had made that pretty clear in previous posts.
> 
> The only blame can be on anyone claiming true correction when it hasn't taken place, and that will depend on individual circumstances. It is also often entirely accidental to make such a claim, due to the filling properties masking the true finish so expertly.
> 
> As for whether you believe what we say or anyone else, I would suggest you always look to the product first of all. If it conforms with the marketing claims then maybe some trust can be established. Maybe you need to chat to a few compound manufacturers and get their take on it and see what they say?


I'm not for a minute suggesting that anyone here is or has "blamed" anyone or any product, it was a generalisation that people will always "blame" the product before looking at themselves and their technique when something goes wrong, do we really think that the detailers Kelly refers to will put their hands up and take responsibility or will they pin it on the product?

If nothing else this thread has proven from all involved that technique is critical to ensure that no issues arise from whatever filling abilities a compound may or may not have

Apologies if you took offense at my point regarding not believing your marketing claims, it was a dig based on your earlier post regarding not believing the 3m claim regarding non - filling, where you said dont believe the manufacturers claims, perhaps a smiley should have been added!


----------



## Kelly @ KDS

Dodo Factory said:


> It is true that Supernatural wax contains no dedicated fillers, but it could fill
> 
> HDWax by Autoglym and Bilt Hamber Autobalm are also good at 'enhancing' the finish in a similar way. HDWax on a dark coloured car can darken it noticeably because of the oils within. It can be used to your advantage


so this is why you can see this once the paint cleansers and waxes have left the paint with washing and time then :lol:



















owners saying it was fine when i picked the car up and did not show this

kelly

www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


----------



## Dodo Factory

spooks said:


> Apologies if you took offense at my point regarding not believing your marketing claims, it was a dig based on your earlier post regarding not believing the 3m claim regarding non - filling, where you said dont believe the manufacturers claims, perhaps a smiley should have been added!


I didn't take offence, you should treat all marketing claims as being marketing claims and if you're lucky they will be based on truth and the company will operate ethically. You can believe or disbelieve ours as you will - the only way we can establish trust is by producing products that conform with expectation and then being as honest and open as we can. So no need for a smiley, apart from here. 

But it would be interesting to ask your 3M rep etc about all this as well, and see what manufacturers of other products say. I don't see them on here. They could even put me right on a few things as they have a lot more experience :thumb:


----------



## Dodo Factory

kdskeltec said:


> so this is why you can see this once the paint cleansers and waxes have left the paint with washing and time then :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> owners saying it was fine when i picked the car up and did not show this
> 
> kelly
> 
> www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


Kelly, that just looks like the one bucket gritty-sponge service wash you do on black jap cars for customers who don't pay


----------



## spooks

kdskeltec said:


> if a product has to stick to the paint then its got to grab as such the paint surface and this will mean its filling in mircoscopic marring .
> 
> www.kdsdetailing.co.uk


Thats an interesting point Kelly, the more "keyed" the surface is the more likely the product is to stick to it then?

Could it be that compounds adhere to a keyed surface in the same way paint does? If a car has a particularly bad finish, is that a better surface for the products to bond to thus making the finish look better than it is.


----------



## Dodo Factory

Filling products tend to sink into rough clearcoat more than 'sticking' to it.

Heat thereafter (through machining) can aid bonding, but the products are rarely adhesive in the same way paint is designed to be.

So yes, damaged clearcoat will show off filling better in many instances. And if there is nothing to mask or fill, then no filling will take place even if the product has a good filling ability.


----------



## charger17

The word fillers is misleading. Typically when people talk about fillers in compounds/polishes they are talking about either glycerin or mineral oil, which are used by the manufacturers to give lubrication. The oils can leave behind a slight film which might help to mask or hide minor imperfections or swirls, but they don't really fill scratches or bond to the paint. Depending on the manufacturers requirements the oils can be thick like syrup or thin like water, the thicker oils being more difficult to remove with a solvent based wipe down.


----------



## Dodo Factory

Carriers acting as inadvertent filling agents, basically...

They can fill micro-marring though, but I definitely agree with the bonding issue. I think there is potentially only a heat/bonding issue going on with silicone resins and maybe even the synthetic waxes (silicone wax, microcrystalline wax) that sometimes find their way into compounds. But more research is needed.


----------



## Reflectology

or maybe they should market them as "*POLISHES*" with the the sub heading of "contains masking agents to help reduce the appearance of defects".

would this be fair to say this is exactly what the polish is doing, if so then it should be made clearer


----------



## PhillipM

They may not be deliberately designed to mask though, just a byproduct of another function in the product - carrier agent/lubrication/cooling agent, etc.


----------



## Reflectology

surely they have been tested over and over again prior to release, these "effects" that are left behind are surely something the manufacturer knows about, if not, why not.


----------



## Tiauguinho

I saw this thread at work when Dom posted it and have been wanting to post a reply since then.

The Great Finish that a lot us strive for is done with hours and hours of compounding, polishing and refining. I spent easily over 100 hours on my M5 paint to be able to achieve the finish that I am satisfied with.

However, I understand that for a lot bodyshops and detailers, spending that amount of time on a job may not be profitable and just plain lunacy. Having products with some filling capability is a good thing for them.

Preferably, I would love to see products with a Filling scale, just like Dom suggested. That way we detailing nutters would be informed in what to expect from a Compound/polish and not be worried with several passes of IPA to clear those fillers out.

As Clark has said, this thread is awesome :buffer:


----------



## Dodo Factory

PhillipM said:


> They may not be deliberately designed to mask though, just a byproduct of another function in the product - carrier agent/lubrication/cooling agent, etc.


Absolutely, this is 100% correct :thumb:


----------



## Dodo Factory

phobia said:


> surely they have been tested over and over again prior to release, these "effects" that are left behind are surely something the manufacturer knows about, if not, why not.


Because of the infinite variables in machine polishing.

It is actually a wholly imprecise art, not an exact science, due to the different paints/clearcoats, the different pads and machines, the different techniques, ambient factors and the whole process (duration of machining etc)

But I would say that you could design some compounds to give a good finish quickly and to mask hologramming, and this may make it more attractive to the bodyshop trade who may desire these features. In fact, detailers may desire them as well. It's just good to have the knowledge what is really going on - or potentially going on - with the panel.

Or you could get mugged by some unexpected drop back a few weeks later. I think many of us have seen a badly hologrammed car in sunlight and heard the owner bemoan that 'xxxx only detailed it last month'. I bet xxxx didn't deliberately do an incomplete correction or miss the hologramming. I bet the brinkmann was out - but the strong IPA solution stayed in the van


----------



## Reflectology

I agree with the above, has anyone tested Farecla Total as I did see it mentioned in this thread, I may give it a go today on half a bonnet, no wipedown and the other half with 50:50 IPA and report back with results, as it is supposed to be a one step product there should be no need to refine with anything else. What i will do is study the Farecla Total video to ensure perfect application is met and it is to Farecla procedures.


----------



## maesal

Here is the video:






I did the test and it filled, but not so much. Farécla G6 also fills.


----------



## Reflectology

So from your results then you could say it would need refining even more


----------



## maesal

phobia said:


> So from your results then you could say it would need refining even more


I did the test with a Detailers Domaing orange pad and rotary and it needed refining, but with M205 or PO106FA everything was removed, so Total is a great polish for me.


----------



## Reflectology

but even so, not a one step as it states, never the less i do like Total, and although never refined it before I havent seen much by the way of drop back, I will now refine with something, I may try Zero swirl from liquid shine


----------



## maesal

phobia said:


> but even so, not a one step as it states, never the less i do like Total, and although never refined it before I havent seen much by the way of drop back, I will now refine with something, I may try Zero swirl from liquid shine


I tried (without wipedown) polishing with their white (cutting) and black (finishing) pads, just with 1 one application of polish, and that combo removed lots of swirls with a great finish.


----------



## Reflectology

Thats how I used it only with the Total Polishing pad, its light orange (the one in the vid above) but does take some kneading and breaking in, the black finishing pad is pretty good as well, however I did find it "wasn't" total dry use, it did need a quick spritz with qd


----------

