# Non-Diminishing Abrasives Test - Meguiars vs. GTechniq



## Dave KG

From last week's testing session with Gordon, Allie and myself, this was one was one of the biggest tests! Gordon and myself spent time with the machine doing the sets for this test 

Polishing technology that many of us are used to uses diminishing abrasives - abrasives that break down as you polish, where the cut gets less and less and you can then burnish the finish with the broken down abrasives to remove or reduce holograms depending on the polish.

However, polishing technology is now adopting abrasives which do no break down - known as non-diminshing abrasives, or constant-cut abrasives. In these polishes, the abrasives remain cutting to the same amount throughout the polishing set. The idea behind them is that you can change the amount of cut by changing the pad or the amount of pressure (or other factors), rather than changing the polish. Naturally, "standard polishes" can also have their cut varied by changing the pad and polishing style, however non-diminishing polishes take this flexibility to another level and respond to a greater degree to changes. With this in mind, this test compares two of the manufacturers who have taken this polishing technology to the market:

*Meguiars*
Replacing their #80-series polishes, Meguiars first came to the game with the Solo range, with Solo Polishing Cream and the pad kit... Later to the market are #105 Ultra Cut Compound and #205 Ultra Finishing Polish which use the non-diminishing abrasives (Meguiars' SMAT technology) which are tested here. #105 is the aggressive cutting product for severe defect correction while #205 is the light abrasive product designed for light correction and finishing.

*GTechniq*
Perhaps less of a known brand, but certainly coming to the fore in the UK market and beyond is GTechniq - and the popularity of the P1 and P2 polishes is a testament to them, as they are making waxes in a market dominated by Menzerna, 3M and Meguiars. P1 uses non-diminishing abrasives, designed to be the only polish you need capable of severe defect correction or lighter correction. P2 is designed as a finishing polish for the removal of any hologramming and sharpening the finish.

So - the test. Using a VW Golf door, solid red paint with clearcoat and known to be hard paint from removal rates test, the heavy cutting products were first of all tested by foam for correction of defects and possible refinement. They were also tested by wool for severe defect correction. The finishing products were tested for the removal of holograms, both from foam and wool. IPA was used throughout for wipedowns and we have had good success with this in tests for removing oils so long as you saturate the panel and wipe in straight lines with moderate pressure... rather than just a cursory wipe over with a light mist of IPA. Results of our tests:

*Meguiars #105 and #205*

First up, the Meguiars polishes. We started with a nicely marred door (courtesy of sand paper and a gritty cloth):




























and a key used to inflict an X as a deeper mark to challenge the correction power of the product:



















The first test was carried out using a yellow Hexlogic cutting pad. The product was spread and then worked up to around 1800rpm and worked with moderate pressure by rotary polisher, as shown in the video below. No refinement stage was carried out, and the product was worked until it seemed to dry and go slightly tacky:



The results of the first compounding set:



















The finish looks good in terms of correction, however you can see light holograms formed as you can see under the Sun Gun. Using the strip light, which is better for looking at deeper marks as the Sun Gun can sometimes bleach out deeper marks through glare, we can still see the X in the finish, although it has been reduced:



















A repeat of this set, with an extended set length, achieved the following results under the Sun Gun:



















Good level of correction, and a nice sharpness to the Sun Gun reflection although as you can see there is some hologramming which I would expect with no effort made to refine the finish. The deep X has also been significantly reduced again:



















Now - for a moment of truth... IPA wipedown, and check again under the Sun Gun and we can see more holograms revealed, suggesting that #105 has acted to mask the holograms to a degree:




























A good first blow here, good levels of correction achieved and the holograms were to be expected given the cutting pad and the pressure used during the polishing set. However, a point to note here was the masking that #105 achieved as well, something to definitely be aware of.

The next test was to look more at the flexibility of #105 - using it with a 3M polishing pad, and using a Zenith point application method, refining with light pressure and slow speeds. The aim here is to get the best finish from #105 in terms of clarity while still achieving a cut. The video shows the application method - note, at the end of the set, the pad is barely in contact with the finish in order to give as light pressure as possible with the weight of the rotary being supported with the second arm:



The results of this investigated under the Sun Gun:




























Looks good to me so far, however a wipe down was then performed to really assess the finish - IPA has removed a filling effect from #105 above, so it was used again to check here. After wipe down:




























Carefully examining the results, there was perhaps very slight evidence of faint rotary tails but it was hard to differentiate between this and glare on the camera lens... in the flesh, the finish was arguably hologram free, perhaps very faint tails, ultimately hard to call! However, bearing in mind that this is an aggressive cutting compound used here, the clarity of the finish achieved I regard as very impressive and is a true testament to the flexibility of this product. So far, #105 is impressing 

The next stage of the test was to test the cut of #105 closer to its limit using an aggressive wool mop - a Makita cutting wool. The set, shown in the video below, works #105 at 2000rpm with firm pressure until the deep X was removed - no refinement attempted, and the product just worked until the deeper marks removed...



The results:



















Deep mark removed, however, some lovely holograms left!:



















This shows the cutting power of #105, and conveniently presents a nice challenge for the little brother in the range: Meguiars #205 Ultra Finishing Polish. The challenge here was to use the finishing polish, coupled with a finishing pad, to remove the holograms left. So - using a 3M finishing pad, and a long Zenith point set where the product was worked up to 1500 and 1800rpm. Firm pressure was used for the correction, and then the weight of the machine supported during the refinement stages to reduce the cut and burnish the finish:



The end results:




























IPA wipe down:




























#205 has long been one of my favourite finishing polishes for its ease of use, flexibility and finishing ability and on this test it performed well. It has also shown itself not to mask following bodyshop panel wipe wipe down as well, which gives me confidence in its use, and a good quality sharp finish is achieved from it.

Overall, an impressive performance from the #105 and #205 twins showing their cutting and finishing ability... more tests will follow showin how far #205 can be made to cut, but not for this test today 

*GTechniq P1 and P2*

The gauntlet well and truly laid down by the Meguiars products. The GTechniq products get an equivalently marred door with the same X as a deep mark, keyed in using my Volvo car keys :














































As above, the first test involved the use of a cutting pad (Hexlogic yellow, same as above for consistency) to remove as many of the defects as possible. P1 is water based, and the set length can be prolonged using a light spritz of water as you polish. Unfortunately, I got the pad a touch wet at the start which left a bit of splatter so, in common with using G3, a damp pad rather than a wet pad is definitely recommended. However, the product was very comfortable and smooth to polish with... Gtechniq recommend slower polishing speeds and for this reason I used a maximum of 1200rpm working speed and used moderate pressure throughout. Video of the set, Gordon spraying the water when he saw the product drying:



The results of the set, under the Sun Gun:




























Impressive correction, comparable to #105 above but with slower working speeds, and looking at the deeper mark, the correction from the P1 was arguably a little better:



















In common with #105 above, the set was repeated, and the results assessed again for see if the correction has increased. Under the Sun Gun:




























Again, a significant reduction in the defects, and the deeper mark is also notably reduced. The results are taken after an IPA wipedown, my apollogies I forgot to take pictures of the finish before the wipedown!





































The correction so far has been impressive, but what has impressed me more so far has been the finish - despite using a cutting pad and making no effort to refine the product has left a finish which is very close to hologram free, with only light tails. Certainly less than Meguiars #105 above. So far, very impressed with P1!

However, to investigate the flexibility of P1, a 3M polishing pad was now used and a longer set where effort was made to refine was made to see what quality of finish could be achieved using the P1. Again, speeds kept below 1200rpm:



The end results, before the IPA wipe down, are looking very promising:




























And after the IPA wipe down:




























Arguably hologram free, and for a product with the ability to cut severe defects out, the finish was again impressive. Alongside #105, it was nigh on impossible to tell the finishes apart in terms of clarity as both were showing a great amount of flexibility to be able to cut and refine finishes to a very good degree. So far, I was erring towards P1 over #105 as my choice as the slower speeds made for cooler running and the cut seemed a little better on foam with less severe holograms from the cutting pad. However, it was relying on the water spritzes for the set length which is a disadvantage over #105. Very close call so far.

But the test is not over, as the wool mop still needs to be brought out and the correction closer to the limit tested, using the set in the video and cutting until the X is fully removed, speeds up to 1200rpm:



End results of the correction:



















As you'd expect, some nice holograms produced though again, not as severe as the ones produced by #105:



















P1 showing impressive cutting ability here, and it has now set up the test for the finishing polish in the range: P2. Now, this is where things got interesting, as we initially went for a set with P2 similar to #205. That is, we used no additionally water, and prolonged the set length, reducing the pressure at the end of the set, as shown:



This was a mistake it would seem, as the product became a bit sticky during the polishing and did not feel as comfortable as P1 was feeling, and certainly nowhere near as smooth to use as #205. The results were also not impressive, with light holograms left:




























After IPA:










Clearly, this was down to my choice of polishing set and not the product, so we tried a different method, using water spritzes as shown:



This seemed to much better achieve the results from the polish, as shown:




























After an IPA wipedown:




























Overall, the finish seems to be closely equivalent to that achieved by #205 in that it seems to be hologram free and a nice sharp finish. P2 looks to be able to compete finish with with the likes of #205 and PO85RD/E from Menzerna, although getting there with the water spritzes seemed a little more fussy than #205 and #205 felt a little smoother in use. For me, P1 was a hugely impressive product which I will definitely be ensuring I have in my armoury at all times. P2 was also very good, but perhaps the reason I am not raving about it quite so much is that it isn't as "revolutionary" as P1 - P1 seems to shift boundaries a little with its combined but and finishing ability whereas P2 just seems to match its competition. Its a good product, but for me, #205 is marginally more pleasant to use and arguably delivers a slightly sharper finish in my eyes thought with no glossmeter it is not possible to say for sure whether its just my eyes or an actual difference in the finish.

*Overall*

Both of these product ranges are very impressive and both would sit very well in anyone's machine polishing armoury... The most impressive product of the day for me was P1 with its combined cutting and refining power - many will want to refine P1 for certainty in the finish, I know I would because I am fussy, but for a product with the cut it has it finished impressively and for me pushes the boundary just a little further than #105 does. #105 is impressive too in my eyes, a product which I very much like, but in my humble opinion, P1 has stolen its crown. Just! However, #205 keeps its crown in my eyes - perhaps because P2 didn't make me sit up and take notice in quite the same way as P1 did. But for me, #205 (and 85RD) remains my favourite finishing polish when all things are considered.

The ultimate combination now: P1 and #205. Sorted! :thumb::buffer::buffer:


----------



## bigmc

I knew you'd like P1 Dave, it's really as good as people make out isn't it.


----------



## Leodhasach

Another really interesting, informative and well laid out test, thanks for taking the time! :thumb:

Good timing too, with my recent interest in Megs 105 and 205 over my usual Menzerna polishes


----------



## CraigQQ

awesome write up dave.. just enjoyed reading every word.. including the spelling mistake.. :lol:

but i just bought some 205... and ive got plenty p1 and p2.. so looks like im set up for a nice combo with p1 and 205.
the p1 with a wool pad is great correction indeed..
i like p1 for the fact i can use a 3m yellow, and polish for 5+ minutes for one set.. and the panel isn't even warm.. good for beginners maybe? less chance of burn through with rotary?


----------



## Dave KG

Yes, the slower speeds and cooler running of P1 has its advantages for sure and potentially does reduce the risk of burning the paint (thought doesn't reduce the risk of striking through), so a good product for newbies to try... It is less automatic than the likes of Menzerna though, which for many is great as it gives more control but with that comes the need for a little more knowledge to get the best from them. A bit like having a manual gearbox instead of an automatic.


----------



## LeadFarmer

Damn, was hoping for more photos of Allie

Sorry


----------



## CraigQQ

i use a somewhat different p1 technique to yours dave, but it seems to work for me..
wonder if you could test it next time your using p1..

usual deal, start your set with p1 until it dries out, one spray of water on the pad, not the panel,
work the polish until it starts to dry again, at this point wipe the pad with a microfibre or terry towel.
don't add any more water ect, just polish with your freshly wiped pad until it turns clear,
and buff it off..

its closely adopted from a technique I was advised by nick from Slrestoration.


----------



## robtech

superb stuff and great to see the differences.excuse my ignorance but whats IPA mean?


----------



## CraigQQ

its isopropyl alcohol robtech.

most people use it after polishing to remove the oils, and make sure they are not masking the defects(as seen above in daves pics)

things like srp.. dont use it as you will remove the fillers lol.


----------



## Dave KG

CraigQQ said:


> i use a somewhat different p1 technique to yours dave, but it seems to work for me..
> wonder if you could test it next time your using p1..
> 
> usual deal, start your set with p1 until it dries out, one spray of water on the pad, not the panel,
> work the polish until it starts to dry again, at this point wipe the pad with a microfibre or terry towel.
> don't add any more water ect, just polish with your freshly wiped pad until it turns clear,
> and buff it off..
> 
> its closely adopted from a technique I was advised by nick from Slrestoration.


Will give it a go tomorrow :thumb:



robtech said:


> superb stuff and great to see the differences.excuse my ignorance but whats IPA mean?


Propanol - its an alcohol used for removing oils and fillers from paint to assess the true correction achieved.


----------



## pete001

Another fantastic test.Thank you for finding the time to share.


----------



## robtech

could you use panel wipe as an alternative to IPA?


----------



## Mirror Finish Details

Could have done with some P1 over the last few days then.

Cheers for a great write up Dave, are you going to be in Stoke with Gordon soon??


----------



## ronwash

Dave,thank you very very much for the test.
P1 is a briliant polish,how can you not love working with it?!.:buffer::buffer:


----------



## cleslie

Glad you've given Gtechniq a test. On my rock hard BMW and Audi paint I removed minor swirls with P1 and wool and then finished to an excellent shine with the P1 again but with a 3M blue pad. I thought the P2 was only needed with some softer paints. The thing I found with P1 was the speed I could polish the whole car because you don't have to do 1000's of passes until the polish breaks down. You just work on an area until it's done. With the wool this is no time at all. 
Would be nice to here how you got on with P1 with a finishing pad compared with a dedicated finishing polish.


----------



## Andy from Sandy

I would be very interested to know what pad you would use with P1 on a DA please?

Have I read this correctly that you would use the wool pad for severe correction but use lower cut pads depending on the defects to be removed?

For me, as a rank ameteur, to only need the one correcting polish and then one for final finishing if required will save alot of trial and error.


----------



## fishbonezken

Great test dave!! I feel the same as you regarding the P2. My 500ml of P1 only has about 20% left, and P2 almost 90%, I hardly use it. I did find one use for it though was to mix it with some water in a spray bottle. I use this 'sprayable' P2 to wipe off dried polish residues and seems to work fine, also does not leave any abrasive marring of it's own.

For P1 vs M105 however, when I need to cut with a wool pad, I'd go with M105, P1 just isn't as fast.


----------



## Kevin Brown

Thank you O' Master of Guides and Tests. I am glad to see you in the testing mood. :driver:

I have not used the GTechniq products. However, I do have some time behind the wheel using M105.

The water spritz that worked so well with the GTechniq also works well with M105. Foam or wool pads, as you might suspect.

I typically use a water spritz with M105, and find that it increases cut *substantially* once the particles have all attached to the pad ("substantially" can be as much as a best guess of 30%).

Some guys misinterpret this as the point in which M105 "flashes off", or the point in which its lubricants have evaporated, or soaked into the pad. This is not the case. A simple spritz of water atop the paint surface extends buffing time by loosening the abrasives from the pad as it contacts the water.

In fact, if the edge of the foam pad is kept clean (it can get a bit crusty as it gathers abrasive particles lying upon the paint surface), M105 will finish out incredibly well, similar to what you were able to accomplish I suppose, or perhaps even better.

Once the cutting is complete, the pad can be blown clean, or wiped clean, and pushed into a microfiber towel to aid in the removal of excess moisture.

A slow RPM pass with just a bit of M105 generally yields a great result.

That being said... M101 is, or should be, in the vicinity. :doublesho

Get ready to have some fun! Thanks for the test.


----------



## Kokopelli

Thanks for the great review Dave. This was the question in my mind yesterday and you fed me just in time 

I would like to know how Scholl polishes compare to these also. I'm in a decision point to choose the most efficient pick for a medium correction/polishing compound and can't make up my mind between 105, P1 and Scholl S17+. I use DA in general, hand for tight places and rotary for tough jobs.


----------



## Dave KG

robtech said:


> could you use panel wipe as an alternative to IPA?


Yes, you could 



Mirror Finish said:


> Could have done with some P1 over the last few days then.
> 
> Cheers for a great write up Dave, are you going to be in Stoke with Gordon soon??


I'm not sure yet, all depends on the pennies these days and when Gordon is going down... would be nice to see a few old faces and new faces 



Andy from Sandy said:


> I would be very interested to know what pad you would use with P1 on a DA please?
> 
> Have I read this correctly that you would use the wool pad for severe correction but use lower cut pads depending on the defects to be removed?
> 
> For me, as a rank ameteur, to only need the one correcting polish and then one for final finishing if required will save alot of trial and error.


Yes, the wool pad is for aggressive correction, and the lighter foams are for lighter correction or refinement. P1 is meant to be the only polish that you need in the range, you just vary the pad and the technique.

We'll have a look at DAs in more detail soon but my gut reaction is to use the Hexlogic pads: black for light polishing, white for general correction work and yellow for severe defect correction.



Kevin Brown said:


> Thank you O' Master of Guides and Tests. I am glad to see you in the testing mood. :driver:
> 
> I have not used the GTechniq products. However, I do have some time behind the wheel using M105.
> 
> The water spritz that worked so well with the GTechniq also works well with M105. Foam or wool pads, as you might suspect.
> 
> I typically use a water spritz with M105, and find that it increases cut *substantially* once the particles have all attached to the pad ("substantially" can be as much as a best guess of 30%).
> 
> Some guys misinterpret this as the point in which M105 "flashes off", or the point in which its lubricants have evaporated, or soaked into the pad. This is not the case. A simple spritz of water atop the paint surface extends buffing time by loosening the abrasives from the pad as it contacts the water.
> 
> In fact, if the edge of the foam pad is kept clean (it can get a bit crusty as it gathers abrasive particles lying upon the paint surface), M105 will finish out incredibly well, similar to what you were able to accomplish I suppose, or perhaps even better.
> 
> Once the cutting is complete, the pad can be blown clean, or wiped clean, and pushed into a microfiber towel to aid in the removal of excess moisture.
> 
> A slow RPM pass with just a bit of M105 generally yields a great result.
> 
> That being said... M101 is, or should be, in the vicinity. :doublesho
> 
> Get ready to have some fun! Thanks for the test.


Hi Kevin,

We are planning to look in more detail at the use of water with the #x05 series soon, as well as investigate your machine style (the Kevin Brown method :thumb in more detail as well - with both P1 and M105. So many thanks for the info, we'll carry out more testing and see what limits we can push #105 to  :thumb:


----------



## gally

Great test Dave! Must say thanks to you and Gordon for doing them. Much appreciated.

The water/splatter issue was the reason I didn't enjoy using P1. I bought it on it's AIO polish idea but never really got into it.

Can I ask, obviously you had some small issue with P2. Would P1 on the blue finishing pad and adopting a finishing tecnique work just as well?

I only ask because of how well it finished down even when correcting.


----------



## GMToyota

Thanks for the test Dave! 

Have been using Menz Power Gloss for so far.. any thoughts how 105 and P1 compare to my current favorite Menz compound?


----------



## vx55

Hi Dave KG,

Thanks for this write up.
Any plans to run these tests on soft paints or sticky paints? It will probably test the finishing polishes ability to finish down hologram free.


----------



## CraigQQ

gally said:


> Great test Dave! Must say thanks to you and Gordon for doing them. Much appreciated.
> 
> The water/splatter issue was the reason I didn't enjoy using P1. I bought it on it's AIO polish idea but never really got into it.
> 
> Can I ask, obviously you had some small issue with P2. Would P1 on the blue finishing pad and adopting a finishing tecnique work just as well?
> 
> I only ask because of how well it finished down even when correcting.


i'd say most of the time p2 wont be needed.. but on my soft black paint, it was, it added that extra gloss/clarity as p1 left a small amount of hologramming.
but my paints like lurpack!!


----------



## Andy from Sandy

Dave KG, Thank you for your reply. I will certainly be very interested in your DA review. Thank you.


----------



## Snapples

Love P1 at the moment. Some great stuff. I corrected the bonnet of an Omega just using P1. Click below if you want to see. Always love your write up's Dave 

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=222284


----------



## id_doug

Very comprehensive and informative write up, especially for someone like myself how's knowledge and experience of machine polishing is very limited :thumb:


----------



## Paul N

gally said:


> Great test Dave! Must say thanks to you and Gordon for doing them. Much appreciated.
> 
> The water/splatter issue was the reason I didn't enjoy using P1. I bought it on it's AIO polish idea but never really got into it.


TBH I don't get on with it when using the rotary, however when you need to refresh the paintwork with a DA or working by hand its great. I just find it very messy to work with


----------



## Snapples

Paul N said:


> TBH I don't get on with it when using the rotary, however when you need to refresh the paintwork with a DA or working by hand its great. I just find it very messy to work with


Really? I pretty much only use it with the rotary? It works great. As long as you only apply 2 squirts at a distance max per panel, it works a charm without much splatter.


----------



## CraigQQ

i dont get a lot of splatter now either..

everyone adds a bit much water when using it first time i think..

even if i get splatter now.. it doesnt really make much difference, being water based, a quick snow foam, and wash and its all gone.


----------



## Snapples

CraigQQ said:


> i dont get a lot of splatter now either..
> 
> everyone adds a bit much water when using it first time i think..
> 
> even if i get splatter now.. it doesnt really make much difference, being water based, a quick snow foam, and wash and its all gone.


Exactly :thumb:


----------



## Mr Face

CraigQQ said:


> awesome write up dave.. just enjoyed reading every word..
> 
> i like p1 for the fact i can use a 3m yellow, and polish for 5+ minutes for one set.. and the panel isn't even warm.. good for beginners maybe? less chance of burn through with rotary?


As above, a true master class and enjoyed every second of it. Huge thanks to team Dave & Gordon :thumb:

A couple of questions / observations if I may.

As pointed out by CraigQQ, from watching the first video my thoughts were always going back to "how hot is that panel" One thing that perhaps not machine polishing day in day out I am paranoid about, so thanks CraigQQ for your input, I will give it a whirl next time I need to go that deep & of course when my P1 arrives.

To try and limit heat build up (& any potential short fall in my technique) I started using Gloss-it EVP Pad Prime some time ago. While watching the number of times you spritzed the panel I had to ask if being on your own, concentrating on polishing is it really a workable solution to spritz that often to keep the polish alive ?

Have you tried Pad Prime as an alternative to water spritz ?

As always, any thoughts most gratefully appreciated. (thanks again for taking the time and trouble to bring this to our attention :thumb: )


----------



## mishy

Thanks for your write-up Dave. Another positive to P1 is how easy the pads clean up after!


----------



## Snapples

Yup yup. Sometimes I just need to wacked my hand against it and it all dusts off


----------



## Dave KG

gally said:


> Great test Dave! Must say thanks to you and Gordon for doing them. Much appreciated.
> 
> The water/splatter issue was the reason I didn't enjoy using P1. I bought it on it's AIO polish idea but never really got into it.
> 
> Can I ask, obviously you had some small issue with P2. Would P1 on the blue finishing pad and adopting a finishing tecnique work just as well?
> 
> I only ask because of how well it finished down even when correcting.


Yes, the idea with P1 originally was that it would finish down ready for wax, and there would be no need for any other polish and then P2 was launched, I believe for softer paint types. It is our intention to re-run this #105 vs P1 test on a Toyota panel that we have that has known soft paint and we will be aiming for the best possible finishing from both of them using different techniques to see just how close to wax-ready the finishes can be made 



GMToyota said:


> Thanks for the test Dave!
> 
> Have been using Menz Power Gloss for so far.. any thoughts how 105 and P1 compare to my current favorite Menz compound?


More flexible in my opinion - both #105 and P1 are non-diminshing and overall offer more cut and for me more comfortable working than Power Gloss. Not to say PG is a bad product, though it always felt like the weak link in the Menzerna chain to me compared to the other products on the market such as Fast Cut Plus. #105 and P1 for me are both superior products in terms of the cut they offer and the flexibility they offer, but they do use a different abrasive technology.



vx55 said:


> Hi Dave KG,
> 
> Thanks for this write up.
> Any plans to run these tests on soft paints or sticky paints? It will probably test the finishing polishes ability to finish down hologram free.


As above, we will be retesting these two products on different paint types and adding to this test (though probably in a different thread) - there's a lot of further testing to do, and a lot of techniques to try and paint types to try them on 



Mr Face said:


> As above, a true master class and enjoyed every second of it. Huge thanks to team Dave & Gordon :thumb:
> 
> A couple of questions / observations if I may.
> 
> As pointed out by CraigQQ, from watching the first video my thoughts were always going back to "how hot is that panel" One thing that perhaps not machine polishing day in day out I am paranoid about, so thanks CraigQQ for your input, I will give it a whirl next time I need to go that deep & of course when my P1 arrives.
> 
> To try and limit heat build up (& any potential short fall in my technique) I started using Gloss-it EVP Pad Prime some time ago. While watching the number of times you spritzed the panel I had to ask if being on your own, concentrating on polishing is it really a workable solution to spritz that often to keep the polish alive ?
> 
> Have you tried Pad Prime as an alternative to water spritz ?
> 
> As always, any thoughts most gratefully appreciated. (thanks again for taking the time and trouble to bring this to our attention :thumb: )


Gordon and I were discussing this with reference to P1, and on vertical panels such as doors where use a rotary one handed is less practical it would lead to a lot of stop-starting to keep spritzing the product. On the face of it, it doesn't seem unworkable to me but the truth would come out over a full detail and how fed up of spritzing you got by the end of it! If you are used to Menzerna, which just works straight out the bottle with no need for extra lubes or primes or water, then products that require additional water like this can be a little frustrating. Though, the flip side to this is the flexibility that P1 offers and it is a case of whether or not this added value outweighs the disadvantage of the water spritzes. For me, it does... However, just how much more flexible is P1 than one of our old favourite products that does just work out the bottle: PO85RD3.02 from Menzerna? You may think leaps and bounds, but today's testing shows the power of the Menzerna polish and just how many uses it can be put to as well using the diminishing abrasive technology. Lots of things to think about! Post about the Menzerna will be up in due course 

Haven't considered any other forms of lubrication as yet to work with the water-based P1, though this is something that we can look into for testing just to see how it reacts. :thumb:


----------



## CraigQQ

lol you may not like my method with p1 then dave.. the one i asked you to try.. as this requires stopping the rotary to spray the single water spray on the pad.. not the paint..
although im not sure if it makes much difference... pad or paint.

then you have to stop to wipe the pad.. before polishing to clear :lol:


----------



## Dave KG

CraigQQ said:


> lol you may not like my method with p1 then dave.. the one i asked you to try.. as this requires stopping the rotary to spray the single water spray on the pad.. not the paint..
> although im not sure if it makes much difference... pad or paint.
> 
> then you have to stop to wipe the pad.. before polishing to clear :lol:


I use G3 like that, as I find the lightly spritzing the pad and just keeping it damp rather than potentially soaking the panel helps keep the splatter down - and P1 would seem to be the same here, and more testing is going on of different methods with it... and #105


----------



## CraigQQ

lol i got round to testing 205 today.. using your method.. 3m blue.. zenith, and finishing on 600rpm with the 3m rotary and the pad barely contacting the surface..
finished down lovely.


----------



## Mr Face

Dave KG said:


> Haven't considered any other forms of lubrication as yet to work with the water-based P1, though this is something that we can look into for testing just to see how it reacts. :thumb:


Thanks for the heads up I am going to order P1 and will try it native & with EVP & monitor heat build up. I bought a few little bottles of this stuff recently and can only say I am very glad I did when it came to polishing my LS. Without it, the rotary was impossible to control & almost had my arms out of my shoulder sockets, a few dribbles of it made polishing possible and smoothed out polishing considerably. Will be interested in your findings if you try it out :thumb:

Thanks again.


----------



## GMToyota

Dave KG said:


> More flexible in my opinion - both #105 and P1 are non-diminshing and overall offer more cut and for me more comfortable working than Power Gloss. Not to say PG is a bad product, though it always felt like the weak link in the Menzerna chain to me compared to the other products on the market such as Fast Cut Plus. #105 and P1 for me are both superior products in terms of the cut they offer and the flexibility they offer, but they do use a different abrasive technology.


Thanks for that. I'll change from PG to Fast Gloss (S500).. or perhaps P1 or 105 . Is it worth it to have 2 of these polishes or even all 3 of them in your tool bag? Or is it a waste, since in the end you know you'll always end up using the one that's your favorite (based on your own preferred technique).


----------



## dwmc

great right up once again , 

reminds me of when i bought samples of various polishes and the ones i prefer to use are both the megs and the P1 depending how deep the swirls / scratches are , must add P1 did get recommended by another member (Dan) who i trust his judgement as i do yours to be fair and unbias 

my favorite combo is P1 followed by megs 205 and after reading this thread i feel i made the right choice , 

thanks to all involved for the time and effort you guys put into doing this review :thumb:


----------



## james_death

Superb stuff...:thumb:


----------



## zynexiatech

Great read I'm looking forward to getting my P1 & attacking my mk4 golf, I watched Gtechniq's videos applying P1 and they seemed to used a fair bit of product, how much P1 did you apply to the yellow 3M pad for working that sized area?


----------



## zynexiatech

CraigQQ said:


> i use a somewhat different p1 technique to yours dave, but it seems to work for me..
> wonder if you could test it next time your using p1..
> 
> usual deal, start your set with p1 until it dries out, one spray of water on the pad, not the panel,
> work the polish until it starts to dry again, at this point wipe the pad with a microfibre or terry towel.
> don't add any more water ect, just polish with your freshly wiped pad until it turns clear,
> and buff it off..
> 
> its closely adopted from a technique I was advised by nick from Slrestoration.


I'll be giving this technique a go hopefully in the coming weeks unless I can grow a 3rd arm for spritzing, can I ask how much P1 you apply and what speed you work it at during the set?


----------



## CraigQQ

zynexiatech said:


> I'll be giving this technique a go hopefully in the coming weeks unless I can grow a 3rd arm for spritzing, can I ask how much P1 you apply and what speed you work it at during the set?


well prime the pad with an x as normal.. work that for first section(most of it will be absorbed by pad) 
then instead of my normal 3 pea sized dots i'll use 4 pea sized dots of p1...
if i find it not enough 5 dots instead.


----------



## zynexiatech

CraigQQ said:


> well prime the pad with an x as normal.. work that for first section(most of it will be absorbed by pad)
> then instead of my normal 3 pea sized dots i'll use 4 pea sized dots of p1...
> if i find it not enough 5 dots instead.


Do you do any particular amount of passes at any particular speeds? Or just start off slow and work upto 1200 which I think the video mentioned max working speed needed for P1?


----------



## CraigQQ

sorry yes meant to say 1200 rpm.

and i've never counted the passes mate.. just until it dries.. one spray of water on the pad, then until its just starting to dry out again.. then wipe the pad with a cloth, and continue to polish until clear.


----------



## johandc

GMToyota said:


> Thanks for that. I'll change from PG to Fast Gloss (S500).. or perhaps P1 or 105 . Is it worth it to have 2 of these polishes or even all 3 of them in your tool bag? Or is it a waste, since in the end you know you'll always end up using the one that's your favorite (based on your own preferred technique).


If you do choose to try out Menzernas new Fast Gloss, i'm looking forward to hear how it turns out. 

I'm currently having a struggle finding a method to work it correctly on the DA polisher. This thread of course is all about working a rotary and non-diminishing. However i only own a DA, so have to get the most of the products i own.


----------



## sm81

How hard is using P1 by hand and what applicator you recommended (order is coming to shinearama)?

Does it take many hours to correct whole car. My car is soft painted 1999 silver Corolla.
What about curing time before buffing and bonding time before LSP?


----------



## Immortal Tekniq

Hi all,

Could i use the P1 with a Porter Cable machine? What pad would be best? I was thinking orange lake country?


----------



## adf27

Is there an online shop that sells P1 and #205?? Saves on postage buying them at the same place


----------



## Kokopelli

Shinearama sells AFAIK. I guess CleanYourCar too.


----------



## deegan1979

can anyone please tell me if i would need a finishing polish if applying p1 by hand? ta


----------



## Scoobyworx

good read il watch the demo vids tonight


----------



## iMation

After using Meguiars #105 last night ona Ford Focus RS, i cant say im that impressed.. although the cut and finish were very very good

Seemed very dry and became sticky/powdery after a few passes. a complete pain in the **** to buff off. 

I was using it on a DA with Dodo Orange Waffle pads..

I ended up spraying the pad with a mist of water to help it but still that didnt last long.

Any reason why this would dry out so fast?


----------



## caledonia

iMation said:


> After using Meguiars #105 last night ona Ford Focus RS, i cant say im that impressed.. although the cut and finish were very very good
> 
> Seemed very dry and became sticky/powdery after a few passes. a complete pain in the **** to buff off.
> 
> I was using it on a DA with Dodo Orange Waffle pads..
> 
> I ended up spraying the pad with a mist of water to help it but still that didnt last long.
> 
> Any reason why this would dry out so fast?


There could be many reasons causing this issue you are experiencing. But the root cause is down to premature drying of the lubrication. With out knowing you set size, speed of the machine and an approximate weight over the head of the machine it is hard to nail down. 
The most likely cause though when looking away from the above mentioned is dried paint. old compound and the like building up on the pads surface. This has a habit of drawing the lubricates into the pad and away form the surface where needed. Especially if working with an open celled pad. Get into the habit of cleaning the pad with a despurring brush or an old toothbrush To remove the polish build up and clear removed from the pads surface. Also from time to time use a Microfibre to wipe across the surface of the pad to remove old lubrication. It is like engine oil and once spent is not good either.

One more thing that will make your experience and working time improve on some paint types is the addition of some 205 to the pad. Whether it will not increase the cut as a whole. It will deliver a longer working time. Due to the addition of lubrication, and thus increase the length of the cutting stage if required. 

From a personally point of view I would not also use a waffle pad on the DA as there are not really design to with stand the physical nature of the DA and are prone to tear and sheer internally. Causing premature failure of the pad. I would also recommend that you use 205 after 105. This will certainly increase the gloss and clarity on your car. Try and work in a controlled area no bigger than 18 X 18 inches. This way you will not experience premature drying associated with evaporation.

HTH and make you polishing more enjoyable.
Gordon.


----------



## iMation

caledonia said:


> There could be many reasons causing this issue you are experiencing. But the root cause is down to premature drying of the lubrication. With out knowing you set size, speed of the machine and an approximate weight over the head of the machine it is hard to nail down.


Size set is about 20" x 20" max, speed of the DA is 5 and just a light weight over the head. moving at about 1" a sec



> The most likely cause though when looking away from the above mentioned is dried paint. old compound and the like building up on the pads surface. This has a habit of drawing the lubricates into the pad and away form the surface where needed. Especially if working with an open celled pad. Get into the habit of cleaning the pad with a despurring brush or an old toothbrush To remove the polish build up and clear removed from the pads surface. Also from time to time use a Microfibre to wipe across the surface of the pad to remove old lubrication. It is like engine oil and once spent is not good either.


Yeah fully understand that, after about 4-5 passes the compound really clogs up and get dry, after every 5-6 passes i clean off the pad with a terry cloth, and give it a brush with an old toothbrush.



> One more thing that will make your experience and working time improve on some paint types is the addition of some 205 to the pad. Whether it will not increase the cut as a whole. It will deliver a longer working time. Due to the addition of lubrication, and thus increase the length of the cutting stage if required.


Yeah after speaking with a few people, this has been an option to try.



> From a personally point of view I would not also use a waffle pad on the DA as there are not really design to with stand the physical nature of the DA and are prone to tear and sheer internally. Causing premature failure of the pad. I would also recommend that you use 205 after 105. This will certainly increase the gloss and clarity on your car. Try and work in a controlled area no bigger than 18 X 18 inches. This way you will not experience premature drying associated with evaporation.


I have the White Hex-Logic pad and tbh i find that feels and moves alot better than the Waffle pads.

the #205 is waiting for its turn 

One more question, the air temp is near 0DegC in the unit (recently) will this have an effect on the compound?



> HTH and make you polishing more enjoyable.
> 
> Gordon.


Thanks Gordon, I really appreciate any help with this.

Kind regards

Stu:thumb:


----------



## caledonia

iMation said:


> One more question, the air temp is near 0DegC in the unit (recently) will this have an effect on the compound?
> Stu:thumb:


Yes this will have a slight impact also. The more extreme or the greater the difference between air temp and panel temperature while polishing will cause evaporation in the lubricates. If you wish to cross this off your list. Try working with a slightly lower machine speed of slightly faster hand movement. This will reduce friction and heat. But not to much as friction is required to remove the defects. 
105 also contains a water soluble oil as lubrication so close to freezing it would require a light bit more time to get the oils flowing. Try spreading the polish with your work area for a little longer at a lower speed. Just to generate a slight heat in the lube, before moving on up to you working speed. 
You certainly have done your homework and read up on guides and the like. But also bare in mind that the clue is in the name GUILD. Try different approaches and see what works. There is more than one way to travel to London as long as you arrive safely. It does not matter how long it takes. The outcome will always be the same.
Gordon.


----------



## iMation

caledonia said:


> Yes this will have a slight impact also. The more extreme or the greater the difference between air temp and panel temperature while polishing will cause evaporation in the lubricates. If you wish to cross this off your list. Try working with a slightly lower machine speed of slightly faster hand movement. This will reduce friction and heat. But not to much as friction is required to remove the defects.
> 105 also contains a water soluble oil as lubrication so close to freezing it would require a light bit more time to get the oils flowing. Try spreading the polish with your work area for a little longer at a lower speed. Just to generate a slight heat in the lube, before moving on up to you working speed.
> You certainly have done your homework and read up on guides and the like. But also bare in mind that the clue is in the name GUILD. Try different approaches and see what works. There is more than one way to travel to London as long as you arrive safely. It does not matter how long it takes. The outcome will always be the same.
> Gordon.


Last night i gave it another go,

Gotta say, such an improvement.

As you said, i slowed my machine down a little and with the #105 i added a pea sized blob of Dodo Lime prime.

With the White hex logic pad and this combo it was so nice to use.

smooth movements and didnt get dry or cloged up at all!

Thanks for your help Gordon,

Stu


----------



## danwel

Nice results, not used the megs but I'm a big fan of the P1 by hand and machine


----------



## Ronnie

Perfromance blue is a right mare to work with as well it is not the easiest paints and have come across a few difficult cars to work on my own included. As said speed and work area is importand and also the ambiant moisture and temps have a big factor, another thing do a good check use only about 15% IPa solution as it wil swipe if the paint is tricky as it can hologram just a wee tip. a wee tip is a little squirt of ultrafina added beside the 105 it will add a lot more oil and for teh paint type will aid your work tenfold.

I have to say the whole diminishing abrasive thing is a big black hole in th insustry that it not a recognised term and also from what some have said teh diminishing is not teh particle breaking down into a finer compound but infact teh total opposite, but thats a whole other conversation that has been for us a year of very indepth study and R&D into what is an extremly interesting and scientific field.


----------



## iMation

I would like to read up more about the two. If anybody has any white papers or articles. Could you link them

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2


----------

