# swissvax meduim / strong !



## MAXI-MILAN (Oct 26, 2008)

Hello all members

swissvax cleanar fluid meduim and strong
Is it really a product of swissvax ? Or with the assistance of other companies such as 3m , farecla?

Do really z ymol hd-cleans made from meguirs ?

:wave:

sorry my englisgh not soo good!


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

SV med & strong cleaner fluid has close similaritys to a well known finishing polish, as much as I'm saying.

Z hd-cleanse is unique as far as I know, Z autowash & polish cleaner have links to Turtle wax I think though.


----------



## CleanYourCar (Jan 23, 2006)

Yeah try Menzerna 

Instensive Polish - Strong
Final Finish - Medium


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

CleanYourCar said:


> Yeah try Menzerna
> 
> Instensive Polish - Strong
> Final Finish - Medium


:lol: there you go.


----------



## 3dr (Mar 1, 2008)

so are you saying that menz make stuff for sv?


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

Many years ago,Meguiars used to make HD cleanse for *****.The product was almost identical to #7.


----------



## waxy (Feb 27, 2006)

Scholl concepts manufacture all the cleaner fluids for SwissVax.


----------



## nicp2007 (Apr 25, 2007)

so does that mean SV cleaner strong is medium abrsive and SV medium is finishing abrasive meaning that SV cleaner is non abrasive,

am i right ?

sorry if thats a bit confusing it's been a long day :wall:


----------



## Roy (Jan 17, 2007)

CleanYourCar said:


> Yeah try Menzerna
> 
> Instensive Polish - Strong
> Final Finish - Medium


Are you really sure? Has anyone tried them side by side?

Roy.


----------



## Roy (Jan 17, 2007)

Quote from Gmundster taken from a previous thread.

"Standard Cleaner Fluid is suitable for all makes and ages of cars where the paintwork is in generally good condition but shows some light scratches and swirl marks. Standard cleaner fluid contains no abrasives and stops short of the underlying paint layer without scratching it. This differs from many other polishes which do contain abrasives - the disadvantage being that they start chafing away the paint as abrasive particles continue working through a new paint layer.

We would recommend you use Medium CF to tackle cars in fair condition with more noticable swirls and holograms. Again this product contains no abrasives, works in the same way as standard cleaner fluid.

Strong is used when the paintwork is severely weathered - imagine a red car which is turning pink - strong is designed to remove the top layer of "dead" Paint. You apply Strong evenly onto the paint and then rub in using a polishing cloth. Rubbing causes friction between the product's micro granules which leads to a progressively finer abrasive polish. When you have used Strong you should then repeat the process with standard Cleaner Fluid, as their "polishing oils" will nourish the paint. 

All these products are designed for use by hand but could also be used with an orbital (not a rotary) machine polisher."


----------



## nicp2007 (Apr 25, 2007)

thanks for that, that cleared a few things up :thumb: 

i was always under the inpression you could aply them by rotory though


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

Roy said:


> Are you really sure? Has anyone tried them side by side?
> 
> Roy.





nicp2007 said:


> thanks for that, that cleared a few things up :thumb:
> 
> i was always under the inpression you could aply them by rotory though


I'll do an independent test today and give my thoughts, if they are what I think they are then by rotary will be no problem.


----------



## Envy Car Care (Aug 17, 2006)

Roy said:


> Are you really sure? Has anyone tried them side by side?
> 
> Roy.


----------



## nicp2007 (Apr 25, 2007)

Gleammachine said:


> I'll do an independent test today and give my thoughts, if they are what I think they are then by rotary will be no problem.


thanks fella :thumb:


----------



## Paul-T (Nov 2, 2006)

I've not used Medium or Strong too much, but I do use Pro a lot via rotary and it works brilliantly. At first I thought it was Menz 106FA, and while I still believe it may be related I'm sure it's not the same stuff rebottled as per some claims. I've found CF Pro to be utterly stable irrespective of temperature, humidity or panel characteristics.


----------



## Envy Car Care (Aug 17, 2006)

I agree SW Pro CF doesn't appear to be the same as final finish, but CF medium (non-pro) bears a striking similarity


----------



## Monaco Detailer (Dec 3, 2007)

Ok here is my outtake on all 4 cleaners

CF Norm - i very rarely use this as i machine everything, but when i do i find it a very good product that does what it says on the tin as the saying goes

CF Pro - Now i love this, the results you can get are amazing by using a different head technique, of course it really depends on how bad the panel is, the key here is to use a little Quick finish on the pad, one spray then apply a little bit on the pad but rather than a blob put about 2" on the inside of the pad in a line going with the circle of the pad & work it round with your finger...when applying work it with the machine if it starts going a little dry a fine misting of QF will make it work again.

Results on A 2007 Bentley Azure

Before...










After...










just done with the PRO! without fast cut, menz etc.

CF Medium - Now depending again on the cars paint & what defects are on it this CF is also very effective, i normally use this with a medium cut pad (applied in the same way as above) i use the pro after using the medium just to enhance the finish.

Left side before, right side after.....










after CF Med & Pro










CF Strong....

This i use with a 100% lambswool head (applied as above) followed by the CF medium then the pro, the only downside to this is the splattering you get if it sets hard its a pain to shift but to gain results like this from using them all in that order is what i love about the stuff...

Rolls Drophead Cpe passenger door










Bentley Azure 2007










Ferrari F430 Spider....










Lambo Miura SV (on our stand at Top Marques 08)










Lambo LP640...










I am not here to say if they are/arnt the same as other brands all i can say tho is that they work fantastic, therefore i need not to use anything else in. If those people that read this have never used them you should give them ago, hobby detailers or pro's alike.

Thanks for reading

MD :thumb:


----------



## Porta (Jan 3, 2007)

Swisswax pro cleaner is made by Scholl Concepts, and I believe the other cleaners is made by them as well. Scholl are awsome.

Looks like the pro cleaner is something like Scholl Concepts S30+, wich IMO is better then PO106FA. Works faster, easier to clean and are not so sensitive. I would by S30+ instead of pro cleaner since S30 is cheaper and comes in 1 or 5 liter containers. But then you will not get the Swisswax logo


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

As promised did a quick test this afternoon, so here's my unbiased view on the similarity's between Swissvax cleaner fluid medium and Menzerna po85rd final finish.










On the left Menz po85rd, on the right Swissvax cleaner fluid medium.










SV CF Med,










Menz ff,










Both look identical maybe the CF is slightly lighter, both smell identical.

Panel taped down the middle, left half had Menzerna 85rd spread at 900rpm on a 3m blue pad via the rotary,










Refined and broken down at 1200-1500 rpm for a few minutes,










Buffed clear,










Fresh pad,










Same process again with the SV CF med,










Refined,










Buffed,










Both seemed to work identical, not the most ideal test panel being of a light colour and outside where it was slightly damp, the finish to me seemed the same, the feel of the panel being the same, with neither feeling slicker than the other, both left that natural machine finish that has a slight resistant oily nature.










Tape removed,










As stated SV CF seems to be slightly lighter which may just be down to different batches or it may also have another ingredient?










SV cleaner fluid standard applied via a finishing pad on the rotary at 1000rpm for a short while,










Finish once buffed,



















Conclusion,

The 2 are very similar in looks, smell, use and finish and the only difference is one being very slightly lighter than the other, this is not conclusive though as they are different ages and from different batches.
The swissvax cleaner fluids are by no means for hand application only and are more than competent being applied via machine.
Have not used CF pro but have seen and smelled the product and to me it also has close links to Menzerna final finish, knowing what the cost was when I enquired within swissvax hq I'm glad it wasn't something I went ahead and purchased.
This is not a direct attack at a manufacturer as there are many products on the market re-bottled and re-labelled and sold of as individuals.


----------



## nicp2007 (Apr 25, 2007)

thanks for that mate :thumb:

i've never used the SV cleaners but they are on the shopping list, 

i have used the menz though so i know what to expect

thanks again :thumb:


----------



## Roy (Jan 17, 2007)

Envy Valeting said:


>


Tim,

What I was trying to get across was, yes CF Medium is similar to Final Finish, but my experiences with both CF Pro and especially CF Strong by machine, is that there slightly different.

Yes Menzerna make some very good finishing polishes, but do we need this on every Swissvax CF thread?

Roy.


----------



## drive 'n' shine (Apr 22, 2006)

Hope the Missus didn't mind you scribbling on her boot :lol:


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

drive 'n' shine said:


> Hope the Missus didn't mind you scribbling on her boot :lol:


Thats the least of her worries, she now needs to find someone to detail the rest of her car, looks like a pikeys picnic.:lol:


----------



## MAXI-MILAN (Oct 26, 2008)

Thank you ,Excellent compared:thumb:.
what do you think is more aggressive SW CF meduim or Meg 83# ?


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

Roy said:


> "We would recommend you use Medium CF to tackle cars in fair condition with more noticable swirls and holograms. Again *this product contains no abrasives*, works in the same way as standard cleaner fluid.
> 
> /snip
> 
> All these products are designed for use by hand but could also be used with an orbital (not a rotary) machine polisher."





Roy said:


> Tim,
> 
> What I was trying to get across was, yes *CF Medium is similar to Final Finish*, but my experiences with both CF Pro and especially CF Strong by machine, is that there slightly different.
> 
> Roy.


This seems like a total contradiction - yet on my thread earlier this year about the various CF's, Blondie replied as follows:

_ "However, for Medium "Cleslie" is right that it is referred to as *containing micro granules which when rubbed create a progressively finer abrasive polish* - which is why it is recommended for weathered paint surfaces where the topmost layer of paint needs to be removed. Regular cleaner fluid should then be used to nourish the paint surface."
_

why is there always a different answer to the abrasive content of CF? Surely this is the ONE question that needs to be absolutely 100% clear, as people are using this on paint, often vintage, so should know if they are in fact removing paint or not?

I like CF personally, but this whole 'smoke and mirrors' about what they are or are not (and I mean abrasive not manufacturer) means I wont be buying any until someone clears up EXACTLY what they will do.

So far Robs post makes the most compelling evidence to me...


----------



## Gleammachine (Sep 8, 2007)

MAXI-MILAN said:


> Thank you ,Excellent compared:thumb:.
> what do you think is more aggressive SW CF meduim or Meg 83# ?


Megs #83 has more cut than CF med.


----------



## Envy Car Care (Aug 17, 2006)

Roy said:


> Tim,
> 
> but do we need this on every Swissvax CF thread?
> 
> Roy.


I didnt make the comparisons Roy whilst you get down from your high horse, others have minds of their own not just me.


----------



## Roy (Jan 17, 2007)

Bigpikle said:


> This seems like a total contradiction - yet on my thread earlier this year about the various CF's, Blondie replied as follows:
> 
> _ "However, for Medium "Cleslie" is right that it is referred to as *containing micro granules which when rubbed create a progressively finer abrasive polish* - which is why it is recommended for weathered paint surfaces where the topmost layer of paint needs to be removed. Regular cleaner fluid should then be used to nourish the paint surface."
> _


Hi, on my earlier post, I actually re-quoted Gmundster (Swissvax UK) taken from your thread 2nd reply??



Bigpikle said:


> why is there always a different answer to the abrasive content of CF?


Taken directly from the Swissvax handbook, downloaded from here. 
http://www.swissvax.co.uk/webpage/how_to_use.asp

cleaner fluid
strong
1. Apply Swissol Cleaner Fluid
Strong evenly onto the painted
surface and rub in with heavy
pressure using a Swissol towel
or a polishing cloth. Rubbing
causes friction between the
product's micro granules which
leads to a progressively finer
abrasive polish.

cleaner fluid
medium
1. Apply Swissol Cleaner Fluid
Medium evenly onto the
painted surface and rub in with
heavy pressure using a Swissol
towel or a polishing cloth.
Rubbing causes friction
between the product's micro
granules which leads to a
progressively finer abrasive
polish

I hope this helps, 
Kind Regards, Roy.


----------



## Paul-T (Nov 2, 2006)

Damon - my take on it is, regardless of what's written where, if something is able to remove even light swirls or marring (and Strong is capable of a fair bit), it must be abrasive if it isn't filling.

I don't buy into the whole 'micro/nano particles are not abrasive' thing, something I've had a chat with Rob at GTechniq about - he tells me P1 polish isn't abrasive yet doesn't fill - well if it removes scratches and swirls, and an IPA wipedown shows no fillers, it must be abrasive. Until someone can explain it to me otherwise, that would be my understanding.

So, based on results I am happy I can repeatedly replicate, CF Pro, Strong and Medium are all abrasive products to one extent or another, only Regular contains nothing abrasive at all. I'm not talking on behalf of SV, or anyone else, just little old me.


----------



## gtechrob (Sep 11, 2006)

Shine On said:


> Damon - my take on it is, regardless of what's written where, if something is able to remove even light swirls or marring (and Strong is capable of a fair bit), it must be abrasive if it isn't filling.
> 
> I don't buy into the whole 'micro/nano particles are not abrasive' thing, something I've had a chat with Rob at GTechniq about - he tells me P1 polish isn't abrasive yet doesn't fill - well if it removes scratches and swirls, and an IPA wipedown shows no fillers, it must be abrasive. Until someone can explain it to me otherwise, that would be my understanding.
> 
> So, based on results I am happy I can repeatedly replicate, CF Pro, Strong and Medium are all abrasive products to one extent or another, only Regular contains nothing abrasive at all. I'm not talking on behalf of SV, or anyone else, just little old me.


hi paul,

just thought i'de jump in here as it sounds like you may have misunderstood how p1 works.

p1 uses abrasives. but they are much smaller than standard (hence the nanoscopic moniker)

what this means is that we don't have to put hardly any lubricating oils in the polish. this also means is that p1 will actually correct paint faster than traditional abrasives both by rotary and by hand and that you only need one polish albeit using two different pads (wool for heavy correction, fine foam for light correction and finishing). to see how p1 works you need to look at a big scratch that you are working with with p1 you will notice the edges get increasingly rounded until the scratch is invisible. this is the key to p1 in that it's using more of a rounding action instead of a cutting one. this difference is why you don't have to worry so much about burning the paint, going through on edges etc.

where p1 also scores big is on very hard surfaces. here I'm talking about non acrylic finishes such as grp and polyester urethane paints as commonly used in very large yacht and aircraft finishing. here p1 excels reducing polishing time even more dramatically (by as much as 2/3 instead of appx 1/3 for auto paint) and it can remove defects that were previously considered impossible to remove.

but having said all the above p1 doesn't replace all polishes in all circumstances. we still need to use cutting compounds (we like 3m fast cut plus) when polishing flat sanded surfaces as in these situations you need a cutting action to start the refinishing process and then we finish using p1.

rob


----------



## Car Key (Mar 20, 2007)

CleanYourCar said:


> Yeah try Menzerna
> 
> Instensive Polish - Strong
> Final Finish - Medium


Would that be Intensive Polish PO91L or PO85RD 3.02?

I don't know if the above Menzerna polishes, are those that have a reputation for acting up under certain circumstances, but do Strong and Medium act up the same? Monaco Detailer seems to suggest that, at least with Strong:



Monaco Detailer said:


> CF Strong....
> 
> This i use with a 100% lambswool head (applied as above) followed by the CF medium then the pro, the only downside to this is the splattering you get if it sets hard its a pain to shift but to gain results like this from using them all in that order is what i love about the stuff...


If they are the Menzerna's that act up, but they don't once labeled SV Strong and SV Medium, then I'm guessing it's Swissvax doing the modding of the formula, otherwise why wouldn't Menzerna do the same with their polishes?


----------



## Car Key (Mar 20, 2007)

Anyone know if the regular CF is a rebadged product?


----------



## Paul-T (Nov 2, 2006)

They are not rebadged Menzerna's, that is why they behave differently. Not sure if regular CF could be found elsewhere, I've certainly not discovered it.


----------



## Porta (Jan 3, 2007)

Swisswax are getting aid from a germany company with the cleaner fluids.


----------

