Before and After - Thanks all

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 02-19-2008 | 09:49 PM
cwbpro69's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
Before and After - Thanks all

Thanks to all for your help on product advice. Also, thanks RollingRock for the encouragement, I think I got it about 65% better (there is still marring when looking at the paint from weird angles.

Here was the process I decided to go with:

Wash
Clay
Laquer Thinner (In spots with heavy overspray)
Clay
Wash
Scratch-X where needed
Megs #83 with Megs #8006 pad
2x Megs #80 with Megs #8006 pad
Megs #9 with Megs #8006 pad
2x NXT 2.0 with Megs #9006 pad (one coat at speed setting 2 and one coat at speed setting 3)

In a month or so I am going to try to tackle the marring at weird angles, I may never be able to get this but I am search for a product that should work.

BEFORE:

AFTER:

*The buttons are clickable for bigger images figured I would save some bandwidth
 
  #2  
Old 02-19-2008 | 10:17 PM
guitarman502's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 792
Likes: 1
From: West Virginia
looks awesome! How was #83 to work with?
 
  #3  
Old 02-19-2008 | 10:19 PM
toolmaann's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
From: Elk Grove, Ca
Looks to be a big improvement... Nice work!

 
  #4  
Old 02-19-2008 | 10:24 PM
cwbpro69's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
#83 is very simple to work with.

Since this was more of an experiment I found applying a light amount and working until nearly gone yielded the best results. Two coats did nothing but waste the product!
 
  #5  
Old 02-19-2008 | 10:28 PM
guitarman502's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 792
Likes: 1
From: West Virginia
thats cool. I was planning on doing the 83 then 80 combo when i go to do my truck. Just afraid that 83 will be hard to work with. Got any more pics?
 
  #6  
Old 02-19-2008 | 10:37 PM
Rockpick's Avatar
Moderator &
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 31,440
Likes: 4
From: The Bluegrass State
Looks much better! Nice work! It just goes to show that a lot of patience and good products and procedure can yield great results.

Guitar--

#83 can certainly be used but, if you'll notice, he stepped down from #83 to #80 and then even to #9. When you walk it down in that type of incrimental order, it's really not too bad to work with...

My advice to those who want to use more of a 'one-stop' type of polish to deal with the majority of what problems that they have is typically to the tune of #80 to avoid having to remove the additional marring that #83 almost always creates.

Again, I never meant to signify that #83 couldn't be used... just that it was a difficult product to get to properly break down with the PC. When you hear me beat the '#83 may not be the best choice' drum, there is typically a caveat (or at least there should be).

-RP-
 
  #7  
Old 02-19-2008 | 11:22 PM
guitarman502's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 792
Likes: 1
From: West Virginia
would doing like 80 followed by 7 be ok? or would doing the 7 just be overkill/useless?
 
  #8  
Old 02-19-2008 | 11:26 PM
Rockpick's Avatar
Moderator &
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 31,440
Likes: 4
From: The Bluegrass State
Ehh... hard call.

If it were mine (and I'm not sure I've ever used that combo), I'd probably use the #80 as needed and then test a small area with the #7 to see if it really brought much to the table.

On a light color, I really doubt you'll see anything and thus, it's probably a waste. On black/red/burgandy and similar dark colors, you may notice some difference.

It'll be up to you to determine if the difference is big enough to justify putting it all the way across the vehicle...
 
  #9  
Old 02-19-2008 | 11:37 PM
guitarman502's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 792
Likes: 1
From: West Virginia
thanks! and sorry cwbpro69 for the hi-jack!
 
  #10  
Old 02-19-2008 | 11:41 PM
Jolly_Green_Giant's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,614
Likes: 0
From: Sayre,OK,USA
Looks great!
 
  #11  
Old 02-19-2008 | 11:44 PM
cwbpro69's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
I am certainly no rockpick, but I would suggest against #83 unless there is heavy marring, swirling, and light oxidation. I think a few passes with#80 will surprise you!

No worries on jacking the thread, everyone is here to share knowledge!
 
  #12  
Old 02-20-2008 | 12:16 AM
attworth's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Definite improvement. Congrats
 
  #13  
Old 02-20-2008 | 10:45 AM
FlyerFX4's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio, Texas
Looks great. How long did all of this take you to do?
 
  #14  
Old 02-20-2008 | 04:33 PM
Houndog's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 517
Likes: 0
From: Rutledge Md. (west of Fallston Md.)
Good info, thanks all.
 




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:59 AM.