Why I'll never use a PC again...
#12
Left side was not worked long enough and/or at a fast enough speed.
I've had the same opinion until I worked the area longer and at a faster speed. After changing my methods, I get the results on the right with a PC.
#13
move along, nothing to see here.
you changed all three variables (pad, polish, and tool) and expect the results to be meaningful?
all a post like this does is stir **** up needlessly.
ps. i've no doubt that a rotary can get things done faster, but an orbital can match the results you've shown and then some.
all a post like this does is stir **** up needlessly.
ps. i've no doubt that a rotary can get things done faster, but an orbital can match the results you've shown and then some.
#17
As many have pointed out this is not an attempt at laboratory comparison between product, pads or...
machines. Rather it is simply Liam's previous experience with a random orbital machine and possibly a combination of an unsuitable polish for the task, incomplete breakdown of product, incorrect pad type/conditioning, insufficient work time, and a relatively ineffective machine compared to his recent experience with a high speed circular polisher.
I hope that as more users become experienced with random orbital machines, they will carefully experiment with rotary machines. Watching and working with an experienced detailer helps the learning curve a great deal while removing much of the damage potential when first using a high speed, circular polisher.
For the record the polish used was the PO85RD 3.02 available from Phil at detailers domain
I hope that as more users become experienced with random orbital machines, they will carefully experiment with rotary machines. Watching and working with an experienced detailer helps the learning curve a great deal while removing much of the damage potential when first using a high speed, circular polisher.
For the record the polish used was the PO85RD 3.02 available from Phil at detailers domain
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post