Accumulator
Well-known member
Summary: The Lake Country 3.5� Purple Foamed Wool (3.5� PFW) pads can be used for aggressive correction of major defects via PC. The resulting finish will require further work as there will probably be significant hazing. This approach is probably not advisable for soft to medium-soft paints but works well on harder paint.
Details Follow:
Machine Used: PC random orbital. I dunno which model I was using as I have them both and can’t tell them apart. It was equipped with the 6� counterweight and used without the side handle.
(I did not try using a pair of the 3.5� PFW pads on the Cyclo as a) I didn’t have a second small backing plate, and b) the smaller-than-4� size wouldn’t allow for the usual Cyclo overlap.)
Required Backing Plate: Be sure to get an appropriately small backing plate if using these pads. The 3.5� PFW pads are indeed smaller than 4� pads and a ~4� backing plate will *NOT* work with them. I had to root through my accumulation of backing plates to find one that would work (ditto for use on the rotary). I don’t remember where I got this backing plate, but it’s a yellow rubber “flexible� one (scare quotes intentional as it doesn’t flex much). This plate measures ~3 3/8� in diameter.
Test Vehicle: 2004 GMC Yukon, OE Carbon Metallic b/c paint. Typical GM-medium-hard; too hard for efficient correction via PC, especially with pads larger than 4�.
The marring for this test consisted of significant RIDS and 2000 grit (Meguiar’s/Nikken Unigrit) sanding scratches.
I was not doing full-panel correction with this combination as it wasn’t necessary on this vehicle. Doing a whole vehicle with these pads would probably require a good number of pads as they are reputed to wear quickly (that was not an issue in my testing, even though I did a fair amount of work with one pad).
Test Product: 1Z Intensive Paste. This is a fairly aggressive product that feels like liquid sandpaper, but (typically for 1Z) these abrasives “fracture easily� and the product can be used by rotary/PC, etc./hand; it does not rely on heat to break down. Note that (also typically for 1Z), it dusts quite a bit, but it’s a “clean� dust that cleans up easily and does not pose a huge risk of micromarring (no, that’s not carte blanche to wipe it off dry, but it’s not the worst compound dust you could work with).
IMO, if you don't need an aggressive product like this, then you don't need the 3.5" PFW pads either.
Amount of Product: Probably too much. I initially applied a few small dots (totaling about 1 ½ coffee beans) of 1Z Intensive to the pad and rubbed it in to distribute it somewhat evenly (1Z does not recommend the “pick up a lineâ€� approach, rather they say to apply to the pad and rub/spread onto the panel before starting the machine). After this initial priming application, I added a small amount of polish for subsequent passes, a dot about half to three-quarters as big as a coffee bean.
I recommend the use of *only* as much product as is necessary to keep the pad lubricated.
Foam Pads Used for Comparison: 4� Cyclo brand Orange Foam light cut (4� COF). These pads would do the correction with the 1Z Intensive, but they generate a *lot* of heat, require numerous passes, and are not, IMO very user-friendly; there is, again IMO, a distinct lack of “feel� for what the PC/pads are doing and for me this does not engender confidence that all is well.
(Note that the 4" Cyclo Green Foam polising pads are too gentle for fair, direct comparison to the 3.5" PFW. I seldom use the 4" Yellow Cyclo Foam cutting pads as they don't cut that much better than the Orange, leave more micromarring, and they quickly wear to the point that *IMO* they aren't all that much more aggressive than the Orange after some use. They're great for use under MF bonnets though.)
The 4� COF pads finish out *much* better than the 3.5 PFW wool, *almost* as nicely as do 4� Cyclo brand Green Foam (4� CGF). These 4� COF pads work well on both the PC and (no surprise) the Cyclo brand polisher, especially with the 1Z Intensive. On the Cyclo, this combo does not do very much serious correction (yes, the PC/4� combo is more aggressive than the Cyclo, at least with the 1Z Intensive).
The 4" CGF pads are perfect for a mild follow-up pass using the 1Z Intensive.
PC Speed Used: I used both 5 and 6. I sorta prefer 5 for use with small pads, but the 3.5� PFW pads behave much better at 6 than do the 4� COF.
Surface Temperature and Work Time: As previously noted, at speeds 5 and 6, the 3.5� PFW pads ran *very* cool, even with significant pressure. *MUCH* cooler than either of the 4� Cyclo foam pads. This resulted in a significantly longer work time for the product than with foam pads.
Plastic/Rubber Trim: There was not damage to rubber or plastic trim when I (gently/carefully) allowed the pads to touch it, which would *not* be the case with 4� COF.
Size of Areas Worked: I had no problems working areas ~8� x 8� and working small areas is easy as the pads don't cause much heat buildup (the way 4" foam pads do) when left in one place.
Cleaning the Pads: As the pads loaded up with product, I spurred them. It seems pretty easy to tell when this is necessary, and if in doubt just do it. Yeah, you could do it with a small, dull screwdriver if you don’t have a spur. The PC spins the pads OK for spurring but it’s not the same as with a rotary. I also gave the pads a light spritz of #34 and then wiped them with a cotton towel, this worked ~OK but it didn't separate/fluff up the strands of wool as well as spurring did.
Test Results:
Wetsanding Scratches: The 3.5� PFW pads removed 2000 sanding scratches with ease. One or two passes were sufficient.
RIDS: On RIDS, the results were even more impressive. The 3.5� PFW would diminish a nasty RIDS in one pass, render it quite shallow and rounded with two, and usually eliminate it with three or four. In the cases where I did not fully remove a RIDS, it was because I wanted to preserve the clear, *not* because I simply gave up before attaining complete removal. This contrasted markedly with the 4� COF, which did less correction even with more passes (note that the 4� COF *would* eventually get the job done, generating a *lot* of heat in the process).
Note that these passes all went quite quickly. I can’t say just how long it took, but the 1Z Intensive breaks down pretty fast; it’s *not* a matter of each pass taking a few minutes. But note that I possibly underworked the product; it might be a good idea to work it until it almost dusts (which will be a while when using the 3.5� PFW). I didn't have this "worked long enough?" issue with the foam pads as they really break it down fast.
Resulting Finish and Need for Follow-Up: The resulting finish was quite hazy, typical compound haze but rather severe for this product (note that this pad/product combo did the same thing for me via rotary). Despite my initial forebodings, this haze was easily corrected with a pass of 1Z Intensive on either of the 4� Cyclo pads (the 4� CGF is strong enough, no need for the orange).
(Note that the 1Z Intensive did not leave hazing with either of the 4� Cyclo pads. Again, I might have underworked the product with the wool pads.)
After this follow-up, the finish was pretty good. No obvious issues and I can imagine some (not-too-particular) people thinking it ready-to-wax, at least on certain colors (but *wow* did it improve with subsequent polishing using 1Z High Gloss).
I did notice “pigtails� in the polish at times while I worked it with the 3.5� PFW. A few of these showed up in the clearcoat, but were removed by subsequent polishing with less pressure. This makes me think that a) this combo isn't idiot-proof and b) the 3.5� PFW pads are probably not a good choice for soft paints, but *those* paints would correct easily enough with 4� foam pads anyway.
Time-Saving Technique: A method I found quite handy is something I seldom hear mentioned these days- after working the 1Z Intensive with the 3.5� PFW, I didn’t buff off the polish residue. Instead, I quickly swapped the 3.5� PFW pad for a 4� Cyclo foam pad (or I grabbed the Cyclo) and went right back over the same area using a tiny bit of fresh 1Z Intensive. After working this until it was broken down (almost dry), I finally buffed all the residue off. Worked fine and saved some time.
Conclusion: Since I’m usually dealing with hard clear, the 3.5� PWF, used via PC, just might be my new go-to solution for RIDS, at least if I don’t already have a rotary out (and equipped with that little backing plate).
Details Follow:
Machine Used: PC random orbital. I dunno which model I was using as I have them both and can’t tell them apart. It was equipped with the 6� counterweight and used without the side handle.
(I did not try using a pair of the 3.5� PFW pads on the Cyclo as a) I didn’t have a second small backing plate, and b) the smaller-than-4� size wouldn’t allow for the usual Cyclo overlap.)
Required Backing Plate: Be sure to get an appropriately small backing plate if using these pads. The 3.5� PFW pads are indeed smaller than 4� pads and a ~4� backing plate will *NOT* work with them. I had to root through my accumulation of backing plates to find one that would work (ditto for use on the rotary). I don’t remember where I got this backing plate, but it’s a yellow rubber “flexible� one (scare quotes intentional as it doesn’t flex much). This plate measures ~3 3/8� in diameter.
Test Vehicle: 2004 GMC Yukon, OE Carbon Metallic b/c paint. Typical GM-medium-hard; too hard for efficient correction via PC, especially with pads larger than 4�.
The marring for this test consisted of significant RIDS and 2000 grit (Meguiar’s/Nikken Unigrit) sanding scratches.
I was not doing full-panel correction with this combination as it wasn’t necessary on this vehicle. Doing a whole vehicle with these pads would probably require a good number of pads as they are reputed to wear quickly (that was not an issue in my testing, even though I did a fair amount of work with one pad).
Test Product: 1Z Intensive Paste. This is a fairly aggressive product that feels like liquid sandpaper, but (typically for 1Z) these abrasives “fracture easily� and the product can be used by rotary/PC, etc./hand; it does not rely on heat to break down. Note that (also typically for 1Z), it dusts quite a bit, but it’s a “clean� dust that cleans up easily and does not pose a huge risk of micromarring (no, that’s not carte blanche to wipe it off dry, but it’s not the worst compound dust you could work with).
IMO, if you don't need an aggressive product like this, then you don't need the 3.5" PFW pads either.
Amount of Product: Probably too much. I initially applied a few small dots (totaling about 1 ½ coffee beans) of 1Z Intensive to the pad and rubbed it in to distribute it somewhat evenly (1Z does not recommend the “pick up a lineâ€� approach, rather they say to apply to the pad and rub/spread onto the panel before starting the machine). After this initial priming application, I added a small amount of polish for subsequent passes, a dot about half to three-quarters as big as a coffee bean.
I recommend the use of *only* as much product as is necessary to keep the pad lubricated.
Foam Pads Used for Comparison: 4� Cyclo brand Orange Foam light cut (4� COF). These pads would do the correction with the 1Z Intensive, but they generate a *lot* of heat, require numerous passes, and are not, IMO very user-friendly; there is, again IMO, a distinct lack of “feel� for what the PC/pads are doing and for me this does not engender confidence that all is well.
(Note that the 4" Cyclo Green Foam polising pads are too gentle for fair, direct comparison to the 3.5" PFW. I seldom use the 4" Yellow Cyclo Foam cutting pads as they don't cut that much better than the Orange, leave more micromarring, and they quickly wear to the point that *IMO* they aren't all that much more aggressive than the Orange after some use. They're great for use under MF bonnets though.)
The 4� COF pads finish out *much* better than the 3.5 PFW wool, *almost* as nicely as do 4� Cyclo brand Green Foam (4� CGF). These 4� COF pads work well on both the PC and (no surprise) the Cyclo brand polisher, especially with the 1Z Intensive. On the Cyclo, this combo does not do very much serious correction (yes, the PC/4� combo is more aggressive than the Cyclo, at least with the 1Z Intensive).
The 4" CGF pads are perfect for a mild follow-up pass using the 1Z Intensive.
PC Speed Used: I used both 5 and 6. I sorta prefer 5 for use with small pads, but the 3.5� PFW pads behave much better at 6 than do the 4� COF.
Surface Temperature and Work Time: As previously noted, at speeds 5 and 6, the 3.5� PFW pads ran *very* cool, even with significant pressure. *MUCH* cooler than either of the 4� Cyclo foam pads. This resulted in a significantly longer work time for the product than with foam pads.
Plastic/Rubber Trim: There was not damage to rubber or plastic trim when I (gently/carefully) allowed the pads to touch it, which would *not* be the case with 4� COF.
Size of Areas Worked: I had no problems working areas ~8� x 8� and working small areas is easy as the pads don't cause much heat buildup (the way 4" foam pads do) when left in one place.
Cleaning the Pads: As the pads loaded up with product, I spurred them. It seems pretty easy to tell when this is necessary, and if in doubt just do it. Yeah, you could do it with a small, dull screwdriver if you don’t have a spur. The PC spins the pads OK for spurring but it’s not the same as with a rotary. I also gave the pads a light spritz of #34 and then wiped them with a cotton towel, this worked ~OK but it didn't separate/fluff up the strands of wool as well as spurring did.
Test Results:
Wetsanding Scratches: The 3.5� PFW pads removed 2000 sanding scratches with ease. One or two passes were sufficient.
RIDS: On RIDS, the results were even more impressive. The 3.5� PFW would diminish a nasty RIDS in one pass, render it quite shallow and rounded with two, and usually eliminate it with three or four. In the cases where I did not fully remove a RIDS, it was because I wanted to preserve the clear, *not* because I simply gave up before attaining complete removal. This contrasted markedly with the 4� COF, which did less correction even with more passes (note that the 4� COF *would* eventually get the job done, generating a *lot* of heat in the process).
Note that these passes all went quite quickly. I can’t say just how long it took, but the 1Z Intensive breaks down pretty fast; it’s *not* a matter of each pass taking a few minutes. But note that I possibly underworked the product; it might be a good idea to work it until it almost dusts (which will be a while when using the 3.5� PFW). I didn't have this "worked long enough?" issue with the foam pads as they really break it down fast.
Resulting Finish and Need for Follow-Up: The resulting finish was quite hazy, typical compound haze but rather severe for this product (note that this pad/product combo did the same thing for me via rotary). Despite my initial forebodings, this haze was easily corrected with a pass of 1Z Intensive on either of the 4� Cyclo pads (the 4� CGF is strong enough, no need for the orange).
(Note that the 1Z Intensive did not leave hazing with either of the 4� Cyclo pads. Again, I might have underworked the product with the wool pads.)
After this follow-up, the finish was pretty good. No obvious issues and I can imagine some (not-too-particular) people thinking it ready-to-wax, at least on certain colors (but *wow* did it improve with subsequent polishing using 1Z High Gloss).
I did notice “pigtails� in the polish at times while I worked it with the 3.5� PFW. A few of these showed up in the clearcoat, but were removed by subsequent polishing with less pressure. This makes me think that a) this combo isn't idiot-proof and b) the 3.5� PFW pads are probably not a good choice for soft paints, but *those* paints would correct easily enough with 4� foam pads anyway.
Time-Saving Technique: A method I found quite handy is something I seldom hear mentioned these days- after working the 1Z Intensive with the 3.5� PFW, I didn’t buff off the polish residue. Instead, I quickly swapped the 3.5� PFW pad for a 4� Cyclo foam pad (or I grabbed the Cyclo) and went right back over the same area using a tiny bit of fresh 1Z Intensive. After working this until it was broken down (almost dry), I finally buffed all the residue off. Worked fine and saved some time.
Conclusion: Since I’m usually dealing with hard clear, the 3.5� PWF, used via PC, just might be my new go-to solution for RIDS, at least if I don’t already have a rotary out (and equipped with that little backing plate).
) and I used a full sized PFW pad on the PC, as I don't have the adaptor to use the small backing plate on the PC. The marring was very light. I knew I was using way too heavy of a pad and polish for such light marring (a rotary, red pad, and PO85RD would have been plenty), but I was interested in seeing how PFW finished out on the PC after hearing alot of people say it doesn't leave a very good finish. I used SIP, btw. 
I've been practicing up on my jeweling technique.
) I guess it's not that surprising.