Meguiar's Ultimate Compound (UC) vs. Intensive Polish (IP)

Bostonsfavson

Bostonsfavson

New member
I'm not really sure if this warrants its own thread, but why not, right? I've been playing around with Meg's UC all day. My tailgate had some nice scratches in it from a PDR I (attempted) to perform, so I took it off and went to work. I wanted to compare UC to my go-to polish, IP.



I used a PC with LC orange pads for both products. Prior to starting, I wiped the tailgate down with IPA to get rid of any LSPs. I've been doing this more and more lately, to eliminate any "interference." I primed both pads Kevin Brown-style, but didn't use the KBM (waiting for the paper and the M twins). Let me say right now that no, there aren't any pics. Someone stole my camera and I have yet to replace it :bat



The results? Very, very similar. They both seemed to have about the same cutting power, which is what I really wanted to find out. UC was easier to work with: just work it for a bit, wipe and inspect. No waiting for the polish to break down. Although others have talked about UC leaving the surface LSP ready on some paints, that wasn't the case here. There was minor marring, and just not enough gloss. I tried several different techniques and couldn't get a finish that I was happy with.



IP, as usual, worked very well. Longer working time was required for the polish to break down, but the end result was a nearly LSP ready finish. In fact, I probably could have went right to an LSP, but I went over the entire tailgate with PO106FF to get a little more gloss.



The bottom line is that UC is a great product, and very user friendly. I've used it by hand as well, and think that the enthusiast market will love it. However, I see no reason why I would ever use it over IP, which simply finishes much nicer. Of course, I've been using IP for years, and this was my first time using UC with a PC. I look forward to trying the new M105 and seeing what my results are. FWIW, I did an IPA wipedown after both to weed out any fillers, intentional or otherwise. There didn't seem to be any :2thumbs:



Take care fellas.
 
That's good to know. I have IP also, and I have thought about trying out UC, but I think I'll just hold off for M105.:xyxthumbs
 
It's ironic, I have heard so much about IP and it's benefits. I have never tried it. I have tried UC and like it. I also found that it is close but not always leaves a LSP finish. I do like the work time.
 
From my own experiences, IP (with white LC pad) will leave a very slight haze on dark colored cars (e.g. black, red), but it's not noticeable at all on lighter colored vehicles. It's actually an excellent polish that just doesn't seem to get it's just due since the advent of Menzerna's newer polishes like 106FF/FA, SIP........
 
termigator said:
From my own experiences, IP (with white LC pad) will leave a very slight haze on dark colored cars (e.g. black, red), but it's not noticeable at all on lighter colored vehicles. It's actually an excellent polish that just doesn't seem to get it's just due since the advent of Menzerna's newer polishes like 106FF/FA, SIP........
Click to expand...



I'm not sure I've ever used IP with a white pad--it's always IP/orange followed by FPII or 106FF/white. Maybe once.
 
Say, this is one of the coolest mini write-ups I have ever seen!

Honest, thorough, open to additional testing. Great jobQ :2thumbs:



:idea Shoulda had you help me write my paper... we could have weeded out about 80% of it and it would be DONE!



Very cool. Thanks.
 
Kevin Brown said:
Say, this is one of the coolest mini write-ups I have ever seen!

Honest, thorough, open to additional testing. Great jobQ :2thumbs:



:idea Shoulda had you help me write my paper... we could have weeded out about 80% of it and it would be DONE!



Very cool. Thanks.
Click to expand...



Why thank you sir! :heelclick



If there's a benefit to work being slow, it's having time to mess around with stuff like this.
 
I actually just got my shipment of M105/M205 yesterday and tried it out. I liked the combo and the results it produced. On my particular vehicle which is black, I think it actually did a slightly better job at leaving the finish LSP ready as compared to IP followed by 85RD. I also used a PC with Orange LC followed with white LC pads. It also seemed like the M105/M205 was able to be worked longer, though.
 
Bostonsfavson said:
I'm not sure I've ever used IP with a white pad--it's always IP/orange followed by FPII or 106FF/white. Maybe once.
Click to expand...



I'm only an enthusiast, not a pro. I've only worked on my cars and a few of my relatives', none of which have needed major work. I always went white pad with IP as my most aggressive to start with and it's worked out real well. :)
 
wannafbody said:
I have to say that IME I find that Megs Ultimate Compound has more cut than SIP when worked by PC and a 4 inch pad.
Click to expand...



Although I find them to be quite similar, if pressed to choose one I would probably agree with you. Personally, I find that I have a propensity to work UC a bit harder than IP/SIP, therefore increasing its cutting power.
 
wannafbody said:
You could probably get away with one stepping it with a white pad on a light color. On darks a two step is needed.
Click to expand...



That's what I do with IP now. Guess I won't be needing UC after all.:thx
 
I just tried, on a heavily oxidized roof; 2000 Toyota Tundra:



Optimum Hyper Compound, new formulation, on a 6.5 SurBuf=Piss poor correction, definate haze



OHC on 4'' Orange LC: Almost the same





Megs UC on 6.5 SurBuf: 9/10 correction, but still needed a 2nd step.



Megs UC on 4'' LC Orange: 10/10 correction, finished down damn near LSP-ready via KBPCM~ish.



The Megs UC has been my new fav compound, as I believe with proper pad choice it can cut almost as much as 105, but finish down nicer. IMO/IME of course.
 
Since I've never used IP, I can't comment on its abilities, but I've recently had the opportunity to use some of Megs "New for 09" line. I detailed a 2005 black Honda Accord that has been washed only rarely and never detailed or waxed.



I started with their new Swirl-X, since it's supposed to be a step above #83 DACP which is my normal "go to" on a neglected surface. After quite a bit of work, I was rewarded with an extremely glossy shine, but after hitting the paint with a pair of 500w halogen lights, I saw there wasn't much correction...I now had a deep, glossy, scratched and swirled surface. I don't fault the Sw-X, the level of damage to the paint was beyond it's design specs.



I grabbed the bottle of UC and a LC polishing pad. Working up to a 6, and fairly heavy pressure, the combo did the job, but I felt that the polishing pad wasn't strong enough to hold up to the pressure of speed and downforce needed.



Switching to an LC cutting pad, I kept the speed at 6, but I was able to significantly able to lighten up on the downward pressure. The UC works great, no gumming up, no dust and when it was time to remove it, it came off clean and easy.



The end result was an unbelievable turn around. The UC brought the paint to an LSP-ready finish that I topped off with one application of M21-2.0



Here is a pic of the clay I used after JUST the trunk lid:



tn_SDC10162.JPG




This pic is a before (wash & clay) / after (Swirl X) of the hood. Although there is an improvement, in reality the hood was still horrible.



tn_SDC10152.JPG




Here are the final results, UC + M21 2.0 Polymer Sealant.



tn_SDC10166.JPG




tn_SDC10167.JPG
 
I've had very similar results as posted above. I've been using Ultimate Compound with a G110 and a yellow Megs 2.0 polishing pad on 6 and it's done an excellent job at leaving an LSP ready finish and removing any swirls/oxidation/light scratches etc, with a few passes. However, it's still not strong enough to get most random deep scratches out. Really it looks like a cutting pad needs to be used to do any more serious correction (which I haven't tried yet). It's really not as strong as people may think. I have swirl-x, but haven't felt the need to go back over the UC with it to see if it makes it any deeper. I'm sure 205 or SIP would help, but after following up with NXT 2.0, I've yet to be unimpressed with the results. If swirl-x isn't near as strong as UC, I wouldn't think it would be capable of much paint correction. UC or 105 is the way to go for Meguiars compounds.
 
UC is a better choice (for me) because of the fact that I do not need to let the polish completely break down. Thus, I can quit whenever I want to without creating marring due to improper use of the polish. In most situations where a finishing polish is needed or wanted after UC, the same is likely to be true after polishes such as IP. The ease of use of UC tips the scale in its favor, at least to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top