A Pro-Skeptic correction job

Pro-Skeptic

Has judged me for spending a lot of time on my vehicles. I have asked him to post examples of his work, but he ignores my requests . Now, I know why he goes nuts when I post examples from other forums of before and after pics of correction
work. I dug up this fine example of his work that required 12 hours to finish.

This Porsche is a 2008 with 337 miles. Now I would not consider this car a daily driver by no means given the mileage.

He makes this statement:

I was quite surprised in both the manufacturer as well as the dealership for allowing such a caliber of vehicle to be delivered to someone paying well over $100,000 with all the obvious correctable flaws and imperfections. Below are several examples of the flaws in this brand new vehicle:


Granted, there are slight scratches on the car, and for that price the dealership could have removed them. Although,
what he did on this car will lead to more work down the road . This car does not need correction IMO, and the process
he used is ass backwards . For example:

Here’s the wash/prep process:

I used Auto Magic Wash & Wax for the 1st wash through a foam gun & HD Grout Sponge:

Why would you use this product? It would seem logical that you are trying to take any wax off the vehicle, so why would
you use a soap that contains wax? It would make much more sense to use dawn to strip the wax off. Just my opinion.


The claying step makes sense, and that is what I would have done


Here is where I see a big problem:

After buffing, the car was then hand washed again with Meguiar’s 00 to remove all buffing dust and oils. I then paint sealed with 1 coat of 1Z Einszett Glanz Wax and allowed to cure/cross-link as long as possible before the sun started to go down. Immediately after, an additional coat of chilled Zymol Carbon was applied panel by panel to bring out an even better color, depth & reflection.

First, read the description for Meguiar's 00

This is a professional grade shampoo car wash equipped with enough muscle to power off even the most glued-on grime

Then it states this:The exclusive formula in Meguiar?s #00 Hi-Tech Wash guarantees the wax finish won?t rinse off with the suds. Your glossy finish is in careful hands with #00 Hi-Tech Wash.

Generous foaming bubbles, moisture-laden lubricators and no harsh detergents are the features that make Meguiar?s #00 Hi-Tech Wash the professional?s choice. Performance, consistency

IT IS STRONG ENOUGH TO POWER OFF MOST GLUED ON GRIME, BUT A WAX COAT WILL NOT COME OFF .
Somehow that does not make any sense.

Pro-Skeptic makes the statement that using this product will remove all the dust and oils from the polishing. I am not to sure about that.

Now he applies 1 coat of 1Z Einszett Glanz Wax which is a poly sealant, and follows it with Zymol Carbon.
Now the car does look good, but it should. Wax when first put on does look awesome, but down the road and with more
washes it will be worse from all that wax he applied. Then he can come back and blame it on the customer for not properly
washing his car the right way, and do it all over again.

This story never changes , nor do the results from it. Applying products that stick, harden , and do not bond to the finish to cover up defects leads to swirling and correction. As Ron says, FACTS ARE FACTS.

Here is the post:

[www.autogeekonline.net]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 08:03PM by billd55.

So, you're choosing to continue your attacks on me? Am I right??

Why do you consider this a attack? Are you not proud of your work.? You ask me questions about mine, so explain yours.
If you cannot stand the heat in the kitchen, maybe you should be more careful when you point fingers at people
with nothing to base it on.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 06:59PM by billd55.

My work speaks for itself. You've asked me to leave you alone, yet you are continuing to concentrate your efforts back to pestering me. How is this fair? It seems like we are at a fork in the road. You can either stop this or take this to the next level. Your choice?

Just mind your own business, and we can end this now. Your actions are making it personal.

Bill (and anyone else wondering): I’m replying to these questions raised ONLY as an attempt to explain (politely) how correction and proper washing of a vehicle can be a viable option for perfect preservation & protection of an automobile. This is NOT in any way, shape of form at attempt to argue or disrespect Bill’s opinion. Here goes…

billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
This Porsche is a 2008 with 337 miles. Now I would not consider this car a daily driver by no means given the mileage.

This vehicle actually is (was) a daily driver and was given to this person as a X-mas gift from another client of mine. This thread/detail was done immediately after the client took delivery of it. The owner would have liked to not have the dealer do any prep, but because it was a present, he thought it might be tacky if he gave it to this person still with its protective wrapping as this is how the owner usually handled his new cars. If you search for another car I did around this time (orange Porsche Turbo Conv’t) you’ll see how exactly he usually receives his vehicles.

billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Granted, there are slight scratches on the car, and for that price the dealership could have removed them. Although, what he did on this car will lead to more work down the road.

I maintained the vehicle for 2 years until it was turned in on its lease. I trained the owner how to properly wash it and they did a pretty good job based on their abilities. I would do touch ups on it every 4 or so months and there was only very light wash educed marring that required a light finishing polish to revive back to it’s initial state. Also, keep in mind that dealers (especially this one in S. Florida) has a reputation of delivering vehicles in poor condition. I have other examples documenting this as well.

billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
This car does not need correction IMO, and the process he used is ass backwards.

Keep in mind Bill that in the above statement you mentioned that the car did indeed have “slight scratches”? So by that logic(which I agree with) it needs correction. Take another look at the deep scratches and swirls that were created when the factory did its Quality Control correction procedures. They obviously tried compounding out defects (this it normal) and left rotary/compounding marks. Porsche paint is extremely soft and requires specialty finishing products/procedures to finish 100% defect free. Because the factory isn’t concerned with doing this high level of work, they typically ship the car out this way. The last thing they would use would be wax. Especially in the paint department!! That could cause a major quality problem if it contaminated their paint line.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I used Auto Magic Wash & Wax for the 1st wash through a foam gun & HD Grout Sponge:



Why would you use this product? It would seem logical that you are trying to take any wax off the vehicle, so why would you use a soap that contains wax? It would make much more sense to use dawn to strip the wax off. Just my opinion.

This vehicle didn’t have any wax on it as far as I could tell. New paint can and will bead water pretty good on its own anyways. Even when you let a mild soap dwell on the surface, it can actually still etch certain waxes/sealants. But, Dawn wouldn’t have been a bad thing to use either. Looking back, the absolute best thing I could have done was use an ACB decon wash. That would have done a deeper cleaning if needed. But, because I knew I was going to be correcting the defects/surface anyways, using a soap that has wax/gloss enhancers really doesn’t make a difference.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The claying step makes sense, and that is what I would have done.


Ok



billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Here is where I see a big problem:

After buffing, the car was then hand washed again with Meguiar’s 00 to remove all buffing dust and oils. I then paint sealed with 1 coat of 1Z Einszett Glanz Wax and allowed to cure/cross-link as long as possible before the sun started to go down. Immediately after, an additional coat of chilled Zymol Carbon was applied panel by panel to bring out an even better color, depth & reflection.

First, read the description for Meguiar's 00

This is a professional grade shampoo car wash equipped with enough muscle to power off even the most glued-on grime

Then it states this:The exclusive formula in Meguiar?s #00 Hi-Tech Wash guarantees the wax finish won?t rinse off with the suds. Your glossy finish is in careful hands with #00 Hi-Tech Wash.

Generous foaming bubbles, moisture-laden lubricators and no harsh detergents are the features that make Meguiar?s #00 Hi-Tech Wash the professional?s choice. Performance, consistency

IT IS STRONG ENOUGH TO POWER OFF MOST GLUED ON GRIME, BUT A WAX COAT WILL NOT COME OFF .
Somehow that does not make any sense.

Pro-Skeptic makes the statement that using this product will remove all the dust and oils from the polishing. I am not to sure about that.

Correct. After buffing and before I (and many other correction specialists) seal paint, I like to rewash the vehicle to remove the polishing dust out of the cracks and crevices. It also does a good job of removing the polishing oils in many products like Menzerna. These oils are much lighter then waxes/sealants too and don’t usually require a harsh product to remove. I used Meg’s #00 as apposed to AM W& W because I didn’t want anything left behind that *could* interfere with the bonding of the sealant I was using. Some people don’t feel this isn’t a big deal, but on this one I decided to do it anyways.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Now he applies 1 coat of 1Z Einszett Glanz Wax which is a poly sealant, and follows it with Zymol Carbon. Now the car does look good, but it should.

Yes, thanks! And much better after correctly polishing the paint.

billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Wax when first put on does look awesome, but down the road and with more washes it will be worse from all that wax he applied. Then he can come back and blame it on the customer for not properly washing his car the right way, and do it all over again.


See above in my 1st reply. I maintained this car for a few years and the customer did a great job of the washing too. There wasn’t anything that “came back” and the car’s finish was always within 90% of the condition that it was after I did it initially. Wax/Sealants didn’t cause any ill effects here.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
This story never changes, nor do the results from it. Applying products that stick, harden, and do not bond to the finish to cover up defects leads to swirling and correction.



The only thing I would say you are incorrect about is the covering up of defects. You initially stated that the car “didn’t need any correction”, so where does the covering up of swirling come from? I corrected the finish on the vehicle (permanently), sealed it and it was washed with proper techniques and nothing came back over 2 years time. The biggest thing I’m unclear about is that in one statement you acknowledge the car having scratches (which it did), but then state it didn’t need correction? How else would you *remove* these problems unless you did correction which I did? And, they never returned. Can you explain more about your comment above? What you’re saying could make a lot of sense, but I need more explanation. I look forward to your comments.

Now this is a post I can respond to.

Quote:

This vehicle actually is (was) a daily driver and was given to this person as a X-mas gift from another client of mine

At the time of this detail, this Porsche was a 2008 with 337 miles if I read the post correctly. I am assuming that since
this car was a lease, that the new owner could not been driven more than 30,000 miles in two years at best, and was garage kept. Also, is was not taken to car washes either.

Quote:

I maintained the vehicle for 2 years until it was turned in on its lease. I trained the owner how to properly wash it and they did a pretty good job based on their abilities. I would do touch ups on it every 4 or so months and there was only very light wash educed marring that required a light finishing polish to revive back to it’s initial state.


My statement:Although, what he did on this car will lead to more work down the road. This meant that 6 visits were required
to remove wash educed marring that required a light finishing polish to revive back to it’s initial state over the 2 years .
Using my procedure, there would be no polishing needed beyond the first visit( if that), and one other 12 months later.

Quote:

This vehicle didn’t have any wax on it as far as I could tell.

I do not know a way to tell if a car has wax on it either, but I would be very safe in saying that the car was waxed at some time, and was washed prior to delivery. These are were the scratches came from in my opinion. I know this could have been fixed by a Dawn wash , clay bar, Gem's pre-cleaner, and a hand coat of AT-5.

Quote:

Keep in mind Bill that in the above statement you mentioned that the car did indeed have “slight scratches”? So by that logic(which I agree with) it needs correction. Take another look at the deep scratches and swirls that were created when the factory did its Quality Control correction procedures. They obviously tried compounding out defects (this it normal) and left rotary/compounding marks. Porsche paint is extremely soft and requires specialty finishing products/procedures to finish 100% defect free. Because the factory isn’t concerned with doing this high level of work, they typically ship the car out this way. The last thing they would use would be wax. Especially in the paint department!! That could cause a major quality problem if it contaminated their paint line.

I would not say they were deep scratches and swirls by no means. You are assuming they compounded this vehicle , but you are not absolutely sure?

Quote:
The last thing they would use would be wax. Especially in the paint department!! That could cause a major quality problem if it contaminated their paint line

This statement makes no sense to me. They very well could have just waxed the vehicle as part of their prep process.

Quote:

There wasn’t anything that “came back” and the car’s finish was always within 90% of the condition that it was after I did it initially. Wax/Sealants didn’t cause any ill effects here.

Quote:

I would do touch ups on it every 4 or so months and there was only very light wash educed marring that required a light finishing polish to revive back to it’s initial state.

Am I reading this right? You had to come back 3 times a year to buff the very light wash educed marring , and apply more wax. What do you mean nothing came back?

Quote:

Wax/Sealants didn’t cause any ill effects here.


So washing was the only reason for this damage? Fact: Harsh soaps are not used to wash a car because it strips the wax,
so using a mild soap could not wear down the wax enough to show this type of marring . Here is what happens when harsh
soaps where used IMO.

[www.autopia.org]


Quote:

I corrected the finish on the vehicle (permanently), sealed it and it was washed with proper techniques and nothing came back over 2 years time.


If you corrected it permanently, than why did you need to go back 6 times over 2 years to remove "wash educed marring that required a light finishing polish to revive back to it’s initial state ". I assume that is considered correction to bring it from
90% to 100%.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2011 05:51AM by billd55.

billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I am assuming that since this car was a lease, that the new owner
could not been driven more than 30,000 miles in two years at best,
and was garage kept. Also, it was not taken to car washes either.


The only car washes they visited on occasion were touchless ones. Yes, probably around 30K. Also keep in mind that this vehicle was this person’s only vehicle and was driven daily and parked outside in an exposed lot. The only time it was ever garaged was at night.



billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
My statement: Although, what he did on this car will lead to more
work down the road. This meant that 6 visits were required to remove
wash educed marring that required a light finishing polish to revive back
to it’s initial state over the 2 years . Using my procedure, there would be
no polishing needed beyond the first visit( if that), and one other 12 months later.


I can’t see how this would be possible? Porsche paint is some of the softest out there. Certain microfiber towels can even produce marring that can be seen under certain light. Claying will leave abrasions too. There is no way you could stretch out *this type of finish* to a year without doing much more then a light polish at that point. That is, if you wanted to return it to its initial state w/o a lot of effort. AT-5 (per Rich) does not reduce marring, so it’s not like this product would have helped in this department either. In this case, with this client, they preferred keeping their car looking its best (realistically) more frequently too. They would never allow their finish to go that long between visits. Now, if this vehicle was another color and/or one with a harder finish9like the blue Mercedes in your video) then it could be different.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I do not know a way to tell if a car has wax on it either, but I would
be very safe in saying that the car was waxed at some time, and
was washed prior to delivery. These are were the scratches came
from in my opinion. I know this could have been fixed by a Dawn wash
,clay bar, Gem's pre-cleaner, and a hand coat of AT-5.


All I can suggest is that this particular owner tends to stay on top of what the dealer does with his vehicles. Besides being adamant about not allowing them to wash his cars while in for service, he insists that his new cars get delivered to him with the plastic still on. He won’t even trust their technicians to remove the plastic!! Could they have waxed *this* vehicle because the delivery circumstances were different?? Maybe. But I am 100% certain that they did wash it and would be willing to bet (from seeing their wash bay/technicians workflow 1st hand) that they did cause the heavy wash educed scratches. As far as the Gem’s pre-cleaner goes, because I’ve never used this product, I am just assuming that it does have some corrective abilities and can level paint. If so, then yes, it could have maybe corrected these defects. BUT, this would only have been possible by use of a professional grade machine such as a rotary buffer or dual action polisher. There is no way working by hand would have created anything close to the finish I created.

Also, I would only assume that you meant you would want to use Gem’s Clearcoat Compound as their Pre-Cleaner is no more then a mild paint cleaner? Per this product’s description: Clearcoat Compound: Specially formulated for clearcoat, this light compound removes micro-scratches from the surface. Should be applied after using our Pre-Treatment so that imperfections are more readily seen. As the description states, the Pre-Cleaner clean the paint so that the imperfections can be seen, not corrected.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I would not say they were deep scratches and swirls by no means.
You are assuming they compounded this vehicle , but you are not
absolutely sure?


I am 110% positive that this vehicle was spot compounded at the factory during the post painting quality control stage. I’ve seen literally 100’s of new vehicles with the identical isolated swirl pattern AND talked to multiple paint/OEM reps to confirm this problem. I’m quite familiar with how these types of things are done @ the factory level. And keep in mind that I did warranty paint repairs for 15 different new car dealers and I repaired these types of problems both pre and post delivery on a regular basis. Were they deep? Not really, but I’m also quite certain that they required a machine coupled with the proper polishing compounds to polish them away permanently.



billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
This statement makes no sense to me. They very well could have
just waxed the vehicle as part of their prep process.


Prep process at the dealer or at the factory?? Yes the dealer, but not at the factory. I don’t know of any factory that utilizes wax at their factories. Maybe Ron could speak on this as he has toured dozens of them throughout his career. I just feel that having wax (with harmful silicones) could reap havoc in a sterile paint line environment.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Am I reading this right? You had to come back 3 times a year to
buff the very light wash educed marring, and apply more wax.
What do you mean nothing came back?


I mean that none of the original defects came back. This means my process didn’t hide or fill them. And because of (A) the way this owner demanded close to perfect paint and (B] had a car with very soft paint, that it required frequent light polishing to keep it within the “10% of perfect” range. The particular owner would not accept their vehicle falling below these standards. There is also no way possible to avoid not lightly micromarring this finish during the wash process either.



billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
So washing was the only reason for this damage? Fact: Harsh
soaps are not used to wash a car because it strips the wax, so
using a mild soap could not wear down the wax enough to show
this type of marring. Here is what happens when harsh soaps where
used IMO.
[www.autopia.org]


Yes, washing was the only reason why this car needed freshening up. Regardless of what kind of soap, wax or sealant (including AT-5) would be used on this vehicle, it would accumulate wash educed micromarring. I just feel (based on 1st hand experience) that other cars/colors prolong this from happening so quickly. I have several other clients with other kinds of vehicles that don’t require this frequent of polishing. Most only need touch-ups every 9-12 months or even more (when washed properly). But, there’s always that client that refuses to wash, or have their cars washed properly and even 1 bad wash could cause the car to be damaged again.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
If you corrected it permanently, than why did you need to go back
6 times over 2 years to remove "wash educed marring that required
a light finishing polish to revive back to it’s initial state ". I assume
that is considered correction to bring it from 90% to 100%.

I explained this above^^^ Also keep that there is different levels of correction. There is heavy correction to fix negligent DAMAGE (dealers and hack car washers) and correction to fix the inevitable micromarring that is very, very light in nature. I feel that the later is the best least evasive way to preserve and protect paint for the long haul. (besides keeping it in a bubble and not every touching it) It’s also the best way to keep it looking its very best too.

Quote:

. AT-5 (per Rich) does not reduce marring, so it’s not like this product would have helped in this department either. In this case, with this client, they preferred keeping their car looking its best (realistically) more frequently



You must have misunderstood what Rich told you here. AT-5 does reduce marring from washing . This argument of which
paint is soft vs hard really is amusing to me. As I wrote in my post about types of paint used on clear coats they are
mostly acrylic polyurethanes. It really makes little sense to me to say one company has harder vs softer paint than another.
What would be the benefit of making clear coat paint softer if simple washing, or using a towel for drying would mar the
surface? It really makes no sense at all.

See what you cannot understand is this. Most waxes/sealants do not bond to paint. That is why it is a well known fact not to use Dawn on waxed vehicles. They breakdown the wax.


Quote:

Could they have waxed *this* vehicle because the delivery circumstances were different?? Maybe. But I am 100% certain that they did wash it and would be willing to bet (from seeing their wash bay/technicians workflow 1st hand) that they did cause the heavy wash educed scratches.


You seem to have made my point here. You admit that wax was used , and the car was washed prior to delivery to your customer. I never said these scratches were heavy on this Porsche. What I did say was that even using a mild
soap and wiping it dry will produce the marring you were asked to come out fix in the first place.




Quote:

There is no way you could stretch out *this type of finish* to a year without doing much more then a light polish at that point. That is, if you wanted to return it to its initial state w/o a lot of effort.

You are correct in this statement if you are talking about wax, but 100% wrong if talking about AT-5. Why is this. Primarily
because AT-5 truly bonds to the clear coat. and puts a coating over the existing clear coat. Can AT-5 be marred,Yes, but
not by washing, claying , or using towels. Sure you could get marring from rubbing against a bush, but the difference is
that Gem's cleaner would remove it instead of correcting the whole car.

The above statement is clearly based on your opinion with zero facts to support it. With AT-5 you do not have to remove it
before correction , or applying another coat of wax/ sealant to return it to it's initial state. The reason for this is because it can bond to itself when properly cleaned first where wax/sealants cannot. It is just that simple.

Quote:

As far as the Gem’s pre-cleaner goes, because I’ve never used this product, I am just assuming that it does have some corrective abilities and can level paint. If so, then yes, it could have maybe corrected these defects. BUT, this would only have been possible by use of a professional grade machine such as a rotary buffer or dual action polisher. There is no way working by hand would have created anything close to the finish I created.


What Gem's pre-cleaner does is clean the surface . In this case with the Porsche, the paint does not need to be leveled
as you call it. It just needs to have the wax removed that is causing the problem. The clearcoat compound is for removing the minor actual scratches in the clear, and machine polishing would be necessary for that.


Quote:

I am 110% positive that this vehicle was spot compounded at the factory during the post painting quality control stage.


Were they deep? Not really, but quite certain that they required a machine coupled with the proper polishing compounds to polish them away permanently.



Let me ask you this question? If your customer did not like these scratches, and others mostly likely also. I cannot see
Porsche shipping cars from the factory with this obvious problem. It would seem the dealers would complain about it
since they would have to pay you to fix it. Also, it makes very little sense that the factory would spot compound areas of the car, and not the whole car.


Quote:

but quite certain that they required a machine coupled with the proper polishing compounds to polish them away permanently.


I am puzzled. You are certain about what? You say they compounded the Porsche at the factory, and now you are doing the same thing. Are you saying that Porsche does not know what they are doing when it comes to polishing their own paint, and you do? You keep saying proper polishing permanently prevents these types of problems. I do not see it.


Quote:

There is also no way possible to avoid not lightly micromarring this finish during the wash process either.

You are correct. The reason why is because you are using wax/sealants. It is just that simple. I have applied AT-5
to hundreds of vehicles, and I never see this condition . If you want to avoid this problem, then stop using these products.


Quote:

Regardless of what kind of soap, wax or sealant (including AT-5) would be used on this vehicle, it would accumulate wash educed micromarring. I just feel (based on 1st hand experience) that other cars/colors prolong this from happening so quickly

What first hand experience do you have? Only with cars that use wax/sealants. What 1st hand experience do you have with
AT-5? Working for 15 dealerships doing correction repairs is really not relevant on what AT-5 can or cannot do IMO.


Quote:


I have several other clients with other kinds of vehicles that don’t require this frequent of polishing. Most only need touch-ups every 9-12 months or even more (when washed properly). But, there’s always that client that refuses to wash, or have their cars washed properly and even 1 bad wash could cause the car to be damaged again.


I just happen to feel that most customers just want to have their vehicle looking great , protected, and not have to worry
if they are washing their cars the right way. The problem is, that one bad wash can be very costly in more ways than money.
With AT-5 they do not have to worry about that bad wash, and they only I have to do it once a year.


Quote:

I feel that the later is the best least evasive way to preserve and protect paint for the long haul. (besides keeping it in a bubble and not every touching it) It’s also the best way to keep it looking its very best too.


You say this:preserve and protect paint for the long haul. How are you exactly doing this? I get the preserve part, but not the protection. What are you are protecting against. The sun, bugs, treesap, acid rain, salt ? Because waxes and sealants will not do that. They may add a barrier, but given a short time these elements go right thru it no matter how many times a year
you come out. Most people do not keep their cars in a bubble, so it seems you are really saying that correction maintains
the original shine of the paint only to maintain that 100% look.

I didn’t want you to think I was avoiding you, but I’ve been up to my ears with work, personal stuff and the holidays.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
You must have misunderstood what Rich told you here. AT-5 does reduce marring from washing.

I specifically asked Rich if AT-5 reduced marring AND had any kind of anti-marring properties and he clearly said NO. If you have something documenting and proving otherwise I’d like to see it.



billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
This argument of which paint is soft vs hard really is amusing to me. As I wrote in my post about types of paint used on clear coats they are mostly acrylic polyurethanes. It really makes little sense to me to say one company has harder vs softer paint than another. What would be the benefit of making clear coat paint softer if simple washing, or using a towel for drying would mar the surface? It really makes no sense at all.

Yes, it’s true. Some finishes are hard and some are soft. Unless you are in the practice of correcting them, it may or may not be something that you might not notice or understand. For example, you could have two cars to compare. Say a Mercedes S-Class (black) and a BMW 3-series (black) and mechanically wash each one identically with the same soap, the same wash mitt and the same process. I would be willing to bet a lot of money that the BMW would have a much higher and deeper concentration of wash induced marring. I’ve seen it on many, many occasions. The main reason would be Mercedes (on most of their European manufactured plants) use a special kind of clear coat called Ceramiclear (PPG). It’s purposefully harder to withstand abrasions and in turn allow the finish to hold a higher amount of its original gloss for longer periods of time compared to other paints. Because it’s so hard, it’s also a pain in the butt to remove marring from. Many time requiring a more abrasive polishing compound and pad to correct. Totally unlike the 3 Series BMW (3 and 1 series actually) which is primarily a much softer and prone to marring finish. From PPG’s own website proving this:
[www.ppg.com]


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
See what you cannot understand is this. Most waxes/sealants do not bond to paint. That is why it is a well known fact not to use Dawn on waxed vehicles. They breakdown the wax.

I totally agree and understand this.. Dawn breaks down wax as one of its intended purposes is to degrease your pots and pans. Wax and sealants are made up of various oils, so Dawn can sometimes do a decent job of diminishing/deteriorating this film from the surface. Common sense tells me this. If I wanted something that was proven to be impervious to Dawn or other degreasers I’d want to use a product like Optimum Opti-Coat. Dawn will not put a dent in this stuff.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
You seem to have made my point here. You admit that wax was used , and the car was washed prior to delivery to your customer.

Just because the car was washed by the dealer doesn’t mean it was waxed. I don’t get the connection? Believe me; dealers (especially this one) try to do the very least possible with any car. There’s nothing leading me to believe that the dealer used wax just because they washed it? Why they would spend more time when they aren’t getting paid more makes no sense. Especially when the customer requests that they don’t use any wax AND buys several other $100,000++ cars from them regularly. You’re saying that they dismissed what this customer requested in spite just so they could wax this car? I don’t believe this to be accurate.

billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I never said these scratches were heavy on this Porsche. What I did say was that even using a mild
soap and wiping it dry will produce the marring you were asked to come out fix in the first place.

It’s not the mild soap and wiping it dry that created the marring on this car in these pics. It was a combination of the factory leaving compounding marks from not final polishing it correctly and the dealership detailers not knowing how to wash cars correctly. As I said before, the owner properly and regularly washed this vehicle and there was never any kind of marring that mimicked this as long as the owner owned the car. If this marring was a 10, the marring that I came back to correct was a .5.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Can AT-5 be marred, Yes, but not by washing, claying , or using towels. Sure you could get marring from rubbing against a bush, but the difference is that Gem's cleaner would remove it instead of correcting the whole car.

Ok, then by that logic how did marring get installed onto the vehicles in your videos? Did each owner take a bush and rub it across they paint?


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The above statement is clearly based on your opinion with zero facts to support it. With AT-5 you do not have to remove it before correction , or applying another coat of wax/ sealant to return it to it's initial state. The reason for this is because it can bond to itself when properly cleaned first where wax/sealants cannot. It is just that simple.

That’s actually pretty complex. You’re saying that you can correct the finish that has been treated with AT-5 and not remove the AT-5? And you can layer the product onto and over itself? Has this been proven and if so can you provide evidence of it?



billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
What Gem's pre-cleaner does is clean the surface. In this case with the Porsche, the paint does not need to be leveled as you call it. It just needs to have the wax removed that is causing the problem. The clearcoat compound is for removing the minor actual scratches in the clear, and machine polishing would be necessary for that.

How can a product like the pre-cleaner remove scratches by just cleaning the surface? It has to level the scratch as well as the area encompassing the scratch in order to remove it. If you’re using the pre-cleaner and removing scratches (by hand especially) you’re most likely hiding/filling them in (chemically) and not removing them in the 1st place. And, again there is noting leading me to believe that this car has ever been waxed so I don’t see where wax has anything to do with correction of the paint? Can’t we just assume for the moment tat wax wasn’t used??





billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Let me ask you this question? If your customer did not like these scratches, and others mostly likely also. I cannot see Porsche shipping cars from the factory with this obvious problem. It would seem the dealers would complain about it since they would have to pay you to fix it.

Manufacturers allow the problems with their vehicles to be fixed under warranty. Assuming that they acknowledge these issues in the 1st place which is half the battle seeing that dealership detailers don’t have the slightest idea how to identify or even correct these problems in the 1st place. And then there’s the salespeople who only care about selling the car and the owner being so excited to get this new car that they don’t pick up on any of these issues anyways. The manufactures knows there’s a problem but relies on the law of averages and chooses the road that costs them less to take which just so happens to be to keep these practices going. They’ve been doing it for decades….


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Also, it makes very little sense that the factory would spot compound areas of the car, and not the whole car.

Because the whole car didn’t need compounding. After a car is painted, it goes thought a quality control area where technicians identify and try correcting blemishes such as paint runs and surface dirt. The technician will then spot sand the defect and then quickly compound the sanding marks away. Depending on the color of the vehicle, they might do a finer polishing step to further refine the marring left in the 1st compounding step. What they don’t do is go 1 step further by refinish the prior steps marring away which in turned filled the 1st step anyways. If you ever get a chance to tour an auto assembly plant I would urge you to do so. There are actually several You-Tube videos too that go over this as well.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I am puzzled. You are certain about what? You say they compounded the Porsche at the factory, and now you are doing the same thing.

Where did I say I compounded this car??? And yes I’m certain.


billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Are you saying that Porsche does not know what they are doing when it comes to polishing their own paint, and you do?

Yes. Correct.

billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
You keep saying proper polishing permanently prevents these types of problems. I do not see it.

I never said I permanently prevented them. I said I permanently corrected the initial paint defects meaning that the defects weren’t filled or hidden like they were at the factory.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
You are correct. The reason why is because you are using wax/sealants. It is just that simple. I have applied AT-5 to hundreds of vehicles, and I never see this condition . If you want to avoid this problem, then stop using these products.

Have you ever maintained a late model black Porsche before? If not, then how would you know?



billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
What first hand experience do you have? Only with cars that use wax/sealants. What 1st hand experience do you have with AT-5? Working for 15 dealerships doing correction repairs is really not relevant on what AT-5 can or cannot do IMO.

No experience with AT-5 at all. If you’d like to send me a sample to test its scratch and chemical resistancy then I’d be willing to give feedback to support your cause.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I just happen to feel that most customers just want to have their vehicle looking great , protected, and not have to worry if they are washing their cars the right way. The problem is, that one bad wash can be very costly in more ways than money. With AT-5 they do not have to worry about that bad wash, and they only I have to do it once a year.

I totally agree. Most people only care about clean and shiny paint and couldn’t even defect a swirl if their life depended on it. The clients I service do not fall within this norm. Neither do the services or prices for said services I provide. I cater to people that want their vehicles looking their absolute best. And the only way this can be done is by polishing them.




billd55 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
You say this:preserve and protect paint for the long haul. How are you exactly doing this? I get the preserve part, but not the protection. What are you are protecting against. The sun, bugs, treesap, acid rain, salt ? Because waxes and sealants will not do that. They may add a barrier, but given a short time these elements go right thru it no matter how many times a year you come out. Most people do not keep their cars in a bubble, so it seems you are really saying that correction maintains the original shine of the paint only to maintain that 100% look.

Good point Bill. Yes, a barrier. And this barrier seems to hold up quite well to all these elements you listed or else I wouldn’t be allowed to keep maintaining these and my own vehicles to this high standard that I prescribe to. Besides, waxing and sealing a car is fun. I would be board to death if I didn’t have to do it anymore.

Quote:

That’s actually pretty complex. You’re saying that you can correct the finish that has been treated with AT-5 and not remove the AT-5? And you can layer the product onto and over itself? Has this been proven and if so can you provide evidence of it?

I am not correcting the AT-5 finish like wax. I do not need to remove the AT-5 coating, and yes I can layer over it . What I am trying to accomplish is to clean the existing layer, so I can bond another coat on it. Look at the Jeep and Tahoe videos.
That is what I did on them .

Quote:

There’s nothing leading me to believe that the dealer used wax just because they washed it? Why they would spend more time when they aren’t getting paid more makes no sense.

I really do not get this logic. What I am saying is that the dealership more than likely waxed the Porsche once, and washed
it prior to delivery.


Quote:

Ok, then by that logic how did marring get installed onto the vehicles in your videos? Did each owner take a bush and rub it across they paint?

The marring you see in my videos was not by me. You keep mentioning the blue Mercedes, but what you call marring was put there by someone else. Is AT-5 going to cover up scratches?NO!

There is a certain type of marring that occurs when cars are waxed. I have shown many examples here, and the severity of the marring occurs because of the soaps used. You will notice the cars in my videos never look like these do. The cars
you mention such as the Black Sonata were in bad shape prior to the application of AT-5.



Quote:

How can a product like the pre-cleaner remove scratches by just cleaning the surface?

It is not. If there is a actual scratch then your method would be needed. What I am trying to say is that wax does not come off as easy as a Dawn wash. In fact, moonlight46 told me that when he washed his car that had been waxed with 2 coats
that the dawn wash did not remove the wax layer.

He said that when he used the pre-cleaner I sent him that he could see the wax peeling off. Also, it removed defects
that the wax was covering up. All the cleaner does, is to remove all the stuff sitting on the top of the clear.



Quote:

Have you ever maintained a late model black Porsche before? If not, then how would you know?


Why does it have to be a Black Porsche? I have used it on black cars with the same results.



Quote:

No experience with AT-5 at all. If you’d like to send me a sample to test its scratch and chemical resistancy then I’d be willing to give feedback to support your cause.


I cannot afford to keep giving out samples for free. I did this with moonlght 46 to make a point. Call Rich and see if he will
send you one. I am doing this to provide info here. This is not my cause as you call it.



Quote:

Good point Bill. Yes, a barrier. And this barrier seems to hold up quite well to all these elements you listed or else I wouldn’t be allowed to keep maintaining these and my own vehicles to this high standard that I prescribe to. Besides, waxing and sealing a car is fun. I would be board to death if I didn’t have to do it anymore.


Well maybe you would be bored, but guys like Tim in the video would not give it a second thought. I realize what style of detailing you do, and the customers you cater to. Although, the vast car owners in this country are not into perfection of their
paint finish, nor to concerned to learn how to do it either.

If the barrier did hold up the way you say it does. Than why do you have to remove it to reapply it? It requires alot of time and money to do it the proper way.