3M Ultrafina Vs. Menz. 85RD

There are a few places online that sell UF for about $43 shipped.

My local Sherwin-Williams automotive refinishing store will sell it to me for $35 as I have an account. The account is free and no minimum purchase is required.

 

I am going to 1 step polish my car today before giving it a winter protection. I am going to try 9 part 85rd to 1 part UF,
I am thinking the oils and water in UF would help the 85rd work longer and burnish the paint just right. my only worries
is that the 85rd wont play nice with UF and it will dry on the paint making it hard to remove "if its no compatible"

 

85RD already has a long working time, just wondering why you would need any additional time for 85RD. Also ultrafina does not have as long working time as 85RD so it might lessen your time with the 85RD.

 

yeah as I was thinking, the UF is recommended to be buffed off wet so it makes sense.

What I was thinking of actually is to lessen the cut in 85rd so that it burnish the paint,
My car is almost LSP ready with the exception of a cat that climbed on my trunk left a little
nasty swirl mark in the right side of the trunk, what do you guys recommend 85rd white pad
or blue pad for the whole car?

 

85RD has very little cut to it. Its sole purpose is to burnish the paint to a high gloss. Use either the blue or black pad with it. Both pads have little to none in the way of mechanical action which is what you want.:thumb:

 

awesome thanks, might need to switch to a white 4" pad and SIP for that little part in the trunk.

 

It sure does.

 

Use a blue pad.

yes it will.

 

OK, this whole UF thing has had me so perplexed for so long.... I think I'm finally getting a good handle on it now that I'm just about through with my second quart of the stuff...

What does it compare to as far as correcting power? 106? 85RD? FPII? OP?

This question has been driving me nuts. I thought I had it nailed at right about the 106 level, when a few others chimed in and said it felt lighter to them; more like 85rd. So I kept that in mind as I did the next few cars with it. My answer: it still feels like it has about the same correction ability as 106FF does. But wait, there's more! 106 is one of my favorite polishes, for sure, but on *some* very soft clears, it just doesn't work very well. It'll spit, gum up, hop, and just be ornery, not to mention it just won't polish really soft paint. I have successfully used UF on paints ranging from ceramiclear hard to Bentley soft, and it works equally well on them all. And the speed! Good heavens, the stuff works faaaaast. It seems like the directions say something like to do four passes. That seems to really be the magic number. Four passes, and you are *done*! You can do more if you want; the stuff isn't gonna dry up, but it seems like it's pretty broken down after four, and you aren't going to get much further with it unless you do a fresh application.

Where does UF fit in in the Finishing Polish class?

Well, to me there's two sub categories within the Finishing Polishes. There's the finishing polishes you use to clean up after compounding that leave an OK shine, and there are true jeweling polishes that have absolutely no game when it comes to cleaning up after compounding, but they do a phenomenal job of glossing.

Examples of polishes that do a great job of cleaning up the compounding mess, but just do an OK job of gloss: PO106FF, OP, 1ZHG.

Examples of polishes that do a great job of glossing, but have no correction game: PO85RD, FPII.

UF is the only polish I've used that goes cross category. The stuff has the ability to clean up after compounding and leave a terrific shine. Yeah, you might get a touch more gloss by following UF up with 85rd or FPII, but for the amount of work requried, it usually isn't worth it, nor is it *that* much of an improvement.

I've been doing two applications of UF after compounding. The stuff is so fast to use, I can usually do two applications of UF in the amount of time it takes to do one application of 106. And I get much better results. The first application takes out the compounding marks, and the second one finishes off the shine.

In my book, 3M literally blew the doors off the competition with this formulation. I'm tempted to buy several cases of the stuff just in case they decide to screw with the forumula. It seems like 3M just can't ever leave their stuff alone without changing formulas every year. Let's all hope they realize a winner when they see it and keep their hands off of it for a while.

 

Heh, another very useful post from you Supe. Thanks!

 

Ive used 106 on soft Bentley paint without any issues. Maybe try using a different pad?

 

Greg Nichols and I used 106 on a Bentley, too. And it did work very well, just not as well as the UF did. But there have been a few cars (mostly Hondas) where I just couldn't get 106 to behave. It was acting similar to how SIP does when it's not playing nice. It doesn't happen often, thankfully.

 

I remember that write up you guys did. Thankfully I havent had any issues with FF.

 

Once again I have to agree with you, my mom has an Accord and those two don't like to play nice with the cc. UF to the rescue.

 

Did you finish with 106ff? Have you seen the car 2 or 3 months later?

 

Todd, I make sure my imperfections are removed before going to my finishing polish. You should know that by now.

 

I too prefer UF to 106FF for its versatility. I used it to polish out a Cadillac STS just yesterday. I made one pass at 600 RPMs, 4 passes at 2100 RPMs, 2 passes at 1400 RPMs, and 2 passes at 900 RPMs while in the sun and it still played ball like a champ removing some significant marring and burnishing the finish.

 

If you could call 106 a finishing polish..

:bla2:

 

Uf is a great finishing polish, but it too will "fill" if not checked with a good wipe down. SuperBee and I found that you need 2 IPA 91% wipe downs to really know.

 

or just prepsol