Ultimate Detailing Machine

Just found these pics of my RX7:

Rex3.jpg


Rex7.JPG


Rex9.JPG


No 'swirling', 'cobwebs' and certainly no 'holograms'. And what did I use? Some cheapo turtlewax shampoo, and a bit of MER polish.

Sure, you may see swirling under the anal-light from an inch away, but in most lights and conditions the difference is minimal.
 
[TW]Fox;10341817 said:
What difference can you see in the example I posted?
Click to expand...
Yes a clear difference but with respect a cut and polish would have taken that shine back up, probably just a polish since the paint isn't oxidised. Posting like that makes you sound like you've never done it yourself.
 
[TW]Fox;10339544 said:
Those pictures were particularly poor, even I couldnt see the difference. But the point is that on many cars you CAN see the difference.

Here is a freshly washed black Leon Cupra R:

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/polishedbliss/polishedbliss/leon0206/image4.jpg
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/polishedbliss/polishedbliss/leon0206/image7.jpg

It signifies everything thats wrong with buying a black car. Lovingly cleaned by a guy with a sponge and... oh dear. I mean look at it. Nice sunny day and your pride and joy, despite being immaculately clean and dried looks like a complete mess.

You have to all agree, it looks crap. Yes?

So, here comes a pointless, waste of time, OCD detailing moron to make no difference to the paintwork:

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/polishedbliss/polishedbliss/leon0206/image14.jpg
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/polishedbliss/polishedbliss/leon0206/image10.jpg

Surely now you get it?
Click to expand...

To be honest, I've got the same results by hand using the megs 3 step paint cleaner, polish and wax. This was on my mums 2004 Nighthawk Black Jazz a month ago.

It had never been waxed/polished before. Took me about 4/5 hours due to needing to clean a lot of contaminents off the paint, which made the most difference to the finish. I also managed to remove a wing to quarter panel scratch (didn't go past the paint).

It probably cost me about £5 in materials to do, if that. I'm a bit of a crow when it comes to shiny things and I won't stop until I'm happy with the finish and in this case I was very happy. I don't do this often to cars and as with mine being silver it never looks any different really.

I think detailing to the degree £300 pays for is just the 2006/2007 craze like the yo-yo craze back when I was in school. It's just a bit of a fad as the effect doesn't last that long if you use the vehicle on a daily basis for a good 15-20 mile round trip.
 
It neednt cost you £300 tho, buy the kit for around £70 and DIY, it cuts you time by a third and aint so painfull on the arms, and it will remove scratches and stuff with ease tbh somethings you just cant do by hand tbh.I sorted my old mans Nissan serena out by PC, it wouldnt have been able to tackle it it by hand at all.

Are you guys actually againt the principle of 'detailing' or the actual fad/craze/term.
 
DreXeL said:
Rex9.JPG


No 'swirling', 'cobwebs' and certainly no 'holograms'. And what did I use? Some cheapo turtlewax shampoo, and a bit of MER polish.

Sure, you may see swirling under the anal-light from an inch away, but in most lights and conditions the difference is minimal.
Click to expand...

Not the best photo to use to further your case really, given that the paint looks pretty dull and lacklustre, and has obvious marks in it.
 
[TW]Fox;10348127 said:
But that takes an afternoon, and that makes you sad! etc etc.
Click to expand...

Only because it had never been done since it was new and it was covered in contaminents. Only takes an 1-2 hours to polish and wax my car by hand every month by hand. I do it to protect the paintwork due to the very thin paint Honda think is acceptable.

I don't see spending hundreds of pounds on someone or some equipment to clean and maintain a vehicle as far as paintwork is concerned. It's just money wasted for something you can do once and keep topping up by hand for pennies on the long run.
 
Trojan said:
Not the best photo to use to further your case really, given that the paint looks pretty dull and lacklustre, and has obvious marks in it.
Click to expand...

Well we clearly have different views on what constitues dull then.

Besides, I wasn't trying to illustrate ultimate depth of shine, I was pointing out the lack of spiderwebs, swirls, and holograms.
 
DreXeL said:
Well we clearly have different views on what constitues dull then.

Besides, I wasn't trying to illustrate ultimate depth of shine, I was pointing out the lack of spiderwebs, swirls, and holograms.
Click to expand...

But not the lack of marks in general?
 
This thread (as has happened many times before) has gone down the route of you say detailing I say polish.

The thread was originally about a mechanical polisher that has the misfortune to have "detailing" in its name in a ploy to cash in on a current trend. The funny thing is people are actually arguing about the same thing- "look what was done to this car" "yeah but that could have been achieved by polishing it" :confused: If using a mechanical polisher isn't polishing what the hell is it? The only difference I can see is one takes all day and leaves you feeling like a cripple, the other a machine takes the brunt of the punishment.

The sooner people stop saying stuff like I detailed my car when all they did was polish it, whether it be by hand or machine, the sooner these 5 page threads with everyone aruging the same thing will stop.
 
DreXeL said:
Well we clearly have different views on what constitues dull then.

Besides, I wasn't trying to illustrate ultimate depth of shine, I was pointing out the lack of spiderwebs, swirls, and holograms.
Click to expand...

You just cant see them from that view thats all.

My Xantia looked amazing in pictures. Stand 2 feet away on a sunny day and it was a mess. Your RX7 was NOT swirl free. Not if its the same one you brought to RR days anyway.
 
[TW]Fox;10348583 said:
Your RX7 was NOT swirl free.
Click to expand...

Indeed it wasn't, infact the 14-year-old paintwork had seen much better days. I was just trying to illustrate the fact that just because a car hasn't been 'detailed', it doesn't turn into a swirled, spiderwebbed mess as soon as it sees some sun.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;10336655 said:
penski buys 1980's Vauxhalls and DreXel was content to drive around for 6 months in a car with sideskirts painted in Dulux emulusion. I love them both but they are the last people I would ask for an opinion on quality paintwork.
Click to expand...

Steady :p
 
DreXeL said:
Indeed it wasn't, infact the 14-year-old paintwork had seen much better days. I was just trying to illustrate the fact that just because a car hasn't been 'detailed', it doesn't turn into a swirled, spiderwebbed mess as soon as it sees some sun.
Click to expand...

Cars come from dealerships brand new with all sorts of bad swirls and marks, there are very few that dont. Im not sure where your logic lies, as if they come out of the dealerships this bad theyre only going to get worse.

Heres an example, a Audi R8

DSCF7300.jpg


DSCF7334.jpg
 
Liverpool-Lad said:
Cars come from dealerships brand new with all sorts of bad swirls and marks, there are very few that dont.
Click to expand...

I haven't said anything to the contrary? :confused:

What I'm saying is the swirls don't look anywhere near as bad as in the kind of pics you have just posted, in most real-life situations. The fact that they have to have a certian light cast on them and taken from a certain angle just goes to prove my point further.

TBH I can't be arsed with this argument anymore, it's going round in circles. I've already said I couldn't give a flying **** if somebody wants to spend an entire weekend 'detailing' thier car, I was simply saying I don't 'get it' when you can achieve 90% of the result for 10% of the effort.

/unsubscribes from thread.
 
Last edited:
DreXeL said:
I haven't said anything to the contrary? :confused:

What I'm saying is the swirls don't look anywhere near as bad as in the kind of pics you have just posted posted, in most situations. The fact that they have to have a certian light cast on them and taken from a certain angle just goes to prove my point further.

TBH I can't be arsed with this argument anymore, it's going round in circles.

I've already said I couldn't give a flying **** if somebody wants to spend an entire weekend 'detailing' thier car, I was simply saying I don't 'get it' when you can achieve 90% of the result for 10% of the effort.
Click to expand...

I agree, these are pictures of my car after giving it a quick wash with some autoglym shampoo stuff and drying it with a microfibre towel:
DSC02585.JPG

DSC02586.JPG


It looks super shiny and spangly there, when in reality it's covered in swirl marks etc, I personally can't be bothered to shell out on a lot of money on getting rid of something that you can't really notice unless you're on a mission to find imperfections.
 
DreXeL said:
What I'm saying is the swirls don't look anywhere near as bad as in the kind of pics you have just posted posted, in most real-life situations. The fact that they have to have a certian light cast on them and taken from a certain angle just goes to prove my point further.
Click to expand...

Untrue, just get them in direct sun and they look a mess :)
 
wohoo said:
Are you guys actually againt the principle of 'detailing' or the actual fad/craze/term.
Click to expand...

To me, what is currently refered to as "detailing" is getting the paintwork/trim/wheels etc. of a car into the best possible condition, using whatever materials, tools and time is required. This is (IMO) a pointless exercise unless the car is subsquently stored in a dust free, UV free, humidity controlled environment for the rest of it's life. Otherwise your expensive/time consuming "detail" is going to look like it never happened within a few weeks of normal driving.

Washing and polishing your car regularly is fine and sensible. Getting anal on "holograms" is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom