PC truth...
PC truth...
Driver School Candidate
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
From: ON
well I have both a rotory and PC, I just got my PC and all I can say is WOW. I love this tool so easy to use, and the finish is unreal, wish I picked one up along time ago. Even for wet sanding certain areas in my car to remove deep scratches and using the PC witha yellow pad and cutting compound to buff it out works very well.
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,283
Likes: 63
From: FL
Actually, no.
I own a Makita 9227c rotary and a Porter-Cable 7424 Dual Action.
Both can remove the same defects. The rotary can, in some cases, be faster but often will remove more paint than is necessary. The PC is probably safer to use but both can deliver great results.
With some of the new SMAT abrasive technology available today I can get the same results from either tool. I prefer using the PC, but that is just a matter of personal preference.
I own a Makita 9227c rotary and a Porter-Cable 7424 Dual Action.
Both can remove the same defects. The rotary can, in some cases, be faster but often will remove more paint than is necessary. The PC is probably safer to use but both can deliver great results.
With some of the new SMAT abrasive technology available today I can get the same results from either tool. I prefer using the PC, but that is just a matter of personal preference.
Actually, no.
I own a Makita 9227c rotary and a Porter-Cable 7424 Dual Action.
Both can remove the same defects. The rotary can, in some cases, be faster but often will remove more paint than is necessary. The PC is probably safer to use but both can deliver great results.
With some of the new SMAT abrasive technology available today I can get the same results from either tool. I prefer using the PC, but that is just a matter of personal preference.
I own a Makita 9227c rotary and a Porter-Cable 7424 Dual Action.
Both can remove the same defects. The rotary can, in some cases, be faster but often will remove more paint than is necessary. The PC is probably safer to use but both can deliver great results.
With some of the new SMAT abrasive technology available today I can get the same results from either tool. I prefer using the PC, but that is just a matter of personal preference.
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,283
Likes: 63
From: FL
I know it's bizzare. But I have an article that says PC removes more paint than Rotary. Here it is: http://www.autopia.org/forum/car-det...shock-you.html
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,283
Likes: 63
From: FL
Re: Wetsanding vs. Rotary vs. PC, what removes more paint? (The answer may shock you)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Laughhunn
This is certainly a most informative thread. But somehow, I'm thinking a lot of people are taking this information offered to come to the conclusion that a pc takes off more paint than a rotary. Does anyone believe that a "normal" two-step with a pc vs a "normal" two-step with a rotary takes off more material in the process? I don't.
And TH0001, the OP responds:
And you are correct. A rotary will remove more paint step for step.
Of course it generally takes 2-3 steps to remove defects from the paint using a rotary vs. as many as 8-10 with a PC, in which case you would remove more paint to remove the same depth as defects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Laughhunn
This is certainly a most informative thread. But somehow, I'm thinking a lot of people are taking this information offered to come to the conclusion that a pc takes off more paint than a rotary. Does anyone believe that a "normal" two-step with a pc vs a "normal" two-step with a rotary takes off more material in the process? I don't.
And TH0001, the OP responds:
And you are correct. A rotary will remove more paint step for step.
Of course it generally takes 2-3 steps to remove defects from the paint using a rotary vs. as many as 8-10 with a PC, in which case you would remove more paint to remove the same depth as defects.
Re: Wetsanding vs. Rotary vs. PC, what removes more paint? (The answer may shock you)
Thanks so much for clarifying. I gleaned that from your test, myself. HOWEVER, with this being the World-Wide-Web that we're attached to, this thread has taken a life of it's own elsewhere. I ran across several instances where people on various forums were indeed postulating that the circular polisher was declared "less harmful" than the random orbit. And they were pointing at this thread as proof. I thought it important that this thread here on Autopia isn't used to perpetuate that thought, and the fact that *you* responded as you did, should squelch that mis-interpretation.
Thanks again
__________________
Jeff Laughhunn
Thanks so much for clarifying. I gleaned that from your test, myself. HOWEVER, with this being the World-Wide-Web that we're attached to, this thread has taken a life of it's own elsewhere. I ran across several instances where people on various forums were indeed postulating that the circular polisher was declared "less harmful" than the random orbit. And they were pointing at this thread as proof. I thought it important that this thread here on Autopia isn't used to perpetuate that thought, and the fact that *you* responded as you did, should squelch that mis-interpretation.
Thanks again
__________________
Jeff Laughhunn
Not speaking for TH0001 but I'd say that his theory may not be accurate with today's technology.
Last edited by jfelbab; May 23, 2009 at 03:57 PM.
Trending Topics
Yet he states the following:
And the next post:
Further, this thread was back 2008 before SMAT abrasives were available. Using SMAT you no longer need to work a product waiting for it to break down. SMAT abrasives don't breakdown like their earlier diminishing abrasives. SMAT abrasives work as long as you work them as long as they don't dry out. This means that you can achieve the same correction as a rotary with far fewer passes and less fear of damaging the paint in a much shorter time than previously.
Not speaking for TH0001 but I'd say that his theory may not be accurate with today's technology.
And the next post:
Further, this thread was back 2008 before SMAT abrasives were available. Using SMAT you no longer need to work a product waiting for it to break down. SMAT abrasives don't breakdown like their earlier diminishing abrasives. SMAT abrasives work as long as you work them as long as they don't dry out. This means that you can achieve the same correction as a rotary with far fewer passes and less fear of damaging the paint in a much shorter time than previously.
Not speaking for TH0001 but I'd say that his theory may not be accurate with today's technology.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
User 41924
Automotive Care & Detailing
6
Jul 1, 2013 02:30 PM
yESman
Automotive Care & Detailing
5
Jun 17, 2007 02:45 PM