Todd, thank you for being a customer of Menzerna products. Although I can appreciate the great interest you show in the details of our product line, I believe that you may not have an accurate understanding or impression.

First, I do not know your relationship with “Brian,” and how you might have been privy to a conversation I may have had with him from which you are quoting. I’m sure that I provided the correct explanation to the issue he may have had, however your description of this is inaccurate. Allow me to set the record straight:

Yes, Menzerna develops products for specific applications and requirements, be they for a particular manufacturer or general market requirement. A product was developed for Mercedes, and this product also has wider application capabilities. In particular, the PO106 was available for a long time, and to the “professional” market. You were just now aware of it. Frankly, the rest of your post is completely inaccurate.

Although the PO106 (among other products) was developed for use on a scratch resistant clear, the majority of our customers are using it on conventional clears. This has nothing to do with what you call “masking.”

I would like to try to respond to your last paragraph, however it is incomprehensible to me.

If you have a question about the Menzerna product line, I would be glad to answer your questions. But please do not create a false story and attribute it to a third party conversation.

 

Again Todd, you have taken posts of of context, and attributed statements from a third party incorrectly. We have been selling PO83 since 2005. There is no US vs. European version of a Menzerna product. MenzernaUSA will bring in products that we feel perform best for this market and if there is a demand for a product.
As the factory continues to develop and update a polish family, a slight change does not necessitate a new part number or description. So we will stick with PO83 and/or SIP as our designation, and not use PO85RD3.01, PO85RD3.02, etc.

 

Jeff, I appericate any clarfication you are willing to give. I will continue to be a customer of Menzerna because I enjoy the products and think they are among the best.

To accuse me of creating a false story is rather funny. I will even get the time/date that he spoke with you regarding a thread that was on autogeek.net. Brian is my bussiness partner, and was speaking to you on the phone next to me, as where where driving to a job. No false story created. Brian has also responded on the second page of this post. Please do not accuse me of creating anything, because your assumption and accusation is incorrect.

 

Am I incorrect in saying that CMA was selling relabelled Menzerna(with slight changes in formulation for more lubricity) as Blackfire before 2005? Would you not say that what peeked your interest to begin to sell these products over here was the sucess they had with their line?

Has SIP had a change in the forumlation since being imported?

Thank you for taking the time to respond because I would be interested in hereing straight for the source.

 

Your first point regarding CMA is incorrect. Regarding our marketing decisions, again you are completely wrong. Honestly, this discussion has nothing to do with the thread topic, and has become nothing more than gossip. Better to concentrate on product usage, issues, concerns, processes, etc. instead of guessing the formulation of a polish.

 

I agree with you Jeff. I'm not sure why actuall response from the manufacturer isn't satisfying curiousity for Todd.

Jeff, would it be safe to sy that by using SIP and Nano you can remedy most situations? Of course paint condition and pad choices will effect the result. But this has been our "go to" combo in the field and when recommending to clients. Also, anything new and exciting coming from Menzerna soon?

 

Based on the feedback from our customer and distributors, and confirmed by our sales figures, the PowerGloss compound, PO83 SIP or PO91E Intensive polish, and PO106 or PO85RD can successfully meet the needs of any detailing requirement for paint defect repair.

 

Got it. So when would it be a good idea to use SIP instead of IP, and vise versa. I know cost is one factor, and SIP is for the ceramic paints, but other than that, why wouldn't SIP be the choice over IP?

 

Cost is alway a factor in every business. But value is actually more important. If price was the most important consideration, than PO91E would be the choice over PO83. If PO83 works faster than PO91E and saves time and effort, than PO83 is the better value at the higher cost.

Please allow me to stress once again that SIP was developed to work on scratch-resistant clears, but is not exclusive to SRC's. Same with PO106 and PO85RD.

 

On Porsche paint, I've found that SIP/106 combo gives a much deep and defined look. I've tried using Final Polish to finish, but it's not as clear as 106. Plus, for the DIY detailer, we're talking $10 a bottle difference in price; not a huge factor in savings considering SIP/106 give you better results. OK, gotta go to work now. Thanks for coming on 6speed Jeff.

 

I am interested what Menzerna USA recommends for conditions in which 106ff tends to mask defects.

I first experienced this on G35, which I polished the trunk using SIP on a purple wool pad (Lake Country) to remove the defects and then finished with 106ff on white Lake Country pad. The paint looked amazing (this was about 9 months ago). It had that "Menzerna" wetness, if you will, that 106ff provides.

I left for several hours, while the G35 was in the sun, then went to move back into the garage. At his point, I noticed "faint" hologramming over the paint. This was shocking, considering how perfect the paint was at first.
I spoke to Ryan Blanchette (whom I know you know) who had informed me that he noticed some light marring in the paint of a black GMC he had done a month prior.

This led us to test 106ff in different conditions and on many paints. We have noticed on very soft paint, 106ff can make the car look perfect. If the paint is not sealed, these marks can come back rather quickly (a couple hours in direct sunlight). Wiping the paint with alcohol (to inspect) would not acclerate the reappearace of the light swirls. However, using DuPont Prep-Sol would show the reappearance of the marks (if they existed) immedately.

Around this time, I had a follow up detail on a Maserati, which was perfect following 106ff and a white pad. Upon seeing the car 2 months later I noticed light buffer trails in the paint. I asked my client when he first saw these, he said a couple days ago, which is why called for the follow up.

I have pictures from this detail the day I did it, as well as a picture in the same area that shows light trails from 2 months later.

I posted my results on autopia.org which caused a big stir. However, I recieved PM's from at least 15 people who experienced similar results. Of the last several months, I have spoken to 20 or so experienced detailers (many who post details on various boards using your products and are considered amongst the best) who have had similar results of machine induced marring returing to previously perfect paint or have wiped the panels down with prep-sol and noticed a slight return of marring.

Recently I have seen more posts on people experiencing similar things on various boards, so it appears that it isn't isolated.

To this point, your view has been that Menzerna doesn't contain fillers and has no masking ability.

I believe in effect you are telling us that we are not experiencing this, or you are calling us liars. The point is many people have experienced this, and your offical stance has been it is not happening.

 

Interesting, and I am assuming that it is climate related, because on Porsche paint, 106ff acts to "dig" in and causes heavy friction on the paint. The paint can squeek, and the handle of the buffer tries to counter rotate.

Switching to PO85 or 3M Ultra-Fina remedies the problem pretty quickly. It also seems that us Florida detailiers are the ones finding faults with most of the products.

I know Zaino had the same problem when the Zaino rep could not get Z-PC to work. I had explained to him what was happening (the polish would haze the paint) and he kind of looked at me funny like I didn't know what he was doing. Then he tried, hazed the paint (much worse then I ever did) and told me it was enviromental?

I know when I was on my South African detailing trip, all of the products worked great.

 

What do you mean by "mask" Hides/fills/covers?

So you polish, then clean it up. Come back later & see imperfections?

I did my black C4S with 106, came out flawless, then about a month later I noticed a couple of buffer marks on the drivers door, is this what you are talking about? I put it down to being tired & the last panel done, & my poor garage lighting.

 

Yes, this is what I am talking about. The paint appears flawless for about a month then show up.

Can I ask what pad you where using to finish the paint? I have a clue but would rather you say it.

I also have done a lot of research on why this happens and have drawn some pretty strong conclusions (and solutions). However, I have been under the gun of Menzerna for working for a solution to a problem they still deny exists.

 

Green LC pad, metabo rotary. I should also say this was done in the cold, under 40deg. Where I KNOW 106 has issues.