A full polishing range.
From cutting and one-step correction to final finishing.
Build a fair comparison of heavy cut compounds using equivalent defects, supported pads, consistent inspection and total correction-to-finish time.
Updated · NANOLAB Knowledge

The best heavy cut compound for a studio is the one that performs reliably in its actual work. A fair comparison needs more than two products used on different cars. Define the test conditions and the finish standard before deciding which system is more efficient.
Decide whether you are comparing liquids on one approved pad or complete manufacturer systems. Those are different tests. If each supplier specifies a different pad, a complete-system comparison may be more relevant to purchasing than forcing both liquids onto the same pad.
Use equivalent areas with comparable starting defects. Separate original paint from repairs and record the known surface condition.
Use clean pads in similar condition and a repeatable inspection method. Record tool movement, section size, product application and working cycle. Follow each product’s supported directions rather than imposing an arbitrary identical cycle that disadvantages one system.
Photograph the starting area and cleaned result under the same light and exposure. Do not present a residue-covered result as the finished outcome.
Record machine time, pad cleaning, changes, wipe-off and any refinement needed. Also note dust, splatter and the practical effort required to remove residue from adjacent areas.
A system that cuts a little faster but creates significantly more cleanup or finishing work may not save labour. Conversely, a higher bottle price may be justified by a better complete process, but calculate it from observed use rather than assumptions.
State what was tested and where the result applies. One panel cannot represent every clear coat, climate or technician. Repeat on relevant paint types before standardising the studio’s process.
Keep rejected results and the reasons for rejection. A purchasing record that says a combination failed to finish a particular sensitive paint is more actionable than a vague ranking of compounds from strongest to weakest. Choose evidence you can repeat, not the most impressive unqualified claim.

Repeating Compounding Cycles: When to Reassess the Process