[hobi]

Originally Posted by Unclesamscandy

Based on what I have heard (my wife is a chemist and grew up in Pittsburgh incidentally where she attended Carnegie-Mellon to get her PhD) from not only practicioners and academics like my wife- I second Paint guy. The processes and science behind the newer product is superior.

As to the comment about enamel, I recall Centauri and Emron being the rage once, and the very best painters did (with time and skill) easily make them look as good as anything with prep, application and sanding and buffing, all done artfully. But the new generation of finishes are created scientifically for resilience. All the research money has gone into these finished so if you ever wondered why they cost so damn much...

I agree about the science, and would also add that the new materials they were not desighned with restoration in mind. The paint companies spent alot of money on research towards the collision industry and that means new cars mostly. I have spent along time getting a system and materials to work on 1969 1970 endura bumpers yes there is kits out there by 3m and sem for example but they were not desighned for our cars. Will they work yes with alot more effort and time.

I also can remember when 600 wet paper was the finest I could find now 2500 3000 wet is common. So even the polishing is completely different from the old Lacquer days before you could go 400 than 600 polish and it looked great now I spend forever polishing I think the materials are a real asset on one hand with the science and tech but on the other hand our cars were not in mind when they develop new products but just my opinion.

[paint guy]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

Can anything be done to slow this process (on an original paint car)?

K

I don't know the answer to your question, but can give you a couple of ideas that MAY help. First off, the common type of plasticizer used in "old-school' lacquers were phthalate compounds and as such are volatile (they will evaporate). I would imagine keeping the car out of the hot sun and using some kind of sealer or wax would slow the process. ( I know there are some on this forum who are not fond of using wax on cars.)

[Unclesamscandy]

Originally Posted by paint guy

I don't know the answer to your question, but can give you a couple of ideas that MAY help. First off, the common type of plasticizer used in "old-school' lacquers were phthalate compounds and as such are volatile (they will evaporate). I would imagine keeping the car out of the hot sun and using some kind of sealer or wax would slow the process. ( I know there are some on this forum who are not fond of using wax on cars.)

My wife the chemist said tonight that the chemistry of finishes has come as far in ten years as it had in the previous 30-40 years. Kind of an exponential increase, particularly in the area of UV resistance. Helps us understand why the new paints hold up better. All this like all other advances in technology are of course a result of socialism and welfare. Actually a lot of the coatings research was helped by industries working on the space and aeronautics programs. More stuff from boring men with glasses and white coats that don't get arrested.

However, defense and space require discipline, higher education and uncool scientists in general so they must be gotten rid of. JK.

[getmygoat]

Originally Posted by paint guy

Lacquer does not have anywhere the durability of BC/CC or even single-stage but not because there is no lead in it. Many lacquer colors used in the sixties had NO lead and still cracked. Some colors that had lead (reds and oranges, for example) had lots of lead due to the color, but this contributed absolutely nothing to the common failure mode of lacquer, which is the film getting brittle and short, and eventually cracking from plasticizer migration.

I'm far from an expert, but I have an original paint judge and I have not noticed any cracking. The paint was sun faded and I used rubbing compound on it to shine it up... Still not "nice" paint, but, no cracking that I can see.

[hobi]

Originally Posted by getmygoat

I'm far from an expert, but I have an original paint judge and I have not noticed any cracking. The paint was sun faded and I used rubbing compound on it to shine it up... Still not "nice" paint, but, no cracking that I can see.

Very Cool they are only original once VERY VERY COOL

[lintmann]

Originally Posted by Jerry H.

Unless it has changed recently the GTOAA rule book reads like this (and this is from memory): The car should be restored as if the factory had unlimited time to build the car. As far as body and paint that is to mean gaps lined up perfectly and paint level (no orange peel) and shiny. As was posted above, no points are deducted for using paints other than lacquer.

So am I to understand that a excellent all original car will score less that a "perfectly" restored car will as far as body and paint are concerned?

[Ron Landis]

Originally Posted by lintmann

So am I to understand that a excellent all original car will score less that a "perfectly" restored car will as far as body and paint are concerned?

on the "judge" involved. Our Gardner exhaust scored less than a Midas one and our "correctly" finished undercarriage scored less than an admittedly "spray-bombed" one. Also got a lower score for correct Coker tires than the other car got for off-the -rack RWL radials. In defense...the other Judge DID have Hide-Aways! That was my last dealings with "judged" GTOAA meets. Been "popular vote" ever since. Why bother? Just sayin'...no guarantees just because you did it right. I know of a GTOAA judge that does '69 Judges and has the exhaust tips on HIS car upside-down.

[Wakepowell]

Originally Posted by lintmann

So am I to understand that a excellent all original car will score less that a "perfectly" restored car will as far as body and paint are concerned?

No, these 2 cars would not be judged in the same category. An original unrestored car would be in the survivor class and the other in the restored class.

[weranc55]

Originally Posted by lintmann

So am I to understand that a excellent all original car will score less that a "perfectly" restored car will as far as body and paint are concerned?

Your right. You can also put a complete new repo interior in the car and it will be scored higher than a nice original interior.

[lintmann]

Thanks guys, thats interesting and really good to know.

Wakepowell, "No, these 2 cars would not be judged in the same category. An original unrestored car would be in the survivor class and the other in the restored class."

That makes sense to me. What I should have said was- will an AUTHENTICALY restored car score less than a "perfectly" restored car- and I think the answer will be yes?

[paint guy]

Originally Posted by getmygoat

I'm far from an expert, but I have an original paint judge and I have not noticed any cracking. The paint was sun faded and I used rubbing compound on it to shine it up... Still not "nice" paint, but, no cracking that I can see.

I am pleased to here that your lacquer paint is holding up well for you. I hope you never have to repaint (it can get quite expensive as I'm sure you are aware). But there is no denying the chemistry involved, the fact that lower molecular weight polymers (think lacquer) will suffer from film degradation sooner than higher molecular weight polymers (think cross-linked polyurethane). Add in the fact that commonly used U.V. light stabilizers weren't even invented in the sixties, and the phenomenon I mentioned earlier(plasticizer migration), and there is no disputing that todays automotive finishes (even collision refinish products, which may be completely different chemistry from what the OEM'S use) are far superior to lacquer. FAR superior.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by getmygoat

I'm far from an expert, but I have an original paint judge and I have not noticed any cracking. The paint was sun faded and I used rubbing compound on it to shine it up... Still not "nice" paint, but, no cracking that I can see.

You are very fortunate, IMO.

I have an original paint '65 - and it's pretty disgusting. Very heavily cracked on the horizontal surfaces. Hair in the paint. Areas with streaks that look like they were sprayed over solvent or something.

It's probably the worst paint job to come out of the Pontiac assembly facility. I don't think anyone will be replicating this piece of artwork any time soon...



K

[Unclesamscandy]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

You are very fortunate, IMO.

I have an original paint '65 - and it's pretty disgusting. Very heavily cracked on the horizontal surfaces. Hair in the paint. Areas with streaks that look like they were sprayed over solvent or something.

It's probably the worst paint job to come out of the Pontiac assembly facility. I don't think anyone will be replicating this piece of artwork any time soon...



K

Reminds me of "Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?"