Tweet
I am looking for info on what NCRS allows for repaint due to non availabilty of lacquer. Iam painting a' 65 , I plan to use base/clear urethane and will wet sand and buff. also , according to manuals Ihave seen the jambs are not to have any gloss,how do you deal wiyh this issue ?
-
-
Re: accepted method for paint
you would scuff the door jams. you can still get lacquer paint, it is out there you just need to look for it. -
Re: accepted method for paint
Most knowledgable judges will catch your basecoat/clear coat. You can cut down on the deductions by dulling door jambs. Sanding will only leave scratches that will be detected. A flatting agent can be added to the paint to make those areas dull. The hood suround and trunk suround are also dull. The painter will have to spray these area then "soft mask" and spray the car in regular gloss. The result unless the painter is very knowledgeable about NCRS is a car that will be deemed over restored at best with a 20% deduction. Could still go anywhere from there to 100% deduction depending on the painter's ability to make basecoat/clearcoat look like lacquer. The main problem is most painters are concerned with it looking very smooth and deep looking. The original cars just do not look that good.
SteveComment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
you can still purchase lacquer paint.
here is one place:
This is part of PPG Industries and PPG still offers lacquer paint and can get you the correct color mix for your '65. If your local PPG dealer can't get it your painter or you can order the paint directly from the above link.Comment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
As far as I know all the present laquer suppliers have the same problem........ they can't put lead in it, so it ain't what it usta' be. Also, some of the supposedly "good" replacement laquer that's metallic has had the metallic pigment so far off in it that it was noticeably incorrect. A guy here had some old Dupont original factory packs of Sebring Silver put up that was YEARS old and still had the lead and the right pigment from whatever shells they used back then to make it. For me, unless I find some old paint that hasn't been opened I'm doin' BC/CC from now on. The no lead laquer available now just doesn't seem to hold the shine if it ever sees daylight.Comment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
I tend to agree with Norris. Back in the 1960s I worked in the body shop of a Chevrolet Dealership and shot a lot of lacquer paints. Safety equipment wasn't required or used as it is today, and many times I walked crooked coming out of that paint booth.
At the 1996 NCRS Nationals in St. Paul, 3M had reps present to promote their product line (which looked very good as I remember). I got into a discussion with them about the then available acrylic lacquer paint and was told that it had been EPA'd to death, was not the same good old lacquer of yester-year, was a softer paint that was more easily buffed off if not careful, and had an applied life expectancy of around two years. Let's see now, If I paint my car with this new lacquer, finish putting it together, take it to a few NCRS events to pursue Top Flight and let the judges pick it apart, correct all found wrong until it passes, and then head for Bloomington Gold (if accepted for judging), by the time I could head for Chicago's Chevy/Vette Fest to secure a Gold Spinner & Triple Crown I would have to repaint the car!
I think the issue of paint is something NCRS needs to address. It is alright to be a fanatic (we all are in this hobby), but there comes a time when common sense should come into play, and especially when an original base product is no longer available, and that lacquer that is is outlawed for use in parts of this country. I do believe though that there may now be an exception for hobby use only of lacquer paints. I do know that a southern Wisconsin restorer (a professional) shot his straight axle with something other than lacquer because lacquer was illegal and he couldn't afford to have his business shut down. He received a full paint deduct at the '96 Nationals, and as a result he and several other straight axle owners present left NCRS. Bottom line though is that this new formula lacquer is not the same formula lacquer that was originally applied to our Corvettes, so by NCRS standards even this ISN'T ORIGINAL and should suffer the full deduct on a judging field.
Where there's a will there's a way though, and I'm sure some of the old lacquers can be found somewhere if you throw common sense aside and have money to spare. Several years ago I was told to ship my car to England to have it painted with lacquer. Now to me that isn't common sense, and I'll use those dollars for other things, thank you.Comment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
John,
When was the lead removed from current acrylic lacquer? I painted my '65 with Dupont Lucite in 1987 and contrary to the "two year" life expectancy quoted by the 3M reps you mention, it still looks pretty good (on a driver). The paint's brittle and chips easily, but so was the GM "Magic Mirror" finish on my '71 Camaro.
I like the ease of working with lacquer (for a hobbyist), but agree with you that maybe the NCRS will have to re-think the "original" paint issue in the near future, from a practical if not authenticity standpoint.
grantComment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
Grant, John, et al. The paint issue has been addressed by our National Judging Chairman Roy Sinor. It was the topic of his column in the Restorer a few issues ago. It is also in the newest Judging Reference Guide. It is also available on Northern California Chapter's web site. Follow the link below. This address answer all you concerns. Plus with all the post's in the archives of this board you should able to become an expert on the issue
Dick WhittingtonComment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
I had my car shot with lacquer in 1984 do you think that was still the old kind?Comment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
The solvents that are used in the lacquer today are different blends than were used in the 60's up to early 70's. At that time the solvents that were exempted by rule 66 were the ones to use. This changed the blends. At the same time lead was taken out of the pigments which effected yellow, red, orange and blue cars. The new lead free pigments do not weather as well and may not give you the exact color without a new color match and may not match at all. I just had my car done in PPG lacquer. It is ermine white. No lead in the 60's, no lead today, so color match is the same. Solvents are different, but would only effect application since none of the solvents stay with the film after curing. Bottom line, pigments have change, solvents have changed, but the base lacquers have not really changed in years.
SteveComment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
In my opinion, we should accept lacqure but I say that hesitantly. Because if the lacqure paint job doesn't look original it should be deducted also. And, there should be an additional deduction if the car is painted with modern lacqure because it is crap. Then as far as base coat/clear coat is concerned, it should also be acceptable but should never get full points because it is not original. Quality of a re-paint should be considered and based on "what the paint would look like if GM had the time to do it right" and/or by todays automotive standards. Nobody should get full points for a paint unless it can be proven original and in excellent condition. We should create a new word for modern lacqure because it just isn't the same as the old stuff and just call it something else. I suspect the paint companies kept the old name so that those people that liked the original stuff would just keep buying the new stuff. It might as well be call base coat/base coat/base coat or something like that. If I could find the original stuff, I might try it if I new it had not changed in the can. But I would not ever put modern lacqure on a car I cared about because it is junk compared to todays paint. Also, I would never intentionally put sand scratches in my primer and leave the surface all bumpy, put runs in the paint, etc. It's like restamping a block....its still not the original block. You might pass it of as one but it still is not the original block. I'm probably talking out my you-know-what. But hey, I support whatever a person wants to do with their car. The only standard I have is my own. I would like to see someone do a car in gold leaf paper. That would be cool looking! Have a good one! TerryComment
-
Re: accepted method for paint
Quote: "No lead in the 60's, no lead today, so color match is the same"
Steve, I don't believe the lead had been removed from the paint in the 60's.Comment
Comment