Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

[Terry M.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

My copy of the flow chart "cheat sheet" John posted has "copyright NCRS 2008" in the lower left corner.

No Michael, the paint does not have to be lacquer, and yes I think Ray Charles could tell BC/CC in some cases, but Tom Ames has some panels that will test almost any one's skill at determining the material used -- at least anyone except a professional painter with lots of experience. The point of NCRS judging is not to identify the product used, but to determine if the end result is TFP (Typical Factory Production).

The fight we wage is that few people want to spend tens of thousands of dollars for a paint job that is as crappy as the original work was.

[Michael J.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

My copy of the flow chart "cheat sheet" John posted has "copyright NCRS 2008" in the lower left corner.

No Michael, the paint does not have to be lacquer, and yes I think Ray Charles could tell BC/CC in some cases, but Tom Ames has some panels that will test almost any one's skill at determining the material used -- at least anyone except a professional painter with lots of experience. The point of NCRS judging is not to identify the product used, but to determine if the end result is TFP (Typical Factory Production).

The fight we wage is that few people want to spend tens of thousands of dollars for a paint job that is as crappy as the original work was.

OK, that makes sense, I can see that the judging should be on the "effect" of looking as original. I just wonder what you have to do to a BC/CC paint to make it look that way!

[Terry M.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

OK, that makes sense, I can see that the judging should be on the "effect" of looking as original. I just wonder what you have to do to a BC/CC paint to make it look that way!

There is another thread on here about dulling the door jambs, and and if you follow that thread it is down to the point that what one has to do is put lipstick on a pig.

[Jeff B.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

The fact of the matter is that you cannot, nor could you ever get what the factory applied as a paint finish to your Corvette. This was factory "bake only" acrylic lacquer; what was available to the general public was air evaporative acrylic lacquer. Close, but no cigar. Now, the lacquer today is not even fit to have the label acrylic lacquer. What's Portland Cement without the cement?

What we do as restorers today is the same as we did then; we mimic the factory look so that the end result has the appearance of, without actually being the same as.

[Dick W.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

We were using modern materials on the restorations we turned out of our shop over 20 years ago. With that said, the extra effort to make it appear like lacquer was very labor intensive. We would paint the car one day, and the next we would color sand with a DA. Then rub the car with rubbing compound, but never bring it to the urethane typical gloss. Probably an additonal 40-50 hours of labor. The jambs, hood ledges, etc were shot with paint flattened to 70% gloss, very similar to unbuffed lacquer.

[Joseph C.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Thanks. Checked out thier website and it looks like they have a huge variety. They sell PPG and a brand called "Restoration Shop". The PPG product is 200% more expensive - at least. Any idea why the huge difference in price?? Thanks again! Joe

[Dick W.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Joseph, difference in peanut butter and gold, decide which you want on your car.

[Ronald L.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Spray it yourself blindfolded in your garage

Seriously, paint defects were there, dirt and dust in either the booths and bake furnaces was a constant problem, worse with plastic.

Still is to this day.

[John D.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

My local Car Quest store sells PPG lacquer. But they can't mix all the colors. Bring a fat wallet. JD

[Chris E.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Here is my experience, right or wrong.

Paint is THE most hotly contested area within NCRS judging because of the high cost and high point loss if a full deduct is warranted (85 points for a 67). To get Top Flight, you can lose 270 points. If you lose ALL of your paint points (85) then the rest of the car has to be THAT much better. For example, you'll need to get the best possible tires because that is a big point area (radials were a 15 point deduct for me). You'll need to do your best with the battery (my date coded reproduction battery was a 7 point deduct), etc, etc, etc.

I have had my 67 through two rounds of Chapter judging. The first step in the process as I understand it is to look at the car with doors, hood, etc CLOSED. That is how you make your first determination. If you think it is a factory style APPEARANCE (note I didn't say material), then you go down the left side of the flow chart. This means at WORST you'd get a 9 point deduct (20% of 45 originality points) and then whatever it would score for condition (chips, scratches, etc). This is where my car was judged the first time out.

The second time out, my car was judged down the right side of the flow chart. Here, they felt that the car did NOT have a typical factory APPEARANCE. Then they opened the doors and hood and looked at the door jambs and hood drip rails. From there, they saw that these areas were slightly more dull than the main body panels. They decided that this difference was enough to warrant only a 50% deduct.

So what am I doing in preparation for Regionals? Dulling down those areas more in the hope that if I DO fall down the right side of the chart, that when they open the doors and hood they'll see the dull areas and I'll only get a 50% deduct.

The trouble here is the deducts I'm talking about are on the originality portion of the 85 points (45 originality, 40 condition). As you probably are well aware, you need 10% of your originality points to qualify for getting ANY condition points. So really, the POINT difference between a 50% deduct and a 100% deduct on originality takes WITH IT the 40 condition points. Follow me? In other words, a 50% deduct is only a 22 point loss (50% of 45), but a 100% deduct is ALL 85 POINTS LOST. The difference is 63 points. Again, when you can only lose 270 points to get Top Flight, losing 63 isn't a deal breaker, but it leaves you only 207 points to lose on the rest of the car. That's not much, let me tell you.

My car scored a 96.8% the first time out and a 97.2% the second time out. I had the opportunity to fix a few things in between , hence the slight improvement.

My paint job is BC/CC. I'm 36 years old and didn't want to live a lifetime with a lacquer paint job. So, given that choice, I have tried to learn as much as I can about the judging PROCESS for paint and what judges look for to increase my chances that I will AVOID the 100% deduct. I'll be happy with anything else other than a 100% deduct. As you can imagine, I was THRILLED with a 20% deduct the first time out. But, in both judging rounds, I was given a lot of great advice on what small changes I can make to the paint job to increase the likelihood that I'd do well at Regionals and Nationals. Even though my car is BC/CC, it does have a fair amount of orange peel in it. I didn't ask the body shop for that, it just happened.

How's that for starters?

[Terry M.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Chris,
Outstanding write-up. You nailed it. You have a lot more patience at the keyboard than I do. Thanks for taking the time.

[Chris E.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Chris,
Outstanding write-up. You nailed it. You have a lot more patience at the keyboard than I do. Thanks for taking the time.

Thanks Terry. I'm passionate about paint because it is SUCH an easy way to lose SO many points. I've spent a lot of time talking to a LOT of people to try and find the "average" response when judging paint. Certainly there is variability, but I'm trying my best to see where the center of the issue is.

I also have a recommendation that the first sentence be updated on the Paint Flow Chart to read:

"Does the material have an appearance that is consistent with factory applications?"

The reason I recommend this is that many of the people I've spoken with about how to judge paint, it isn't about the MATERIAL, it is about the APPEARANCE of that material. I was told at one point (in jest, to make a point), that you could use a RATTLE CAN to paint a Corvette, AS LONG AS the APPEARANCE was consistent with that of a factory applied finish.

Tom Ames represented this idea as "distinctiveness of image" at the Judging Retreat in Dallas a few years ago. In other words, how much orange peel is in the paint. Fortunately for me, my BC/CC paint job actually has a fair bit of orange peel in it. That allows me to "fine tune" my paint job by dulling down the areas mentioned to get that much closer to a factory APPEARING finish. Without that orange peel in the paint, I'd have a MUCH harder time making the argument for a 50% deduct instead of a 100% deduct I think.