A Good Paint Job?? - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

rchase · #31 09-30-2006, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

rchase of course you brought up a very good point. How much $$$ should one put into a car? Well everyones situation is different, maybe the car is only driven on weekends and has a lot of value to the currant owner. Of course a daily driver one hopes to get a few more years out of would fall into a different catigory.

Poor work is poor work, I agree that quality paint jobs can be had for less. It depends on how much prep work is needed, some cars need very little. One needs to weigh quality vs price. Paying more will not automatically get you a better job.

Btw I only look at the paint as 1 part in an exterior restoration. One cannot forget that all the seals need to be replaced along with all the exterior metal. If the glass is marginal throw that in as well.

Exactly. Just because your shelling out 5K and are being assured that your getting quality work does not mean your not getting a snow job and a barely above average paint work.

Many people think paint is this magic bullet that will make their cars look great. Im sure a lot of people have seen older 126's that have had their bumpers painted body colored rather than replacing them and have oxidized trim and crispy rubber. All that gleams is not gold they say and thats really a good example.

Before spending the big bucks on a paint job there are a lot of things that can be done to improve a daily driver's appearance. I replaced the grille on my 126 that had several chips and stains on it and it made the car look much better. A good detailing and wax job can do wonders as well. I think a lot of cars get painted over again because some people don't know what a little rubbing/polishing compound can do for an old dull finish. They assume just because its dull they need new paint.

davestlouis · #32 12-31-2006, 01:30 AM

One would be shocked at how many fasteners are rusted or just brittle and will fall apart when the tech tries to remove trim so the painter can do his thing. Any kind of major disassembly will lead to all sorts of ancillary problems. The going labor rate in St. Louis is $54/hr and on a car with lots of exterior trim, there could conceivably be 20-30 hours of R&I labor just on trim. The windshield and backglass should probably come out...hope you don't break one or both. I also caution people that fresh paint will make the rest of the car look shabby, so don't necessarily rush into spending goo-gobs of money on paint, because it will lead to spending bunches on upholstery and trim. You can get to a point where the car ceases to be a car...if I'm afraid to get a door ding, what's the point of having the stupid thing?

JasonOne · #33 04-22-2007, 09:57 PM

I was once told about how BMZ painters would flatten the finish before letting the car leave the factory. I imagine this was done to remove any orange skin effect and sections that were too thick. Anyone know about this? I'm interested in helping out a fresh coat of 040 black on a car I'm probably going to buy. The paint is Matrix and the door dings and dents were filled and sanded and primed. The car was sprayed well enough. It just appears that some sections are heavy handed and others not so. The patch work also comes out just a little in the right light and right angle. I'm not too concerned with it really. I'm just hoping a good buff and polish by hand will take it to the next level. Paints had five months to cure and it's begging for a buff. The car is a sportline LE 190E and has miles. It's just a possible driver for me. I could take it to a good painter I know if it really needs help. The lower panels and bumpers were sprayed also which I dont mind. Could always get another bodykit or original type panels later.
Thanks
Jason
1988 300CE Midnight Blue/Parchment 120K RIP

Hatterasguy · #34 04-22-2007, 11:25 PM

I am no expert, but if its fresh never touched paint I'd start with a wet sand. Then move to an aggresive polish, and finish up with a fine polish and some wax.

rchase · #35 04-23-2007, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

I am no expert, but if its fresh never touched paint I'd start with a wet sand. Then move to an aggresive polish, and finish up with a fine polish and some wax.

Thats a bit too aggressive. One wrong wrong move and its back to the spray booth. I would suggest some polishing compound. It might take longer but you can always take more off rather than put it back on. Orange peel is a function of some of the evaporative chemicals in the paint. The faster drying paints that most paint shops like these days seem to not smooth out as much. The slower drying paints have much more time to smooth out on the finish of the car however if things are not perfect give more of a chance for particles to be lodged in the finish or runs.

There is a product that a friend of mine showed me called "lacquer leveler" which causes lacquer to become soft and flowing again for dealing with furniture finish problems. It would be interesting to see if they had a similar product for automotive paint.

I would try a good power buffing with polishing compound and then waiting a few months and doing it again. It gives you a thicker finish to work with and the ability to polish out minor issues for a couple of years. Some of the higher end makes do multiple thick coats of paint on a car for this very purpose. Most cheaper cars have paint so thin that its even risky to use polishing compound on them.

tr1cky · #36 11-05-2009, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rchase

Agreed. But there are a number of people out in the market grosly overcharging for paint work. A good paint job does not have to cost 5k on a Mercedes regardless of what the old wives tales say.

Additionally its good to match the paint job with the car. If your painting a 123 chassis 300D paying more than market value for the car just for paint is stupid. Corners can be cut and still have a presentable paint job. Not everone in the parking lot comes over to your car and get on their knees to look down the car to see how much orange peeling you have and spend 20 minutes staring at it. If they did there are plenty of new cars out of Japan and Detroit that they could have fun laughing at.

I like my cars painted the way they came from the factory. Many paint shops go above and beyond the quality of an original paint job. Im also somewhat realistic and realize that paint is the least important part of my car. While its the "pretty" part on the outside its also the part that gets scratched in parking lots and faded by the sun. Unless your car spends most of its time in the garage being rubbed by a diaper its exposed to damaging elements in the wild. Unless its just been freshly painted EVERY car thats ever been driven on the road more than 10,000 miles or so has scratches and damage somewhere. Additionally what good is a beautiful show car paint job when you have imperfect trim and other 20 year old parts on the outside of your car? An exterior restoration is not just about paint.

Time = Money and that is what you're paying for. Add experience to the equation as well and you're in good shape. For the record, I'm not an automotive body expert, but the results are in the tedious, time consuming preparation. The finishing takes expertise as well, but all is lost if you're not prepared.

You don't NEED to spent a lot of money on a paint job. You NEED to spend a lot of money on a great paint job.

jmk · #37 11-11-2009, 09:13 PM

A lot of interesting questions here. I'll go down the list.

I used to work for the company that supplied both Earl Scheib and Maaco. There paints (esp. Earl's) were of inferior quality. I really cannot go into it anymore. As mentioned in this link, good quality primer can cost over $200. It isn't really possible to have a high quality paint job at the prices both shops charge.

Ceramiclear is an OEM clear from PPG. It has nanoparticles in it, and I would suspect it would be quite tough, chemical resistant, and scratch resistant. I used to do research in nanomaterials for coatings, and it makes sense that it would be scratch resistant and hard to paint.

Hate to tell you this but even Ferraris are painted by robot these days. (used to work for the supplier to Ferrari, and MB, and Toyota, and Honda, even Harley Davidson)

The appearance reduction between the 1982 car and 1999 car is due mostly to VOCs. In 1982, only the US had very stringent levels in the amount of solvent used in coatings. By 1999, even Japanese domestic plants were limiting solvent emissions.

That is the biggest reason for appearance reductions, but there are a plethora of variables with regards to appearance.

They never strip paint in the factory. It is no advantage to stripping paint. Repairs are done over the original coat.

Too much or too little paint can be detrimental to the appearance and durability of coatings, but it is not in the way you think. From a film thickness standpoint, it isn't so much the total amount of paint on the car as it is the amount applied per coat. Too much or too little per coat, not so much the aggregate amount of paint, is where you can run into serious quality problems.

That being said, to many recoats can eventually cause adhesion problems and cracking. For Toyota, we had to test four heavy applications of paint through an extreme thermocycling test to check for recoat failures. The coatings would pass these tests. Recoating is not an issue.

Pete, your SL probably had damage at the factory, and a repair coat was applied to one side. This is common, and should not be a concern if the repair was done properly. Or it was damaged later and repainted with refinish. That can be good, if it is done correctly.

Paint thickeness is measured using the same type of electronic gauge in the factory. Coatings on plastics were measured using a variety of direct measurements with a stereoscope. That type of measurement is truly an artform. They were trying to develop an electronic device for plastics when I left the industry, but there was no machine that was dependable enough at that time.

Lead was in ecoat for decades. Search for my comments, and you will see more info on this.

micalk · #38 11-12-2009, 10:29 PM

Here in sunny California now the only choice is water based paints. I took Liesl in to a shop that's been in business for over thirty-five years (father/son, now just son). He gave me an earful about how awful the new paints are and that any chips are going to allow moisture to seep into the paint and delaminate from the surface. He says he can clean his paint guns by letting them soak in water. The air is much better in SoCal than it used to be, but he thinks this is a step too far. I'll see what kind of results I get... Hopefully keeping it waxed will slow any paint deterioration.

jmk · #39 11-20-2009, 03:30 PM

Waxing problably won't help--it will probably hurt. See my posts on the subject.

Just because you can clean the guns in water (BTW, they probably will need more than just water to get them properly clean), doesn't mean that the coating will not hold up once it is cured.

Waterborne basecoats work well when they are properly applied. You should have no issues in Southern California. The big problem I've seen and heard about is you can spray them w/o using the isocyanate component. They will dry, look good out of the shop, but will not have good durability. Make sure that the isocyanate is added to the waterborne basecoat, and the paint is applied within the recommended time.

There may be some shop specific issues with the conversion. I would suggest he talks to his paint supplier if he has any issues spraying waterborne coatings.