So I'm working on getting my '31 V8 pickup painted this summer. I went with Martin Senour single stage urethane enamel. I hate the look of base clear so single stage was the only way to go. Now I have a little history with this paint from about 15 years ago. My dad had a '53 Ford sedan delivery that we painted with this same type of paint and when it came to wet sanding and buffing, the color started to change like a gob-stopper. We ended up having to scuff it all down and go over it with base clear. Napa said that this was a problem with "stratification" and that they had seen on a few colors and it was in the process of being fixed. Fast forward to today. What are the chances that I would pick another color that would do the same thing? Well, here's the hood: Wet sanded and starting to change shades: Buffed: Sanded to primer and buffed: I put 3 coats on. I can count 9 different shades which means each coat stratified out into 3 different layers. The first two coats are from the same mixed batch. Because I feared this problem in the back of my mind I stirred, stirred, stirred, before and during the painting. We'll say I'm not happy right now. I'm tempted to sand it flat and buff it out and say it is old paint from the '50's that I cut and buffed...
Metalic paint will do that when cut and buffed, non metallic should not. That's why most people put clear over metallic before cut and buff. That way they cut and buff the clear, and leave the metallic alone.
x5 block it down nice and flat use base clear you can not make a paint do something its not designed for why do you not like base clear? one reason it was created was to be able to cut an buff without harming the metallics single stage metallics look like poop
the top pic looked like it and metallics is the only time I have had this happen but I dont spray martin
Well.....that’s why you leave the single stage to non metallic colors... There are guys that can get it right, fluid tip, air pressure, and technique are all very important.. With the advent of BC \ CC spraying metallic single stage is a lost art.
I don't understand the hate for BC/CC. I would sort of understand it if the idea was to paint the car a solid color to mimic the early style before metallics became en vogue. But if you're going to spray a metallic, then BC/CC is the appropriate process for the finish you're going for. Sucks, but look on the bright side, you have a lot of guide coat on there to block out.
I think the bc/cc issue is that they get so highly polished that the car looks kind of "plasticy" and not like the older paints that were smooth and shiny but not hyper shiny. That's how I feel as well. I learned a trick from an older painter that is a good compromise. First coat 75% base coat and 25% clear coat. Second coat 50/50% base/ clear. Third coat 25% base and 75% clear. Cars he painted that way look more authentic, perfect shine quality without the "plastic" look.
Sounds like crappy paint I have cut and buffed single stage solid colors without this happening It looks like paint that was buffed thru
Exactly. I really don't like that plastic look of the BC/CC. I actually prefer the look to be slightly less shiny because it looks more authentic. Does anyone have any recommendations for a reasonably priced single stage? I've used SPI products for the base but their color selection is very limited in single stage.
Anthony, yes, I eventually buffed through it just to see what it would look like by the time I hit primer. The problem started as soon as the first high spots got wet sanded, they turned light. I knew I had a problem within the first 10 seconds of sanding as the paint on my dad's '53 did the exact same thing. The guy that painted that car and found the problem went through the roof on Napa and they replaced it with BC/CC but not without a bunch of screwing around.
Like everything else in life, you get what you pay for. Haven't felt any need to shoot $1200 a gallon Glasurit but wouldn't go any lower than PPG's Omni line. How much is your time worth if you have to redo??
I really like Limco's acrylic enamel. The price is really good and the look is very authentic, and it cuts and buffs nicely in my opinion. I'm also not a big fan of base/clear if you're going for a really early look.
this is my theory. Every paint company has different levels of products. All of them have worked ok that I have used. I prefer buying from a paint supplier rather than a parts store. Those guys usually know the product. You do get what you pay for. Meaning the cheaper paints have less pigment or solids. This reguires more coats or a tinted sealer to achieve the same coverage of the higher line stuff. That being said I use the lower line products on most of my stuff. The exception is repair work due to the higher line products having better color matching The plastic look a lot of people talk about comes from high solid clears designed for two coat coverage. If you over reduce it slightly and give it a proper flash you can make it lay down very well. The plastic look also comes from the type of primer used. A urethane primer will look more plastic than a polyester or epoxy primer. The way the primer is prepped plays a part in the plastic look equation Gun tip size, air pressure and technique also plays a part.
One of you made a point I've never thought about, but yes it's true. When one uses base coat /clear coat ,color sand and buffs it gives the final finish a ( plastic Look) Specially with a old car it does not look right !! Just my2 cents gene Mn
I doubt you used more than one can of paint but an old timer painter friend of mine told me years ago that if you have more than one container of paint the same color that you are intending to use on the car you mix it all together in one container stir/shake it up good and then you can put it back in it's respective cans. That's probably not the issue here but it is something to think about along with constant air pressure and paint to reducer ratio being exact.
That's a good point about using from a common batch. In this case, all of the paint was from the same gallon. I took it back to Napa today and they gave me my money back without any problems. I'm going to go with Nason next from a regular paint store. I hope to have some new results to report by this weekend.
Have the paint store print you the tech sheet of look it up online. This has a lot of good info on it.
here is something to ponder clear coat is like a magnifying glass it will show things that a single stage can not sometimes the "plastic" look is whats under the clear
Well I re-shot today with the Nason urethane single stage. It sprayed a lot nicer than the Martin Senour using a TP turbine sprayer. For a gallon of paint, activator, and reducer it was only about $10 more than the equivalent M-S. We'll see how it wet sands and buffs but there will not be much of that luckily.
Glad you have something better, but I am wondering if you'd contacted the tech folks at Martin Senour? I'd be interested in what they had to say.
My question would be, why would you use a paint that you had trouble with before? We used urethane paints on trucks because it shines without buffing for many years and we weren't trying for a showroom finish. We just wanted something that looked good from several feet away.
I need to do an experiment at school. Prep a large panel. Spray one side single stage the other with base clear. Do 2 more large panels One with a urethane primer the other one with polyester. Spray one single stage and the other base clear. Maybe able to identify this plastic look issue
MS paints are really Sherwin-Williams. Most don't consider them to be 'cheap stuff'. At least at my local Napa they aren't. I know some people use MS with great success, others hate Omni, I've had mixed results with Kirker. Seems like there can be bad colors., applications or complications with many brands. And, paying lots of dollars for premium brands only gets a better warranty if things go wrong. But, you still have to deal with the problem.
The Jalopy Journal
