I am about two weeks away from painting a clone of a famous 50s custom. I'm trying to duplicate the finish used ie: texture gloss or any other characteristics of that period. Any thoughts or info would be appreciated. -Dan
There are many hambers on here who probably have some terrific and accurate information, IF,...you could give up some information about the actual "clone". If it's a secret, then I doubt you'll get much response. Good luck. Stu
Yup Lacquer, Watersanded and polished with 600 grit sandpaper, hand rubbed with Brasso. Looking like glass. That's how I'd see it. The Old Tinbasher
Hi Stu. How are you ? Long time no see. If my memory serves me right they only used small metallic flakes in the early 50's. There was a thread that discussed early custom paint . Just cant remember what the title was .
It depends on early or late fifties. I started working in a body shop in 58 and it was all still done in laquiers. when you used metal flake or in the late fifties some glass you had to use a ton of clear and lotss of color sanding. good luck and happy sanding
Polosfv3, that is the car I'm doing. It's a father sons build and it is now time to make a decision about the finish.
Do I win the prize from the other thread ???? Your facing some of the same questions I'm pondering on restoring the Lincoln. Matching the color is the easy part but getting it to look correct for the time is the challenge. Most people cant tell the difference at first look but an experienced eye can see the difference immediately. We need to remember that we rarely see an original or old lacquer paint job today. So is it really that much of an issue ? Spraying a light metallic lacquer colors had its difficulties. If the humidity was up you had to add retarder to slow the dry time but could now increase the chance of mottling is the color. To add another problem , if you were not careful when buffing you could easily burn into the color and create a condition similar to mottling that would require refinishing of the damaged area. Your best bet may be to shoot several test panels with or without clear , single stage with or without hardner or clear, lacquer , ect . This may be the only way to determine what you want for a finished result.
Junior's shoebox was a stunner in its day, but let's face it. The paint would be considered low-quality today. It is described as 'two-tone rustic metallic lacquer applied by the owner' on pp32-33 of the book Kustomland. A couple of nice pics there too, including on the inside front cover with a NICE looking model draped over it. Many pictures on Rikster's site. http://public.fotki.com/Rikster/11_car_photos/beautiful_custom_cars/barris-1/hersh_conways_49_ford/ And I bet you could have a conversation with the man himself, he is alive and well in SoCal. ** edit ** I may have to take back that low quality comment above. It looks pretty slick in this photo.
I LOVE that car!!! Totally killer and perfect proportions! Can't wait to see the clone. Post some pics of your build, that'd be awesome to see.
Fortunately I won't have any problem with the color. We've already decided how that will play out but the end sheen is the issue. My Dad is in contact with Junior on a weekly basis and says that the car was flat sanded and polished which isn't a problem. However, once that is done I will have a perfect finish on the car and it won't match what was on the vehicle back in the day. And no I won't use laquer cause I want it to last longer that five years. Urethane clear is what I use on a daily basis as a painter so that's what I'll use. Maybe using a percentage of flatening agent will allow it to die back slightly while still holding UV protection. I do want to mention that from the begining the plan was to make Juniors car "period perfect" while still making it last for another fifty years so this is kinda important.
You can also try shooting the base a little dry , we all no that all the old lacquer bases had that old cobblestone road look they never laid out like today's bases.
I'm really NOT getting why you would want to put flattener in the the paint???????????? Good lacquer paint jobs from back in the day were shiny. VERY shiny. Junior was a great painter, so the paint would probably look even better than average. Yeah, lacquer usually went on with orange peel or shrunk up in a couple weeks to look like it, but it was SO easily sanded and polished, anyone could have a mirror finish with lacquer. The paint should be flat...as in NO texture. It should be polished to a very high degree of shine. It should have "DEPTH", most of all. THAT is what defined great paint in lacquer days. There was another thread about what "depth" actually is....and a lot of people, even ones in the business today, don't have a true appreciation of what it is. I think here, Highlander gets it....lacquer had it, modern paint doesn't. Yes it IS shiny, perhaps even shinier, but in an opaque, plastic-y kind of way. Lacquer had more translucency, and went on thinner, hence the need for the legendary "twenty coats of lacquer". while that may or may not be true, it IS true that you had to put on 2-3 times as many coats of paint to get good coverage with lacquer. But it is reduced 200-300 percent with thinner, which evaporates out over time. There's a few tricks to get modern paints to look a little more like lacquer, hell, I've even fooled guys into thinking that black Centari was black lacquer. As for texture....not meaning the actual paint's polished surface.....the only time I think that has an issue would be the old time pearl paints. Once again, they had a look that can't be duplicated easily with today's materials. I've done it a few times, but it takes time and experimentation to get it right. and even then, today's mica pearls do not have the glow that the old lead based Murano pearls had. (I have 2 lbs of the old Murano, red and gold, and I am going to try using them in modern materials to see if I can duplicate the old pearl look, I think I can). The old pearls definately had more texture to them, under the clear. That might also have to do with the extra transparency of the old materials, as well. But do-able with modern paints. One of the nicest compliments I had on a paint job was from the pinstriper, Glen Weisgerber, who said my pearl paint looked like the old original pearl paint jobs! But it takes time and playing with the paint to achieve the look. Nice job duplicating Junior's car, and it will be worth doing the paint right, whichever road you take to get it there, lacquer, or getting the new paints to look more like lacquer.
Hey Stu, " if '' a really dead - on- the money look of fifties kustom paint is what you're really after, ya won't do it with flattened clears & urethanes that haven't been cut and polished to their max! I've taken major shit off of show judges at classic & muscle car shows over cleared urethane finishes as being " period correct " and had to hold more than one lession in paint i. d.! I've also taken a hit or two from " kustom guys '' who should know better, but have been sold on the lie that the customer is always right, and that the honest measure of the painter is how much clear urethane he can pile on a job. The " sheep '' love shiney, they know not what they look at, but they like it just the same. As for the five year life expectency of a lacquer job........... most early lacquer job failings were caused by poor prep, or bad work i.e. too many different products below a finish, coats shot on too soon, too thickly and the old surfacers and puttys. A lacqer job, well maintained with straight wax ( no silicones, clay or fillers, jus straight carnuba) will ware well. Kustoms , as a rule, don't sit out or see ''street duty ".much. "Meanwhyle, back aboard the Tainted Pork"
As stated a well prepared Lacquer paint job will last a very long time. There is a guy i know with a 68 chevelle who had the car painted in 1978 and the paint still looks perfect.
Yes, lacquer can hold out very well, esp. on a car stored indoors. If you're unfamiliar with the "secrets" of prepping for and shooting lacquer, and you decide to use it, please ask the pro's here for advice. It is quite different from shooting modern paints!
Right on. The newer HVLP guns can really hurt a nice lacquer finish if you don't take a few things into consideration. Fast film build is your enemy.
If you want to see pics of this build go to my dads thread, he tells the whole story. A Late Introduction - A Father/Sons Project http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=406588&highlight=late+introduction
I don't think you can even get close to Juniors paint with todays products. Remember if it was laq it was nitro laq,SO CLEAR.later it was acryl laq. I have a piece I picked up at the Watson-Windfield event that Junior did in nitro laq I wish you were close enough to see it . Roger
That's true, Roger! Nothing can beat the look of the old nitro lacquers....my old boss had a gallon can of the old Cal Custom Candy Apple red paint....and you could see the bottom of the can! Today's Candies sometimes you can't see the bottom of a quart can. That set someting off in my head...seeing that Junior used to work for Barris....the look of his paint has a LOT to do with using the old lacquer, and it's superior toners, and translucency. Now, you're probably never going to get the look dead perfect, but I'd bet you could come up with something that would fool 99% of the folks out there, including a high percentage of car guys, maybe even most paint guys. Start with regular basecoat to get close to your color, actually a few shades lighter. use toner and clear, or real candy paint to topcoat the base, giving it more transparency, as you darken the color with your candy. Perhaps even mix in some of that old gold or bronze powder in with the candy to duplicate the look that Barris favored in his own home made metallics. It would take time and lots of test panels, but as I said before, on a car of this caliber, it's worth it!
Chopolds, You seem to have the knowledge. Please do us a favor and do a 'tech' thread about painting with old products and techniques. I want to paint my Chrysler in black lacquer and would appreciate any information you could pass on. It would also be great to hear what you know about the candies and pearls from the '50s-60s and how to apply them. A thread like that could really help the hobby. Maybe I'm vain, but I can't stand the 'brown' that black becomes under modern clear coat...
I agree with Gotgas. I plan on using older style materials as well, though my truck will not be anything fancy. I've also heard that warming enamel up leads to a richer shine. Any truth to that?
I'll save you all some searching for this fact... PPG's lacquers, for the most part their DCA468 clear and 9700 black haven't changed in over 30yrs. If you "old school" work the project, lay some down, block it flat, lay down the final coats, you have it knocked. It's not rocket science but it is time consuming and labor intense. The will to do it is probably just as important as the skill required.
Hey, If you choose to go with lacquer may I suggest the following: Whenever I shot completes, I would NEVER shoot a job over old finish. Always over lacquer primer, and always a sealer over your primer. Lacquer is usually thinned at 150-175% with the last one or two coats knocked up with a good retarder. This aids flow and if shot well should require little colour sanding. With this much thinner used you're always walking the edge of the knife in your bare feet as sand scratch swelling will dog you like the I.R.S. If you shoot a coat before the previous one has flashed completely, the swelling will hit, and that usually means you must wait for the paint to dry, sand all the previous coats off and start anew, this time guarding against swelling by providing the necessary flash time. To shoot the first five or six coats of an eleven or twelve coat job would take the better part of an eight hour day in seventy plus degree weather. Shooting lacquer in cool or humid weather is a game for fools, even in a heated booth, a leakly door gasket, a puddle of water on the shop floor and yer fucked! The moisture in the air traps the solvent in the job and blushing usually results with, again, removal and respraying of the finish required, as seldem will it sand or polish out! After the last of your coats has been sprayed, and yes , coats in the high teens arn't un common for a low hide colour a period of several days up to a month is required for the thinner in this job to flash out. Cut, polish and wax a lacquer job before it has completely flashed and it's lible to die back in gloss and/or have reactions with the surfacers, puttys or fillers used beneith the top coat; all bad news! If ya go with the gold or bronze power for your ''bling'' , be sure to get the micro fine kind, not the Roth stuff some are pimpin' as the ''real deal" Cadillac had a paint option on its' models in the 60s & 70s called " Firemist'' . These colours were offered in mid range pastel tones, as well as deep colours and contained micro fine metalic flakes ( ground aluminum) and, perhaps ground glass as well. These colours sure had some ''radiance'' and could serve you as abase to work from for Juinor's colours. Good luck with your serious kustom! " Jus' kuz it don't have door handles don't make it a kustom"
I remember very clearly seeing Junior's car in person in the late '50's. I'll guarantee you, that WAS NOT a low-quality paint job. Absolutely brilliant color and depth. (lacquer, I'm sure) IMHO, the best shoebox, ever. Not radical, but timeless.
wow. one of the most nicely done shoeboxes i've ever seen. if you can capture half of that cars presence, you'll have something. can't wait to see it.
The Jalopy Journal
