Yes, fender, that's just what they do alright. Here's the thing though, any layer of filler has the potential ability to soak up solvents. The polyester resin and cream hardener has a solvent in them as well. The layer of filler is not a solid once applied and sanded, it remains porous. The primer, sealer, base color and clear (or single stage color) regardless of type contain high levels of solvent as well and will soak into the layers of fill. When you see "rings" and scratches under the finish on some work I'll say 9 out of 10 is because the work was improperly finished and the solvents acted to swell up the filler and then slowly shrink back. It can happen with excess primer layers too. Ask a dozen finshers how to do something and you'll get a dozen different answers. Without being too much of a **** about it, there's a lot of painters out there that can't see certain things that top level finishers can see. Many of them can't predict to the last wipe with a polishing cloth what could potentially happen. And yes there's another extreme opposite that may worry about how the space/time continuum can be affected by the reflection of certain colors on a bright day. I would never apply a complete layer of fill on a whole car. Frankly and without shame I think it's ****in stupid. A waste of effort, material, it makes a huge mess of powdered sanding dust that gets everywhere taking even more labor hours to keep things clean. But wait there's more (!)... when its done it will leave a substrate layer that's all bumpy because it soaked and purged a large amount of the solvents used to get color on the car! Could end up with more cellulite than Rosie O'donnel's thighs! I mentioned polyester primer. There's a PPG Shop-Line brand and 2 different Evercoat brands. Avoid the "Feather Fill" brand and use "Slick Sand" instead. Feather Fill is very hard to sand and chews up paper twice as fast as Slick Sand. Slick Sand: http://www.evercoat.com/images/ePIM/original/TDS_100709_SLICK_SAND_2_2015_EN.pdf Shopline polyester primer: http://us.ppgrefinish.com/getmedia/..._gray_polyester_primer_filler_sl209-11-13.pdf Make no mistake, excess build with either of these products can cause grief too. 2 nice even coats will level a lot of work and not end up with high mil thickness at the end. Excess mil thickness is probably in the top 5 reasons for finish failure. And I'll stand by what I said that frosting a whole car in mud is stupid. Back in the early 80s we pulled styling bodies for some of the Big 4 (yes it used to be 4). The clay models and cure process of the bodies (tooling foam and epoxy) ended up leaving us some really shakey panels. No doors, hood, decklid, all 1 piece. We would shoot 3 heavy coats of Feather Fill (that's all they had back then) to get em straight and smooth. On 1 car the right rear corner of the roof collapsed a bit. A 1/2 dozen techs and supervisors were looking at it, some degree of panic, some silly ideas of reworking the clay and pulling a complete new body (a process that took days). As they all face palmed and lamented the issue I went and got a full new gallon of mud (bondo) and had my project partner rough the whole roof with 80 while I was gone. I came back and dumped the whole gallon in the corner and squeezed out the whole tube of hardener. The horror on their faces was a Kodak moment, 2 of them went running for a boss thinking (hoping) I'd get fired, and of course the gratuitous expert opinions raged on as I solved a problem. We let it cure over that night and by morning we were greeted with a proper roof. It couldn't be bumped, making a new body would have cost thousands of dollars in material and labor, and frankly I had no desire to spend all night building a mold and pulling a new body. That was an example of how it can be a solution in rare occasions. The design teams would look at those bodies for several weeks then off to the shredder they went, never to sunlight or weeks on end in the parking lot at work. But on real car? No thanks...
Ok so question. I strip the car to bare metal. I cut out the rust, make panels and weld them in. I sand the welds smooth. Im certain theres likely a few small imperfections on the surface of that weld joint. My ***umption is that everybody, including the most competent shop would apply a super thin coat of mud to surface the minor dips and valleys in that weld joint. You on the other hand would not, but rather hit the whole panel or whole car perhaps with the high build polyester primer and then block that?
Why does no one bring up that the original paint on these cars is not only lacquer, but single stage. Every coat not only contains color but contains the correct materials to shine. This, combined with the fact that every single coat melts into the previous creates a deeper, more supple finish. The reason urethane base clear never looks the same is because the stark difference between the color and clear coats makes the car look wrapped in plastic. None of these old cars were rubbed out between coats at the factory. Jesus man, when I used to paint, if someone wanted black that you could swim in, and wasn't worried about the durability of clear coat finishes, I'd suggest single stage paint. It's almost always a deeper, warmer finish.
I don't think that is what he is saying at all. Epoxy prime once the car is stripped, then do select body work where needed (as in don't cover the whole car with filler just use it where needed) then you can spray a poly over that. Highlander have you tried Evecoat's Superbuild yet?
I agree with what you say completely.. (but I am not a pro painter for sure) It seems like in today's world, you don't need to be a good painter with a gun, you only need 400 sheets of wet sandpaper in different grits, then clear the whole thing and sand again....then buff and more buff. No wonder they don't look like the old days. Before modern paints came out, I saw a full fender rod painted in gloss black by Juliano for a close friend. Sprayed to perfection, and no clear, and no "cut and buff". What do they say about welding....you don't need to be a good welder if you are good at grinding? lol
Remember this. The problem that caused manufacturers to seek out more technological paint formulations was durability and environmental reasons, not appearance. It's a bummer when you get a little wild with a can of brake cleaner and melt the paint off your fender. A millisecond of solvent on lacquer contact and its melted. A properly cross linked epoxy (2part) clear coat can withstand most solvents indefinitely and almost all for at least a short period of time before they degrade. It's all really a choice. Lacquer or even single stage enamel if you want that authentic look and depth, base clear if you want to be able to buff it till the cows come home. But I'll tell you this: my 51 has a 50 year old respray, directly on top of the original lacquer. Well, after 50 years of wiping, washing etc, some of the new paint is worn completely through to the old lacquer. For S&G I decided to see if the chalk would buff off. Well s.a.s. as I figured, all of it shined. Here's proof. That's why I love lacquer.
you have to use something filler is filler, either wiped, leaded or sprayed all depends on how straight ya want it the factory uses fillers (lead = filler) all the hand built European cars I have ever worked on has fillers but always try to get the metal as best as possible for a long lasting result
There's a surface that's flat and smooth as it goes centimeter to centimeter across a panel. Then there's a surface that's flat and smooth bumper to bumper. If you're going for bumper to bumper flat there's only one way to get there. However it's extremely important that all the panel breaks and edges are exactly where you want them in bare metal first before you do any mud work let alone skim the whole car. Otherwise you wind up with some really goofy thickness on the edges. And that's prone to chip out in chunks. Building edges and gaps from mud is not a good practice. Body filler is cheaper than polyester sprays, so it's better to get close with filler and perfect with spray poly fillers. Lock the mud work down with a thin fiat of epoxy and spray poly on the epoxy. That seems to give a more unified surface to build off of.
Does anyone here, remember, the O.P. was talking about the appearance of ORIGINAL paint jobs on vintage cars and what made them look so nice? Ford didn't skim coat cars or fine tune panel gaps!
Context is fleeting on written communication, huh? If you read what I replied again you'll not find one sentence that says I NEVER use filler. I'd be the traditional hypocrite if that were my stance. While they are sisters under the skirt, polyester primer and plain ol filler (bondo) are not the same. I also said ANYTHING can be used to excess and cause the same problems, those being SOLVENT PENETRATION and SAND SCRATCH SWELLING. Finish your mud work in 40 and wad it up with primer? That's sure make those scratches come back over and over as the finish heat cycles in the sun. Finish it to 150 you'll never see that. I've made note of it many times that I refuse to apply mud over epoxy primer. I have indeed feathered it into OEM finishes with a very high rate of success, but over any type of primer (except polyester) it has the potential to cause issues, especially over dark colors. Materials in the refinish industry are very different in chemical make up vs OEM materials. Most OEM stuff is oven cured resins for quick results. If protecting a panel during extended times of body work is a concern then a single coat of epoxy is a good thing, but I remove it to bare metal and then do my work, seal it back up when I do the whole car. Anyone can single out 1 step of my recommendations and spin it out of context. I simply thought I'd offer a better way to a lasting finish, also thought I'd express my outlook on covering a whole car with mud. My clients like the idea that they can show a car done 20+ years ago and still rank at the top of judging and peer reviews. Just because my base is mainly well heeled folk with 6 and 7 figure cars doesn't mean the principles don't apply to a hot rod, kustom or muscle car. Do I metal finish repairs more than most in an effort to reduce the need for fill? Yes I do. It's a finishing aid, not an approved repair method.
Fender1325 I suggest the following for your car in your garage. 1 Strip the body one panel at a time to bare metal with spray can paint remover. 2 Repair rust perforation. 3 Sand bare metal for primer adhesion with nothing co****r than 80 grit. 4 Apply rust converter (SEM Rust Mort) to any rust pits. 5 Prime w/ 2 coats light gray epoxy primer. 6 Apply filler to the entire body if you wish. IMO not necessary. Apply 2 coats of epoxy primer after blocking if you do. 7 Apply 2 coats light gray acrylic urethane primer -filler. Block sand and reapply as needed. Last sanding no co****r than 400 grit. 8 Apply one coat light gray epoxy primer as sealer according to PPG DPLF data sheet w/addition of reducer. 9 Spray roof with 3-4 wet double coats of white acrylic lacquer allowing flash between coats. Block sand wet with 600 grit. Repeat spray/sand as needed. Remember that some color will be removed during the final sand/buff procedure as I don't recommend clear. 10 Mask roof and apply yellow to the lower body same procedure as roof. 11 Let dry for several days. Block sand w/ 600 finish with 800 Buff with suitable compounds and wool pad. 2 and 3 could be flipped. There is a lot of detail left out but it will give you some direction.
There's a few questions being asked here. A "few" as in more than just 1. I suppose if your patching doesn't involve an edge or gap then you just run the factory 1/2 century old stuff. But if the repair does involve creating that edge it's best to get the proper bends, radius, and great fit in bare metal.You know places like rockers, door skins, fender bottoms, wheel arches or anyplace a molding might fit Back to your regularly scheduled program.
The subject of automotive paint is still interesting after all these years. I was in the restoration business for 20 years and and I've used it all. The GM Magic Mirror Finish was a thermal reflow acrylic lacquer they began using around 1959. It differed from the earlier nitro lacquer GM used in that it did not require heavy buffing. After the body shells were painted they were run through an oven where the heat caused the lacquer to flow out to a high gloss finish. It allowed a very thin finish which was durable. This thin finish however was sometimes polished through by overly enthusiastic use of cleaner wax applications. Jaguar Cars in the mid 70's through the 80's used a similar thermal reflow lacquer that required a great deal of effort to repair as sanding it would immediately clog paper wet or dry. The acrylic lacquers available today are very different from the lacquers used in production. However they look as good and as often as not better.
I've read this whole thread tonight and this post is absolutely correct. I worked '58-'66 in the Atlanta, GA Lakewood Fisher Body plant. Although I worked in the body ***embly dept. in jobs ranging from spot welding to final body repair in those 8 years, I rode in a 9 p***enger wagon 40 miles each way with guys from every dept., even one guy who mixed the paints before they were pumped to the guns in the spray booths. We did a lot of shop talk about our jobs in those years on the way to work and back and that new thermo reflow acrylic lacquer was the subject of many a conversation when it first came out. Yes you could sand out a sag or a run and as long as it didn't break through to the primer the next oven down the line reflowed it to a gloss! Wasn't there for earlier models but pretty sure they were nitro cellulose lacquer.
The Jalopy Journal
