Aint Envy A B**** - Page 3 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Body - Exterior
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 06:27 AM
jcclark's Avatar
The Penny Pincher
 

Last journal entry: Hanging Bumpers
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky. U.S.A.
Age: 61
Posts: 1,876
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts
[QUOTE=rogen]And as to the logic for not using AE. It's flawed. Just because there is newer technology does not make the older technology bad or unusable or even not suitable for one or another persons need.
QUOTE]

Rogen, go back and read my resonse, I agree. Acrylic enamel is a good
product. The point was, why use it if I can get a base-coat for about
the same price? We all agree thet base coat is better.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 06:33 AM
Beenaway2long's Avatar
or Jeff, or Doc, or...
 

Last journal entry: Results of the Camaro
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Syracuse, NY-well, just North
Age: 51
Posts: 988
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Coal will do the job, but its not cost effiecient when you add up the ancilliary costs. It isn't as cheap when you factor in labor, unless you work for free....And if you do, I got a job for you !
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 07:27 AM
New Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: North America
Posts: 21
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beenaway2long
Coal will do the job, but its not cost effiecient when you add up the ancilliary costs. It isn't as cheap when you factor in labor, unless you work for free....And if you do, I got a job for you !
I agree and you make the point that no one else want's to acknowledge.

Older, less easy to use products are now made out to be bad or no good or inferior simply because it's more cost effective for the industry to use the up to date stuff.

Again, that logic's flawed. Simply because my coal burner is more difficult to use and possible, less efficient is not reason to bad mouth it or say, absolutely not.

For years, my family's water from came from a well we dug on our property, which had to be and was approved and authorized by the State's health department. A couple of years ago, the nearby town put in a municipal water system.

We opted not to use the new water system but informed that our well had been condemned because it was not safe for use any longer forcing us to use the new water system.

Was it now, overnight a bad system or was the motive the almighty dollar?



Spell check please
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 07:37 AM
New Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: North America
Posts: 21
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcclark
We all agree thet base coat is better.
That alone is my entire argument. Is it better or just easier to use. Better, to me means longer lasting, among other things. Because of somethings ease or difficulty of use doesn't in it's self make it better or worse.

I painted 2 cars, more than 20 years ago, one with Dupont BC/CC the other with AE. They were painted in the same year and you'd not be able to tell one paint from the other unless you scraped some of the paint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 07:53 AM
shine's Avatar
SPI Thug
 

Last journal entry: some progress
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: bluff dale texas
Posts: 2,722
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 207 Times in 166 Posts
cheaper paint is just that. it's designed for production shop and collision work. these are not paint jobs that have to last 5years or more. you get what you pay for. warranty's are'nt free
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 08:04 AM
jcclark's Avatar
The Penny Pincher
 

Last journal entry: Hanging Bumpers
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky. U.S.A.
Age: 61
Posts: 1,876
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogen
That alone is my entire argument. Is it better or just easier to use. Better, to me means longer lasting, among other things. Because of somethings ease or difficulty of use doesn't in it's self make it better or worse.

I painted 2 cars, more than 20 years ago, one with Dupont BC/CC the other with AE. They were painted in the same year and you'd not be able to tell one paint from the other unless you scraped some of the paint.
That's a good point, Ive asked that very same question before myself.
Does bc/cc last longer than Acrylic enamel with hardener?
The rep I talked to at PPG told me AE is designed to last 5 yrs,
and bc/cc to last 10 yrs. I asked if AE would be longer with a hardener
and he said yes, but not how much longer.
I would like to know the truth, I suspect that AE (w/hardener) is better
than most will admitt, But still not as good as bc/cc.
I've had some AE that lasted long after I had the car and looked great.
But I cleared it wit AE clear and used a hardener.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 08:21 AM
New Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: North America
Posts: 21
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by shine
cheaper paint is just that you get what you pay for.
Respectfully, assume this. You meet one really stupid person or a few of oriental, hispanic, european descent, you now, credibly declare all people of oriental, hispanic, european descent as stupid and incapable because you met one or a few?

Sometimes ignorance isn't as bliss filled as they'd want you to believe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 08:21 AM
shine's Avatar
SPI Thug
 

Last journal entry: some progress
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: bluff dale texas
Posts: 2,722
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 207 Times in 166 Posts
i have 10 year old paint jobs done with centari enamel with the glamor pack hardner. i would still use it today if it were around here. they shoot well and polish up nice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 08:54 AM
MARTINSR's Avatar
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San francisco bay area
Age: 55
Posts: 13,174
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1,319
Thanked 1,161 Times in 1,024 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by crashtech
It could be that I have no experience with the first generation products you mention. In the eighties I went from a shop that used R-M lacquer as basecoat with a urethane clearcoat designed for this application. After that I went to a shop that used Sikkens. These days we use PPG's DBC basecoat. Now in reality, even though your contention is most likely true, these products bear no resemblence during use to any acrylic enamel I have ever used, whether mixed with "lazerdry" or "basemaker" or what have you. If they did, we'd all still be using Centari, Delstar, and the like. So while my knowledge of paint chemistry is lacking, my practical experience with these products is not. Are you just trying to make a point, or would you go as far as to say that converted acrylic enamel is just as good as a modern base/clear system? And if not, give jcclark the correct reason he is looking for.
I know nothing about "Lazor dry", so I can't comment much at all.

On your DBC......acrylic enamel!

I don't believe in mixing ANY product from another manufacturer into paint, PERIOD.

Brian
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 09:10 AM
if it ain't old, why?
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: on the edge in illinois
Posts: 10
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
came to learn...........got confused.........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 10:56 AM
Beenaway2long's Avatar
or Jeff, or Doc, or...
 

Last journal entry: Results of the Camaro
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Syracuse, NY-well, just North
Age: 51
Posts: 988
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogen
I agree and you make the point that no one else want's to acknowledge.

Older, less easy to use products are now made out to be bad or no good or inferior simply because it's more cost effective for the industry to use the up to date stuff.

Again, that logic's flawed. Simply because my coal burner is more difficult to use and possible, less efficient is not reason to bad mouth it or say, absolutely not.
So then WHY WOULD YOU USE IT? I do not understand YOUR logic. If it's antiquated, less efficient and more costly in the end, then that in itself is enough reason to badmouth it. Why use it, if it has so many drawbacks?

When prepping a car for primer, would you hand sand the entire car or use a DA? Using your logic, I would assume you would NOT use a DA. For that matter, why not just grab a hand full of sand and rub it across the body. The means meet the ends. The body gets sanded. It would be rediculous to waste time/money on systems that are time consuming or inefficient, unless the end result is only obtainable that way. (Nitrocellulous Laquer, for instance.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 11:10 AM
Bee4Me's Avatar
Problem Child,Hard Case
 

Last journal entry: Strangest job I've ever done
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ARK.
Age: 57
Posts: 1,773
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
You guy's are obviously dealing with a "Professional" debater.(Yeah, I could have said IT,but I chose not too. )
NO end in sight IMO.
People like this can argue a fence post to sawdust.

IF,"Badmouthing" something is SOOO wrong, WHY, are soap opera's SOOO popular? Reality TV? Even the NEWS??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 01:18 PM
New Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: North America
Posts: 21
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beenaway2long
So then WHY WOULD YOU USE IT? I do not understand YOUR logic. If it's antiquated, less efficient and more costly in the end, then that in itself is enough reason to badmouth it. Why use it, if it has so many drawbacks?

When prepping a car for primer, would you hand sand the entire car or use a DA? Using your logic, I would assume you would NOT use a DA. For that matter, why not just grab a hand full of sand and rub it across the body. The means meet the ends. The body gets sanded. It would be rediculous to waste time/money on systems that are time consuming or inefficient, unless the end result is only obtainable that way. (Nitrocellulous Laquer, for instance.)

I am prepping a car now to spray with AE. And to answer your question, no one has given a valid reason for not using it. The reasons, for example are, "it's easier to use the new", "it's old technoligy" "it's more trouble" etc. as I've stated and will continue to state until there is credible validation why AE should not be used, it's all illogical.

I would use a DA sander but in your mind, does that mean the end results wouldn't be just effective as hand sanding or chemical stripping, sandblasting or any other manner?

Demonstrate to me how AE's ess efficient and more costly. Do you have plans to dump your other half when he or she become old and antiquated and don't forget, less effecient?

You're being subjective like all the others. To call something ridiculous is a matter of personal opinion, isn't it?

Look, I don't care what anyone does or what brand they use or how they apply it. What bothers me is the rampant negitives about something without 1st hand experience or knowledge. I agree modern is in most cases easier for most but for many, their old ways are better, easier for them. Again, being old doesn't equate to no good or no longer useful or anything else you might describe it as.

You wouldn't tell the old man that his rotary telephone doesn't work anymore because we now have touchtone, would you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 02:46 PM
milo's Avatar
point on positive
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: milogarage Calif.
Age: 58
Posts: 1,672
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 3
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
I think you should use Kirker,,,

http://www.a2zautoforums.com/showthr...ghlight=kirker
http://www.a2zautoforums.com/showthr...ghlight=kirker
http://www.a2zautoforums.com/showthr...ghlight=kirker
http://www.a2zautoforums.com/showthr...ghlight=kirker
http://www.a2zautoforums.com/showthread.php?t=3308
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2005, 03:02 PM
if it ain't old, why?
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: on the edge in illinois
Posts: 10
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
getting more confused(as in blown) Milo's by-line is keeping it a hobby...that's all i want!! just trying to sort thru all this stuff to come to conclusions...just trying to squirt paint....not win trophies......aaaaaaaaaaahhhh sorry my mind overheated!! ooohhh i did use spell check!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Body - Exterior posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Top Speed 69 chevelle SS Hotrodding Basics 30 10-20-2003 02:24 PM
Engine envy! Jag Daddy Engine 6 05-31-2003 06:24 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.