|10-31-2005 10:18 AM|
|10-31-2005 09:23 AM|
|10-30-2005 02:39 PM|
|10-29-2005 04:12 PM|
Thanks for honoring my rants with your grand recognition.
|10-29-2005 02:47 PM|
I don't know about the Spies, I do know one thing, paint reps say a lot that isn't true! Not that they are lying, I don't buy the salemen are bad crap. But they can only pass on what they have learned. Most of these big companies don't let the "privates" know what the "generals" know, it just would be bad business. For instance, I was told and told over and over that one particular value line product at S-W was a stand alone system. After a few years with them there were rumors this wasn't true. After about four years I confermed it without a doubt, this product was "piggy backing" off another high end line!
It is simply marketing stratigy, no big deal. They can't tell you this or it would damage the whole program.
Yes, we are exchanging info, I just exchanged something not advertised. It really doesn't have to be known by the consumer, it wouldn't change much of what they do, other than their view of the company. There is no reason S-W should, could or be made to provide this information. It is a marketing decision made and it is their business.
The information you are after wouldn't be understood or an issue by 99% of consumers who may be buying these products right now. Because you would care to be privy to the R&D results of every product made doesn't mean they should be made public. We can discuss and educate each other using info we know such as I just have, other than that it will just have to be left unknown.
Like I said as an example, should GM be making available to the public the piles, upon piles, hundreds of thosands of files on how they arrive at the designs of their cars? The mind numbing minute details of shear strength on a fender bolt? Sure some "normal" people may be interested and find it facinating, but to what end? What would be the need?
When we get some new info we can share it, what we can't, just let it be.
|10-29-2005 09:47 AM|
As far as saying having knowledge is not important, isn't that why we are here? I like to know as much as possible about the products I use. As to understanding it, I guess we all work on our own level. If someone showed me a model of the molecules, I wouldn't derive much from that, but a comparative analysis of the properties of different resin technologies would be very interesting to me, and possibly useful. Isn't that what this whole pissing contest is about, anyway? I'm not above admitting that I was operating on faulty assumptions, and now I'd like to either get the knowledge or shut the h**l up, at least on this subject.
|10-29-2005 09:42 AM|
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.[/QUOTE]
*In 1984 what base of Dupont did you use?????
How do people always come up with 20 years?
I have been a bodyman for 20 years. Oh I turned 25 yesterday.
My car has been paint ed 20 years and still looks new. --This has been written on the john deere forum 100's of times and still looks new!!!
*I have news for you I and any other experience painter can point out an enamel job verses a base/clear job as soon as its done.
*No normal collision bodyshop could use AE because you could not ever match the bases/clear on the car. Or get the customer to accept the car when you were done.
*So this is why AE is delegated to the low end shops that do used car work and do not have to stand behind their work.
Today a car driven daily painted in RED AE has a chance of 50% of retaining 30% of its gloss level after two years.
*Common sense will tell you a noncleared paint (AE) the "PIGMENTS" are exposed to the elements and just plain cannot survive like a base clearcoat.
* You keep spouting off about prove it to me-- Why do we need to do that?
You are not experienced or your statement would not keep reappearing, so why would we care if you just want to argue? Its your cars use what you want, we don't care.
Everyones idea of a quality job is different and i don't care how good of a painter you are, you could never sneak an enamel job past me or any other painter.
Go to your phone book and call 20 bodyshops in your town and ask if the use AE on their paint jobs.
When the get done laughing they will explain to you why not.
|10-29-2005 09:16 AM|
Nope, stuff like that is "unsaid" even within the companies. It is like relabeling a buyout product and selling it as their own, that will never be confirmed. It just isn't that important anyway. Whos business is it that we know exactly what makeup the product is? If it works, if they back it, if you trust the company, buy the product. Why should we be privy to the chemical make-up of it? How many among us could even have an understanding of what that chemical make-up would mean?
It would be like GM offering to the public all the records of each and every design and engineering plan, it doesn't make sense.
|10-29-2005 09:08 AM|
|10-28-2005 03:02 PM|
|fatfenderfreak||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!!!|
|10-28-2005 02:46 PM|
I think you should use Kirker,,,
|10-28-2005 01:18 PM|
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?
|10-28-2005 11:10 AM|
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??
|10-28-2005 10:56 AM|
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.)
|10-28-2005 09:10 AM|
|fatfenderfreak||came to learn...........got confused.........|
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|