|02-16-2011 09:23 PM|
HS21 must be different now. It lays like glass pretty effortlessly but man..a week later it's hard as a rock.
Not so for the 3.8. I'd put it up against anyone else's single stage. I've used my fair share of it.. just did 2 allovers with it last year. Never used the 200, but was told the same from my rep..just a cheaper version...price and quality.
If they changed the forumla for the hs21...man they sure did screw up if it was anything like your universal, barry.
|02-16-2011 08:43 PM|
I have not had my hands on any U-Tech since Sikkens bought U-tech in 2000 but if the guy is suggesting the 3.8 SS, back then is was better then anything out there at the time.
An excellent polyurethane that buffed good for about two weeks and it would lay like glass. Don't know if its the same now or not.
The 2100 was designed in 1998 as a special project a one coat High solids, polyurethane clear to go with the one coat base also a special project for a particular customer, if its hard as a rock now, then its not the same product, so that leaves me questioning the 3.8. The 2100 and the 3.8 was very similar to the SPI Universal clear. (Just my opinion, of course)
The 200 SS was the cheaper SS in Utech and I was never a fan of that product, if they still have it in Sikkens, I don't know and it may be totally different now.
|02-16-2011 06:42 PM|
|02-16-2011 05:50 PM|
U-tech isn't new. It is akzo's 3rd line and is a true polyester base for their lower line. Knocks the socks off all the other major's lower lines that are really acrylics and enamels.
I wouldn't suggest their HS21 clearcoat if there is some cutting and buffing going on. Stuff is hard as a rock, unless it is cut and buffed very next day. Same as their 4.0 clear. MS clear seems to be the only one that i've used that cut and buffs decent.
Its' a fleet line...so all their clears are going to be significantly harder and tougher to the top lines.
|02-16-2011 04:07 PM|
I have not used this, but have used imron.
It did not work out as an automotive paint because it is too rubbery. It is made that way because the aluminum skin of an airplane expands and contracts a lot!!! They also will need to go from 100+ degrees on the ground, to "minus something" a few minutes later at high altitude.
Black paintjobs are all about the gloss! They typically need more gloss than other colors or it will look very bad. That is why quality black paint if so pricey. The need to achieve a great finish!
When I tried to buff the Imron, it was like buffing a tire. You could make it a little shiny... but not as shiny as cars usually are... or as shiney as it was before buffing. You would have to be able to shoot it nearly perfect... and hope you never had to fix any damage.
If this new paint is formulated that way, I would be very hesitant to use it. You may end up paying for two paint jobs. Why take the chance?
Think about this... If it was a better product than today's auto paints... somebody would already be selling it on the automotive market.
|02-16-2011 03:35 PM|
The guy who I talked to about painting my 37 Dodge coupe suggested using U-Tech paint. He told me its a paint that is being used instead of Imron. He said that U-Tech would be good against possible stone chips on the front fenders. The color that I would like to have is black cherry.
I would like some feed back from anyone who has painted their car with this paint, both pros and cons