Hot Rod Forum banner

Bubbles under paint

9K views 35 replies 14 participants last post by  Old Fool 
#1 ·
About 4 years ago, a friend had her dad's 1954 Desoto subjected to a "cosmetic restoration" at a local, well-known restoration shop. Essentially, it got some body work and a full re-spray and all the chrome re-plated.

I washed the car yesterday for her and found this.



There are dozens of bubbles under the paint on the top of the car and a smaller number and size along the tops of the fenders.

I'm not a painter, and while I recognize these bubbles as rust, I'm uncertain as to whether this due to quality control problem from the restoration shop or just expected deterioration on a car this old. I wouldn't think this should happen within 4 years if the undelying rust was neutralized at the time of the re-spray.

The car has been kept in a parking garage, is rarely driven and has been washed about every 3-4 months.

Obviously, it needs to be fixed. Is it worth a talk with the restoration shop or should I have it "just done right"?
 
See less See more
1
#5 ·
Don't go off half cocked on the shop that re-sprayed the car. Like was said before, if this was a scuff and spray, they didn't have a clue what was "under the fender". The bubbles are rust, definetly, but they are coming up through the sheet metal from the underside. This is rust that has been "working" for almost 60 years and is just now making it's way to the surface. If you pick the rust out there will be a small hole in the fender or roof.
Mark
 
#6 ·
The owner is bringing the estimate/contract to me to review next time she's in town so I can see what the scope of the work was supposed to be to deterine whether or not the restoration shop did their job well. So I'll have to wait until next month.


Thanks for the feedback.
 
#7 ·
for 20k the car should have been stripped. This was a rip off job. If this is just on horizontal panels I doubt it's rust. Sounds more like too much material or simply it failed and extreme sun helped it along. If it were rust I'd figure the bubbles to be bigger in suspect areas. Could be though. Never know til you dig in. Sure looks like rust though in the pics.
 
#8 ·
It may have been stripped, I know as much about the job as you do, BUT even if it was taken to bare metal on the topside, without removing the fenders and cleaning them up on the underside, the rust will continue to work. Especially under fender brackets and double panels. Any mud or road debris will retain moisture and you know what happens then...
This is classic "rust bubbles from underneath" (sounds like a horror movie doesn't it?) and it can only get there after a hole has been eaten through from under the fender or roof. They start very small and get bigger as the rust works itself out under the paint... Just like oxidation under the clear coat on aluminum wheels. Starts with a very small chip and grows as the oxidation spreads under the clearcoat.
I doubt you will get very far with the resto shop. It's been four years and they will probably only "guarantee" their work for a year, probably less...
Mark
 
#12 ·
So you're saying it rusted from the backside on all the horizontal surfaces? I can assure you that's not it. It may be rust but not from the backside.
Hope you're right!:thumbup:
Just so you know, I am from Michigan... I see this stuff all the time, so don't be to quick to assure...
 
#14 ·
But on the same note, if a task that was done to the car isn't on the repair order they are in deep poo poo with BAR at least here in California. EVERY SINGLE nut or bolt turned has to be documented for the customer. Putting a light bulb in a taillight without putting it on the work order is means for a fine.

Brian
 
#17 ·
I don't know anything about other states of course but here in California the ONLY thing a shop has to do, is what they said on the work order, PERIOD. The BAR (Bureau of Automotive Repair, State of California, Dept. of Consumer Affairs Bureau of Automotive Repair) has no power what so ever, ZERO when determining "quality" of the work being performed. That the work IS performed on the work order is ALL they can or will protect for the consumer. If the shop leaves one $2.50 clip off the car that is on the repair order and the customer paid for it THAT can get them a fine. But painting a car without sanding it gets nothing, zero. If the work order said "sand and paint" and they sanded it with 36 grit paper, or they sanded three swipes across the hood, that would be perfectly ok and legal as far as the BAR is concerned, they don't judge "quality" for it is subjective. But what the work order says the customer was charged for, that is another story. If it says "R&I left door handle" it had better been removed and re-installed or they are breaking the law.

Brian
 
#18 ·
I just heard back from the owner. They were supposed to strip the car down to bare metal before painting. She called the owner, who has agrred to meet with her and examine the car when she is next in town (Norfolk, VA). That will be in about a month, so I'll update the thread when I have some news.
 
#23 ·
I have been reading the replies on this post and most are quick to blame the shop that did the car. Sorry guys but just too many unknowns here, too many details we don't know about. How many of you guys that do this type of work are willing to follow around customers with a spraygun forever. You can't control every square inch of a car years later and then be expected to "take care" of it for the bubble. Any decent shop that does restoration type paintwork will get 75 to 100 an hour and at 20 grand for everthing done does seem a bit light to me........just being realistic here.
 
#24 ·
So true, it's a huge car and it doesn't take long to eat up 20K...especially if there is any amount of rechroming. We don't know many things and this is where documentation is crucial. I insist on it...I have become extremely anal and have even had customer's ask if they are paying for the obvious hours of documentation (I don't charge for documentation...I need it to protect myself as well as my customer) and as Brian said, document every nut and bolt that was turned and even then...things can happen.

As you said Dennis, your "just being realistic here" and for a strip to bare metal, bring the substrate to a workable level for the top coat and rechroming...20K sounds more like a deposit...not a complete bill.

So see the documentation, if you like, bring it back here on the forum and then we can assess and hopefully give you a more realistic and honest opinion so you can decide on a direction.

Ray
 
#26 · (Edited)
Follow-Up

Here's how things played out.

I looked at the contract. The car was to be soda blasted and re-painted. The blasting was done by a sub-contractor, the paint done in-house.

The owners tried to set up a meeting with the shop. After a week of un-returned calls, the owner (busy with is TV show producers) finally told them to bring it in to take a look at the paint and reminded them that he offered mechanical services to get the car running again.

Now I realize that it has been 3 years since it was painted, but the car has been garaged during that time. A friend of mine in the auto body/paint business looked at the bubbles and felt that the problem was consistent with improper prep after soda blasting, but it could be from other causes as well. There are hundreds of these bubbles all over the car.

Given that the car needed some mechanical work the guy could do, I felt that there was some room to negotiate a some reasonable resolution. We knew we'd have to pay something.

We towed the car to the shop, arriving at 4:15pm on a Friday. The owner was in a heated discussion with his TV producers, so we wound up talking with the body shop manager who shook his head and said it "shouldn't have done that".

The shop owned called my friend the next morning at about 9:30am and said that the DuPont rep examined the car and said the paint was not at fault. My friend asked for the name of the paint rep so he could speak with him directly and the owner replied that he would get a "full written report next week" (has not yet arrived after 10 days AFAIK). He then stated that he had no intention of doing anything about the paint, that my friend had kept the car under a wet car cover (never been under a cover, always garaged) and then offered to provide the name of his insurance company, refused to consider doing any mechanical repairs and wanted the car out of his shop as soon as possible.

End of conversation.
 
#31 ·
Here's how things played out.

I looked at the contract. The car was to be soda blasted and re-painted. The blasting was done by a sub-contractor, the paint done in-house.

The owners tried to set up a meeting with the shop. After a week of un-returned calls, the owner (busy with is TV show producers) finally told them to bring it in to take a look at the paint and reminded them that he offered mechanical services to get the car running again.

Now I realize that it has been 3 years since it was painted, but the car has been garaged during that time. A friend of mine in the auto body/paint business looked at the bubbles and felt that the problem was consistent with improper prep after soda blasting, but it could be from other causes as well. There are hundreds of these bubbles all over the car.

Given that the car needed some mechanical work the guy could do, I felt that there was some room to negotiate a some reasonable resolution. We knew we'd have to pay something.

We towed the car to the shop, arriving at 4:15pm on a Friday. The owner was in a heated discussion with his TV producers, so we wound up talking with the body shop manager who shook his head and said it "shouldn't have done that".

The shop owned called my friend the next morning at about 9:30am and said that the DuPont rep examined the car and said the paint was not at fault. My friend asked for the name of the paint rep so he could speak with him directly and the owner replied that he would get a "full written report next week" (has not yet arrived after 10 days AFAIK). He then stated that he had no intention of doing anything about the paint, that my friend had kept the car under a wet car cover (never been under a cover, always garaged) and then offered to provide the name of his insurance company, refused to consider doing any mechanical repairs and wanted the car out of his shop as soon as possible.

End of conversation.
well,I can understand wWHY he wants it out of his shop right away,he wouldnt want anyone thinking he did that kind of work...mabee you should talk to one of his producers....as bad as it is at least you'll get the money to have it done from his ins.co. I'd leave it there until they look at it and cut you a check...improper prep sounds about right...
 
#27 ·
As has been the theme throughout this thread, information is key...not only now, but when the vehicle was first done.

It sounds to me as though your friend in the auto body business is correct...I have reread your thread and it seems to me that today is the first time we have heard that the car was soda blasted....and it was on the contract. The soda blasted metal should have been properly neutralized and is in all probability the reason there are bubbles under the paint. I agree with your guy...it could be something else...but...soda blast...bubbles...if it was something else, the bubbles wouldn't be all over, they would usually be more centralized in a problem area...soda blasting and improperly preparing the blasted metal would be consistent with this type of problem.

The Dupont guy is correct as well...the paint didn't fail, in my opinion the person whose task it was to neutralize the surface before priming failed...the paint can only adhere to what it was designed to adhere to...soda blasted metal is not one of those substrates.

Regardless, the person who wanted the work done went to a shop in good faith, expecting a professional to do what they said they could and listed on the repair order. It didn't happen...in my opinion, the shop needs to suck this one up and redo the vehicle properly...that being said...those bubbles didn't just appear one day...they started appearing a while ago and the owner has a responsibility to take it back to the shop in a timely manor...4 years doesn't seem that timely.

Both parties need to accept some responsibility here...more responsibility on the shop's side than the customer...no matter what...the shop is expected to know how to paint a car after it has been soda blasted.

Just my opinions.

Ray
 
#28 ·
those bubbles didn't just appear one day...they started appearing a while ago and the owner has a responsibility to take it back to the shop in a timely manor...4 years doesn't seem that timely.
The car has been garaged since it was repainted three years ago and washed and waxed regularly. The bubbles didn't appear until this summer (and kind of blossomed into existence) and the car owner, who lives 1,000 miles away from here, wanted to see the problem himself and meet the shop owner face-to-face to discuss it. I had prepared him for the fact that after three years, it wasn't likely that the shop owner would eat 100% of the cost of repairs and my friend was OK with that. He was as amazed as I was when the shop owner became combative and blew him off right away, but from stories I've since heard, that seems to be the shop owners' style when dealing with problems.
 
#29 ·
for at least 10 years there have been warnings about soda blasting and acids . but those who use it swear we dont know what we are talking about and continue to advise people how great it is . this a classic example of what happens. everyone involved will point to someone else . you soda blast a car or use any acid it will never see the inside of my shop .
the shop is 100% responsible for this problem . they used a stripping method not approved by any paint mfg . that is why dupont told them goodbye . if i were the customer i would take it to court and sue the hell out of them. the shop owner knows full well what happened but he just does not want to honor the job . these bubble would have shown up much faster had the car been outside much more.
 
#33 ·
Stand strong on this one...document that they have it on their web site...time date any and everything. I like Mikes Idea of talking to his producer...tell them that your planning on buying air time when the show is on and show the public what really happens...that might be a little extreme but, even though the owner of the car has a bit of responsibility and he admitted that, the vehicle was done in good faith and paid for...the shop owner needs to accept his portion of the responsibility.

Just my thoughts

Ray
 
#34 ·
Just to reinforce what is being said, I have been in this position, I am sad to say. We restored a 1970 Chevelle SS for a customer about 5 years ago. Every nut and bolt was replaced, everything was finished to absolute perfection. We had a friend with a big blasting set up come by the shop and sand blast the entire car after tear down. The trunk had been taken off by the previous owner and was not at the shop when this took place. When the owner brought the trunk panel to us, it was already in primer. He says "I had it blasted and put some epoxy on it since it was layin gat my house. I figured it would help out." Well he had used the same epoxy we had (DP90 at the time) and it looked great, so we finished everything, painted the car and everything was fine......for about 6 months. He came back to the shop one day to have me look at the trunk. The car had been garaged 98% of the time since the restoration and had only been to a few shows since. The entire car looked as good as the day he took it home, Except the trunk. It looked as if you had misted it with a spray bottle of water and then painted it. Thousands of little bubbles everywhere. Not a single one anywhere else on the car. After questioning him about his procedures before bringing it to the shop, he said it had been soda blasted, then he wiped it one time with W&G and primed. So we sand blasted the trunk and started over. Still looks good today. I still refuse to let anyone in my shop with anything that has been soda blasted.

Kelly
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top