Respectable paint on 120V compressor? - Page 2 - 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
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2008, 07:32 PM
Slickriffs's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fairfield CT
Age: 64
Posts: 405
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
yup..Although I lack experience I've read alot. Get'n those flakes to orient the way you want consistantly is a knack. I plan to shoot my 55 truck with Omaha Orange..not sure if it will be BB/CC or AE with hardener plus clear. Maybe with a little dab of pearl.

Thanks,

Keith

    Advertisement

Last edited by Slickriffs; 08-30-2008 at 05:36 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 07:27 AM
Old Fool's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: spokane,wa.
Posts: 1,347
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 8
Thanked 40 Times in 34 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slickriffs
Hey Gents..Thanks for the info..


What's the deal on "two stage". Is this a big plus?



Keith
A 2 stage compressor produces air at a higher pressure than a single stage, thereby allowing more air to be stored in a given tank size.
A drawback to this MAY be the introduction of more heat into the air as it is compressed to a higher pressure.
You do not need 175psi for anything in your home garage or most any production shop for that matter.
100psi is the usual max pressure requirement .

Compressed air requirements and air compressor sizing are based on the tools cfm@psi AND the compressors scfm@psi output.
The greater the spread between these 2 factors will allow the compressor to cycle with longer off times.

A single stage compressor producing 18scfm@100 psi, or a 2 stage compressor producing 18scfm@100 psi is the same animal.

The difference is how much volume the storage tank will hold, due to the 2 stage pumping the tank up to 175psi instead of 125psi of the single stage
Either way, ONLY 18scfm@100 psi is available once the tank is at 100psi.

The 2 stage with the higher storage pressure and volume is well suited for a intermittent requirement of a large volume of air, such as the raising of an old skool gas station floor hoist. Took lots of volume to fill , but didn't need to run continuous.

The bottom line: Continuous running of air tools, ie sanders,blasters,paint guns,etc. requires volume NOT hi pressure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 08:58 AM
MARTINSR's Avatar
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San francisco bay area
Age: 55
Posts: 13,098
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1,279
Thanked 1,123 Times in 998 Posts
Hold on here, the Two stage is producing more pressure, but more volume as well. Here's how it works, the first cyl compresses the air, then that air goes over to the second cyl to compress it again! So you are putting TWICE the volume (in laymens terms) into the tank! No, the two stage will back up the same tool for much longer, even when the tank is empty it will back up a high volume tool.

If you can afford the two stage compressor, get it. Like my brother always says, "I have never said DARN I wish I would have bought the cheaper tool".

Brian
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 02:25 PM
Old Fool's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: spokane,wa.
Posts: 1,347
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 8
Thanked 40 Times in 34 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARTINSR
Hold on here, the Two stage is producing more pressure, but more volume as well. Here's how it works, the first cyl compresses the air, then that air goes over to the second cyl to compress it again! So you are putting TWICE the volume (in laymens terms) into the tank! No, the two stage will back up the same tool for much longer, even when the tank is empty it will back up a high volume tool.

If you can afford the two stage compressor, get it. Like my brother always says, "I have never said DARN I wish I would have bought the cheaper tool".

Brian
Resspectfully sir you are not correctly comparing ratings. You must compare ratings at the SAME pressure or the SAME cfm for a valid comparison.

If a compressor is rated at 10cfm@100 psi, it does not matter how many stages it has or its max pressure output. At 100 psi it can only produce 10cfm. You have to compare compressors at the same pressure and cfm to find out what you have.(or do the math)

I do believe the OP is budget conscious and a large single stage will provide the air he needs for less $$ than a 2 stage.

Single Stage 18.1 cfm@90psi -$899 shipped
http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/w..._211720_211720

2 Stage 15.9cfm@90psi - $1299 shipped
http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/w..._290946_290946
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 02:48 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: tennessee
Posts: 5,912
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
[QUOTE=A single stage compressor producing 18scfm@100 psi, or a 2 stage compressor producing 18scfm@100 psi is the same animal. [/QUOTE]


You are close- They would both be producing the same amount of air, that is they would have the same amount of volume at the given pressure setting BUT the two stage would not only be doing it using slightly less power but the volume would be higher at the lower pressures with the two stage thus allowing for less recharge time. The two stage does this by being more efficient because of the principle MartinSr mentioned. All else being equal, the same tank, plumbing and motor with the only difference being a two stage pump vs a single stage the two stage will outperform the single stage by a good margin and produce cooler air doing it (it loses a lot of the heat between the first and second stages).

Last edited by oldred; 08-31-2008 at 03:18 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 03:05 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: tennessee
Posts: 5,912
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
About that comparison with that Ingersoll at over 18 CFM@90 PSI, Unfortunately compressor specs are often overblown and just as "peak" and "maximum developed" HP ratings are often used to mis-lead buyers CFM ratings are sometimes pure fantasy too! There is no cotton pickin way that 5HP single stage inline pump is going to produce those kinds of numbers I don't care what kind of smoke and mirrors they use to arrive at the figures, the laws of physics are the same for everybody! That particular model of IR has been the subject of discussion here in more than one thread and I can say with confidence that if I could attach my flow meter to that darn thing I would be very much surprised to see much over 14 CFM at that pressure IF it could do that much! I have checked the flow on a great many compressors over the last 30 some odd years and I am talking about the good AMERICAN made iron not that piece of Chinese crap with inflated performance numbers (yes that damn thing is CHINESE! ) and never have I seen a single stage piston pump with only 5 HP produce anywhere near that kind of volume, it just does not work that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 03:31 PM
Old Fool's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: spokane,wa.
Posts: 1,347
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 8
Thanked 40 Times in 34 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldred
You are close- They would both be producing the same amount of air, that is they would have the same amount of volume at the given pressure setting BUT the two stage would not only be doing it using slightly less power but the volume would be higher at the lower pressures with the two stage thus allowing for less recharge time. The two stage does this by being more efficient because of the principle MartinSr mentioned. All else being equal, the same tank, plumbing and motor with the only difference being a two stage pump vs a single stage the two stage will outperform the single stage by a good margin and produce cooler air doing it (it loses a lot of the heat between the first and second stages).
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldred
They would both be producing the same amount of air, that is they would have the same amount of volume at the given pressure setting
Quote:
but the volume would be higher at the lower pressures with the two stage

Please explain how it can be the same but different

Compress a gas and you add heat directly corresponding to the pressure increase. The reason a 2 stage "MAY" be providing cooler air is that piece of fin tube between the first stage and the second stage.

Add a refrigerated cooler after the tank and the heat is no longer a problem with either type of compressor.

.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 03:35 PM
MARTINSR's Avatar
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San francisco bay area
Age: 55
Posts: 13,098
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1,279
Thanked 1,123 Times in 998 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Fool
Resspectfully sir you are not correctly comparing ratings. You must compare ratings at the SAME pressure or the SAME cfm for a valid comparison.

If a compressor is rated at 10cfm@100 psi, it does not matter how many stages it has or its max pressure output. At 100 psi it can only produce 10cfm. You have to compare compressors at the same pressure and cfm to find out what you have.(or do the math)

I do believe the OP is budget conscious and a large single stage will provide the air he needs for less $$ than a 2 stage.
What Oldred said.

Do you know of a use for 175 psi? No, so why would anyone ever want a 2 stage? Because they have more volume and keep up better when the tank is empty.

As far as it being the right one for our discussion, that is entirely up to the buyer. All I am saying is IF you can afford the 2 stage, get it, you would never be sorry they "wasted" the extra money.

Brian
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 03:38 PM
MARTINSR's Avatar
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San francisco bay area
Age: 55
Posts: 13,098
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1,279
Thanked 1,123 Times in 998 Posts
Listen, I am not engineer to argue the science of these compressors I would be a fool. The thing is, no "real" body shop runs on a single stage compressor. The two stage compressor is a step up, they will keep up with a cfm hog like an 8" orbital ND 900 they will keep up with an CFM hog HVLP gun better, they are just better.

Are they absolutely needed, no. Heck, one could do the whole car by hand and prime and paint with aerosol cans.

But if you are going to buy a compressor and have the dough, the 2 stage would be the way to go.

Brian
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 04:00 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: tennessee
Posts: 5,912
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Fool

The reason a 2 stage "MAY" be providing cooler air is that piece of fin tube between the first stage and the second stage.

Add a refrigerated cooler after the tank and the heat is no longer a problem with either type of compressor.

.

Apparently you seem surprised that the two stage runs cooler? It does (due to that tube which removes a LOT of heat!) and this has always been one of it's selling points although it's main advantage is in volume. Basically it works like this, given a certain amount of power and a fixed ratio you can produce high volume at low pressure or you could produce high pressure at low volume but you can not produce both high volume and pressure at the same time, V @ P = HP. Think of a car with a certain amount of HP and only one gear, depending on which gear ratio it could either accelerate rapidly to a low top speed or with a ratio change it could accelerate less rapidly to a higher speed. Now by using a two speed transmission that same amount of power could be used to both accelerate rapidly AND reach a higher speed. In the case of the two stage compressor vs a single stage with the same rating for each, say 15 CFM@90 PSI, the two stage would produce somewhat more volume at the lower pressures, thus the CFM rating@90PSI would be the same but the two stage would reach it sooner. On the two stage set-ups with a lower cut-out speed (lots of two stage outfits are set up to cut out at around 135 CFM) there is a heck of a lot of difference in recharge time if the pump/motor is geared to reach maximum torque at that cut out setting like the single stage would be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:44 PM
Old Fool's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: spokane,wa.
Posts: 1,347
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 8
Thanked 40 Times in 34 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldred
Apparently you seem surprised that the two stage runs cooler? It does (due to that tube which removes a LOT of heat!) and this has always been one of it's selling points although it's main advantage is in volume. Basically it works like this, given a certain amount of power and a fixed ratio you can produce high volume at low pressure or you could produce high pressure at low volume but you can not produce both high volume and pressure at the same time, V @ P = HP. Think of a car with a certain amount of HP and only one gear, depending on which gear ratio it could either accelerate rapidly to a low top speed or with a ratio change it could accelerate less rapidly to a higher speed. Now by using a two speed transmission that same amount of power could be used to both accelerate rapidly AND reach a higher speed. In the case of the two stage compressor vs a single stage with the same rating for each, say 15 CFM@90 PSI, the two stage would produce somewhat more volume at the lower pressures, thus the CFM rating@90PSI would be the same but the two stage would reach it sooner. On the two stage set-ups with a lower cut-out speed (lots of two stage outfits are set up to cut out at around 135 CFM) there is a heck of a lot of difference in recharge time if the pump/motor is geared to reach maximum torque at that cut out setting like the single stage would be.

The total volumetric area of the cylinder per revolution x revolutions per minute /efficiency of cylinder and valve seal determines the output.

If one cylinder displaces .03 cu ft , and then shoves it into a cylinder of .02 cu ft. then the pressure of that single compressed cycled will increase, but the total volume of influent is still .03 cu ft.
It has now been compressed to a higher pressure which occupies less total volume in your supply tank . Nowhere in this process did the compressor magically increase the cu.ft. of air it inhaled in that one cycle.

Now multiply that one cycle by number of cycles per minute and you have the CubicFeetMinute the compressor is rated at.

If a single stage dual cylinder compressor operating at 85% efficiency and has a total displacement per revolution of .008cu.ft and compresses that volume to 90 psi , then it would be fair to say it is rated at .408 cu.ft.per minute.
Multiply that number by rpm's and total output is determined.

If a 2 stage compressor with a first stage cylinder has a volume of .008 cu ft. and its ring and valve seal efficiency is 85% then the output of a single intake cylce will be .008 cu ft, but its pressure is increased by the action of the much smaller secondary cylinder that is not a volume increaser but is a pressure increaser.
The influent of a single revolution is the same as with the single stage example above.

the 2 stage compressor is more efficient at producing high pressure due to the compress and re-compress action of each cycle. The total volume is only determined by the above mentioned factors.
As far as being more efficient from an energy standpoint that is not so. it takes a given number of watts to produce pressure at volume, or volume at pressure , which ever way you wish to look at it.

Shops run a 2 stage compressor to get hi volume storage at minimal cost. Storage tanks cost $, and take up a foot print that also cost $.

Body shops are a minimal cost operation,therefore they run the cheapest option available, not necessarily the best.
A true industry using compressed air will run a multiple stage turbine which has far greater capacity, but the $$ to acquire are far more.

I only question the heat statement as I have not done any tests of compressors to see what the effluent temperature is. Some single stage compressors also run fin tube and have lower operating temps than a non cooled compressor.

Anyone serious about dry air will install a refrigerated air cooler, no matter which type of compressor they have.

I have installed, maintained and rebuilt industrial air compressors for 30 years. Joy(Now Cameron),Sullair, and Fuller are the primary units I am trained on. Have also maintained Ingersol-Rand and Curtis industrial recprocating(piston) type compressors.

Cameron multiple stage centrifical compressor:


1500-2200hp 6500-11800cfm 80-150psi

How about this little boy for a body shop?

Its only a single stage 84 cfm@175 psi 25 hp.
Small foot print, large volume, no oil in the air, why doesn't the local shop have it? its not because their compressor is better, its because it is cheaper.
http://www.sullair.com/corp/details/...TI8582,00.html


A little guide to types of air compressors:





Bottom line, buy what ever works for you and your budget. If I had the money some of you guys have I would have a Curtis SE7.5TD in my hobby shop
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 08:28 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: tennessee
Posts: 5,912
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Fool
the 2 stage compressor is more efficient at producing high pressure due to the compress and re-compress action of each cycle.

Exactly what we have been saying! Now you also go on to say that it takes a given number of watts to produce a certain pressure at any given volume which is true but that is in absolute terms and does not take into account the pump's efficiency of which both a single stage and a two stage (piston type) are not nearly 100%, as per your quote above the two stage has an edge over the single stage.


I am not exactly sure what you are trying to say and I seriously doubt that you do either and what does a centrifugal compressor have to do with a single stage piston compressor? You have just spent the last hour or so looking around the net for info and come back here and print of lot of gibberish that you think proves your point but take a good look at what that is saying. Because a two stage (of comparable displacement to a single stage) compressor is more efficient at producing pressure at a given RPM and power input it can thus be used to produce a higher volume at a given pressure than the single stage by driving it at a higher RPM OR given the same RPM a larger displacement compressor (two stage) can be used at the same RPM to deliver a higher CFM with any given HP rating. To cut through the BS and put it in plain language a two stage pump, due to it's higher efficiency at producing pressure (less HP required to produce this pressure due to less wasted energy), can be used at higher RPM or in larger displacement form to reach the desired pressure at HIGHER VOLUME ON THE SAME AMOUNT OF POWER! This is the same principle that allows a two stage to continue to produce higher pressure (usually 175 PSI) when a single stage pump could not due to the higher torque requirements (given the same motor).


The bottom line to anyone looking to buy a compressor is that it is a WELL KNOWN FACT that a two stage piston pump will out-perform a single stage piston pump on any given HP rating. It can do this because of it's higher efficiency allows the same amount of power to either drive a similar displacement pump to the single stage at a higher RPM or a larger displacement pump at the same RPM. You will get more pressure AND volume for the same amount of power available.

Last edited by oldred; 09-01-2008 at 12:02 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 09:24 PM
F&J F&J is offline
Registered User
 

Last journal entry: 32 Ford cabriolet conversion/windshield
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Connecticut
Age: 62
Posts: 1,571
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldred
Exactly what we have been saying! Now you also go on to say that it takes a given number of watts to produce a certain pressure at any given volume which is true but that is in absolute terms and does not take into account the pump's efficiency of which both a single stage and a two stage (piston type) are not nearly 100%, as per your quote above the two stage has an edge over the single stage.


I am not exactly sure what you are trying to say and I seriously doubt that you do either and what does a single stage centrifugal compressor have to do with a single stage piston compressor? You have just spent the last hour or so looking around the net for info and come back here and print of lot of gibberish that you think proves your point but take a good look at what that is saying. Because a two stage (of comparable displacement to a single stage) compressor is more efficient at producing pressure at a given RPM and power imput it can thus be used to produce a higher volume at a given pressure than the single stage by driving it at a higher RPM OR given the same RPM a larger displacement compressor (two stage) can be used at the same RPM to deliver a higher CFM with any given HP rating. To cut through the BS and put it in plain language a two stage pump, due to it's higher efficiency at producing pressure (less HP required to produce this pressure due to less wasted energy), can be used at higher RPM or in larger displacement form to reach the desired pressure at HIGHER VOLUME ON THE SAME AMOUNT OF POWER! This is the same principle that allows a two stage to continue to produce higher pressure (usually 175 PSI) when a single stage pump could not due to the higher torque requirements (given the same motor).


The bottom line to anyone looking to buy a compressor is that it is a WELL KNOWN FACT that a two stage piston pump will out-perform a single stage piston pump on any given HP rating. It can do this because of it's higher efficiency allows the same amount of power to either drive a similar displacement pump to the single stage at a higher RPM or a larger displacement pump at the same RPM. You will get more pressure AND volume for the same amount of power available.


This is the most rude, and contfrontational post I have seen in a while, and directed at a person who is in the trade and was just trying to give his 2 cents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2008, 09:55 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: tennessee
Posts: 5,912
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by F&J
This is the most rude, and contfrontational post I have seen in a while, and directed at a person who is in the trade and was just trying to give his 2 cents.

Look I have been dealing with these things for well over thirty years myself and I know BS when I hear it. Everything he said is fact but in reality is nothing more than what we have been saying and it really is just a high tech way of describing what we already said, even that the two stage is more efficient. Making a decision on which compressor to buy can be extremely confusing for someone who has not had to deal with the things before and it is because of the common myths and mis-understandings, most of which are caused by the very confusing and ridiculously inflated performance ratings put out by the manufacturers. Trying to prove a point with the old "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance then baffle them with BS" approach just makes matters worse. I mean after all that exactly what the hell did he say? Of course a two stage pump of equal displacement to a single stage will produce the same CFM per revolution but so what? The displacement on a two stage vs a single stage with the same motor will probably be different but nothing much else will be the same either on the pump itself, they are two different designs. The point here is that all else being equal, same power, same tank and same plumbing the two stage will produce more CFM per HP than a single stage. It may have more displacement (after all it is a completely different pump) or it may be driven at a different speed but the bottom line is the two stage makes it possible to do this when a single stage could not and that is why a two stage pump is used, not just to increase storage volume. Is he trying to say don't waste money on buying a two stage compressor because a single stage will work just as well? I think most everyone knows better than that so what is the point?

Last edited by oldred; 09-01-2008 at 05:31 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2008, 06:52 AM
F&J F&J is offline
Registered User
 

Last journal entry: 32 Ford cabriolet conversion/windshield
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Connecticut
Age: 62
Posts: 1,571
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
One very imortant, yet short paragraph, was extremely informative to the basic home hobbiest, in my opinion:

Quote:
Shops run a 2 stage compressor to get hi volume storage at minimal cost. Storage tanks cost $, and take up a foot print that also cost $.
In his other post, he explained that the 2 stage units produce much higher PSIs even though that max pressure is not needed to run tools. Put the two statements together, and you bascially can compare the concept of "storing" these higher than needed pressures to the "compact" storage of high pressure gasses that we use; oxy, acey, co/argon.

Like it or not, the home user nearly always runs a single stage for a variety of reasons, and they will get the job done.

Yes, there was a lot of info posted on high end, large manufacturing plant type compressors that did not apply to the home user. However, I just feel that the entire post should not have been condemned for that reason.
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
Eaton Compressor threatens to sue me over "Made in China" compressor post Jon Hotrodders' Lounge 172 08-12-2014 10:04 AM
Paint question for the experts Kevin45 Body - Exterior 34 02-23-2009 05:03 PM
Need advice on a paint job tishmomo Body - Exterior 36 01-15-2008 11:19 AM
Newbie Paint Gun Recomendations dannyg402004@yahoo.c Body - Exterior 2 04-28-2006 10:21 PM
Looking to paint my car with OEM quality finish. Have some Questions Gro Harlem Body - Exterior 12 01-15-2005 06:31 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:39 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.