Why Old Cars Paints Are Better Than Modern 2 Stage Paint Systems??

I

imported_aqua

New member
Hi



I have heard that old vintage cars (before 1970) have better quality and better shine, reflexion and depth that current ones.



I have been told old one stage systems included plumb in their formulas. The use of plumb in car paint was prohibited due to enviromental issues.



Is that true? If yes, ... is the shine superior on these cars?



I am hard trying to understand what chemical differences make those paints look better.







I hope any of you may know it.



Thanks
 
yes, the older paints were lead based (Pb) which made them much harder and durable.



The EPA has banned and regulated the chemicals that can be put in new paints, which has made them weaker
 
Lead was banned for residential home paint not car paint. Lead is still used, at least up to 2001, in automotive paint. BASF eliminated lead in 2001 I believe. I'm fairly sure most brand automotive paints still contain lead, especially in yellows,reds and oranges.
 
Quote: Why Old Cars Paints Are Better Than Modern 2 Stage Paint Systems??



~One man’s opinion / observations ~



Could it be a combination of things, lead, Petroleum distillates and an oil- based as opposed to the newer (softer) water-based paints.



A two-stage paint should be more reflective / have better ‘depth’ because of the polyurethane clear coat



FWIW: Plumbum is Latin for lead, hence Plumber, one who works with lead. Pb is the scientific(chemical element) symbol for lead





~Hope this helps~



Experience unshared; is knowledge wasted…/ Jon

justadumbarchitect * so I question everything *
 
Posted by TOWGT



FWIW: Plumbum is Latin for lead, hence Plumber, one who works with lead. Pb is the scientific(chemical element) symbol for lead.
Click to expand...



You learn something new every day!
 
They are called lead based paints because the pigments used have lead in them. I don't know enough about it, but I think that lead based paints had less color drift, and less metamarism.
 
I'd like to respectfully disagree.



As a long time Mopar restorer, I have always been glad to see perfectly preserved cars from the 50s, 60s and early 70s. They are a treasure trove of info on correctness.



That said, paints may have been harder, but the finish (at least in Mopars) was orange peeled, often had runs or thin spots and did not have anywhere near the reflection or depth that modern cars have.
 
I call Shenanigans, today's paints are leaps and bounds above what we had 20 years ago. They are softer yes but they are far superior than anything ever produced, to say otherwise is romanticizing the past.



I hear people they don't build cars like they used to and I have to say thank god.
 
Just to chime in,



Today's paints are generally much harder, not softer than traditional lacquers and enamels. We cover this every Saturday at the detailing clinics.



Clear coats are dramatically harder than traditional single stage paints. Here’s the problem, people confuse softer with Scratch-Sensitive.



Clear coats are harder, but they still scratch very easily. That's why you see so many companies switch to chemical cleaners, or like Meguiar's has been offering for over 100 years, diminishing abrasives. Clear coats are easily scratched, but difficult to remove scratches out of. They are also easily dulled after they are polished to a high gloss.



Question



Have you ever heard of a Hand-Rubbed Lacquer Finish?



(The answer is supposed to be yes)



Now, have you ever heard of a hand-rubbed basecoat/clear coat finish?



(The answer is supposed to no)



By hand-rubbed, I don't mean to simply apply a coat of wax and wipe it off. I mean the process by which craftsman of old would start out with a coarse rubbing compound, working their way up by following the coarse compounds with finer polishing compounds, and then finishing with some type of hand glaze to produce a deep, wet, smooth glossy finish.



There are some exceptions. Recently, an Engineer from Honda Motor Corporation brought Meguiar’s a Honda Civic or Accord, (Can remember, I have the pictures however), and asked Meguiar's to test and evaluate the finish to see it could be repaired, (defects removed and polished to a high gloss). We found the paint, a non-catalyzed clear coat, to be extremely soft, and extremely difficult to remove defects out of and leave a flawless finish. It was very prone to marring and dulling.



So while there are exceptions, for the most part, modern catalyzed, 2-part paint systems, baked on at the factory level are extremely hard in comparison to solvent-born lacquers and enamels.



By the way, just over the weekend I worked on two antique Rolls Royce automobiles, both with the original nitrocellulose lacquer finishes and like I have posted here, these finishes were very soft, and very easy to affect by hand.



Rolls Royce at Meguiar's!







FWIW



Mike
 
I found it very instructive. A Autopian fellow jgv told me you are an expert in car paints. I also tried to add this thread in www.meguiarsonline.com but some computer identification problems.



According to your words and reading carefully.... may I conclude that old single stage paints are more difficult to scratch that bc/cc although bc/cc much harder?



I guess this is the main point of the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top