"David Billington" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"David Billington" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

"David Billington" wrote in message
...

snip



When you say acrylic lacquer is that the same as acrylic enamel
mentioned earlier.


Two peoples separated by a common language. d8-) I won't try to
untangle that one. If you have an old can of it, the ingredients list
probably would straighten it all out.


While the new tins gives details of all the nasty solvents involved the
old ones just contain exactly what it says on the tin, ie paint , no
ingredients list per se .


The material I'm calling enamel goes on much thicker than the lacquer,
and it can't be sanded out without sanding off the protective film of
resin that floats to the top. The really old enamels (before the
mid-'50s or so) contained drying oil rather than plastic resins, and
they took a month or more to dry completely. Acrylic lacquer could be
waxed in a couple of days, if you allowed it to dry well between coats.
Acrylic enamel could be waxed in about two weeks. I imagine it still
can, because I think it's still around, along with the acrylic lacquer.

--
Ed Huntress



Need to find a paint expert for this one I guess. Your lacquer
description sounds like what I know of cellulose properties where the
paint dries by solvent evaporation, the enamel properties sound like
what is often called one pack, coach enamel and other names in the UK
and while has some solvent to flash off and firm the paint, the main
paint binder cures in the presence of oxygen IIRC hence the longer
hardening time compared to the purely solvent based lacquer.


That's it. The confusion may come from the fact that the basic resin in
car lacquer was changed here in the 1950's from nitrocellulose to an
acrylic resin. The behavior of both is very similar, although old-time
restorers and show-car people have often said that you could get a higher
gloss with the nitrocellulose. I don't know that for a fact, only what
others have said.

Enamel was also switched to an acrylic resin base here, a few years later
than lacquer. The drying mechanism still appears to be oxidation, as with
the older enamels. In any case, it behaves similarly to the old enamels
but it dries somewhat quicker. It's still much slower than either type of
lacquer.


I would expect as the paint industry seems to be somewhat International,
pardon the pun, these days that if it happened in the US, it happened here
also at some point but the colloquial term "cellulose" was maintained
generically for a paint with the same basic characteristics but may
explain terms such as "synthetic" on the tins. I started using
International brand cellulose then the supplier switched to PPG ,
Pennsylvania Painted Glass IIRC. Most likely the same with enamel. A
recent look at the PPG UK site still lists cellulose paint for industrial
applications which is still allowed as far as I know.

That's Pittsburgh Plate Glass. g Or it was. I think they just use the
"PPG" now. They're still a big producer of automotive paints.

The first time I saw the terms "cellulose" and "cellulosing" applied to
automotive paint was in a book titled _Sports Car Bodywork_, published in
the UK sometime in the early or mid-'60s (I still have the book). Then I saw
the term again in some British car magazines. So I suspect that PPG used the
term for your market, as it's not a familiar one in the US. That's not to
say it isn't used, but it's not the common term.


There also are alkyd enamels but I won't go there, because now it's
starting to go over my head.


Heard of them but thats about it. I'll stick to the true enamel as I
understand it, ground glass fused to copper or silver substrate so that
gets us back to metal working. Must try enameling on some of my spun
copper shells, maybe even some cloisonne work.

Do you have any photos to post?

--
Ed Huntress