|
Modern car paint and rust
Hi folks,
Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris |
Modern car paint and rust
On 2017-02-12, Christopher Tidy wrote:
Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. I thought that at some point, they started requiring galvanized body panels. i |
Modern car paint and rust
Am Sonntag, 12. Februar 2017 20:02:27 UTC+1 schrieb Ignoramus20243:
I thought that at some point, they started requiring galvanized body panels. This is also true, I think. But I don't see the modern paint cracking and falling off, so I'm wondering what's better about the paint. |
Modern car paint and rust
On 02/12/2017 1:16 PM, Christopher Tidy wrote:
Am Sonntag, 12. Februar 2017 20:02:27 UTC+1 schrieb Ignoramus20243: I thought that at some point, they started requiring galvanized body panels. This is also true, I think. But I don't see the modern paint cracking and falling off, so I'm wondering what's better about the paint. Don't think there's any "requirement" other than what the manufacturer thinks suits their purpose best as far as whether panels are/aren't galvanized (or otherwise treated). I don't know what actually is most common other than there's a tremendous fraction not that isn't even metal; just pretty sure there's no mandate same. The mandates are those for the fuel mileage averages so that means "lighter is better" in ounces quantities. As for paint, what has improved is they've finally figured out formulas that have at least some longevity after the EPA restrictions on VOC's killed all the traditional finishes as not being within those limits. -- |
Modern car paint and rust
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:43:40 -0800 (PST), Christopher Tidy
wrote: Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris Big thing was change to the surface preparation of the steel to either electrostatic wet application or full body dip of a high quality etching primer which I believe contains Zinc. This was combined with the use of high strength steels and "galvanized" steel in rust prone areas. |
Modern car paint and rust
On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 3:01:15 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote:
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:43:40 -0800 (PST), Christopher Tidy wrote: Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris Big thing was change to the surface preparation of the steel to either electrostatic wet application or full body dip of a high quality etching primer which I believe contains Zinc. This was combined with the use of high strength steels and "galvanized" steel in rust prone areas. Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. -- Ed Huntress |
Modern car paint and rust
Am Sonntag, 12. Februar 2017 23:03:10 UTC+1 schrieb :
Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Are these modern coatings two-pack paints? Or some kind of stove enamel which is baked on? I also remember hearing something about paints which contained cyanide at some point. I'd be interested to know the composition, because they seem way better than anything I can buy. Thanks for the replies! Chris |
Modern car paint and rust
On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 7:54:33 PM UTC-5, Christopher Tidy wrote:
Am Sonntag, 12. Februar 2017 23:03:10 UTC+1 schrieb : Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Are these modern coatings two-pack paints? Or some kind of stove enamel which is baked on? I also remember hearing something about paints which contained cyanide at some point. I'd be interested to know the composition, because they seem way better than anything I can buy. Thanks for the replies! Chris I wish I could give you a simple answer, but the chemistry of automobile paints has exploded in many directions over the past ten years or so, and the chemistry is mostly over my head. Around the world, each manufacturer seems to use something different. There are water-born systems and solvent-born systems; two-wet and three-wet systems; integrated primers and self-sealing clear coats (Nissan). It's wild out there. Some of the primers and clear coats are catalyzed before application. I *think* the base coats are not. Some are described as melamine-based; others are described as acrylic, urethane, or polyester. Water-based systems seem to make up the majority. Again, the chemistry is beyond me. Before I retired I was working on an in-depth study of Ford's production, but I didn't get very far. They have a new two-wet system with no clear coat ("monocoat") and it may be the leading edge. I suspect it's from Axalta. If you want to talk to someone who specializes in this stuff, I may be able to get you some names. -- Ed Huntress |
Modern car paint and rust
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:54:28 -0800 (PST), Christopher Tidy
wrote: Am Sonntag, 12. Februar 2017 23:03:10 UTC+1 schrieb : Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Are these modern coatings two-pack paints? Or some kind of stove enamel which is baked on? I also remember hearing something about paints which contained cyanide at some point. I'd be interested to know the composition, because they seem way better than anything I can buy. Thanks for the replies! At some point in the last 2-3 decades, I recall seeing a commercial on TV where the US mfgr touted that both vehicle frames and body panels being dipped in a rust-proofing hot bath of some sort. I quit TV 13 years ago, so it was well before that. The painter at work sprayed my old '72 Int'l Scout with Imron, a 2-part aviation paint. It was over $100/gal way back then ('82, $3-500 now), but a friend had given it to me, the spare from painting his '48 Willys wagon. Tony was the kind of painter who was somehow connected with the paint and he could colormatch and stand up the metalflake replacement paint like the original, so you couldn't tell the difference. A true _artist_. Have you talked with painters or automotive paint supply shops there across the pond, Chris? They're fonts of knowledge, if you can get them to spare you a few minutes. -- Give me the luxuries of life. I can live without the necessities. --anon |
Modern car paint and rust
|
Modern car paint and rust
Am Dienstag, 14. Februar 2017 03:43:47 UTC+1 schrieb :
If you want to talk to someone who specializes in this stuff, I may be able to get you some names. Thanks, Ed. That's a kind offer. Here's the question in a different form. I'm working on a book and I want to know how to get a coating with a similar performance (modern car paint is, as far as I can see, way better than anything I can get in the shop). It doesn't have be a unique or comprehensive answer, but it needs to be a practical and understandable method. Any idea of someone who could help? Best wishes, Chris |
Modern car paint and rust
Am Dienstag, 14. Februar 2017 14:52:42 UTC+1 schrieb Larry Jaques:
Have you talked with painters or automotive paint supply shops there across the pond, Chris? They're fonts of knowledge, if you can get them to spare you a few minutes. Good idea. I don't know of a specialist shop in the area, but I can look for one. |
Modern car paint and rust
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:21:34 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 5:19:11 PM UTC-5, amdx wrote: On 2/12/2017 4:03 PM, wrote: On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 3:01:15 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:43:40 -0800 (PST), Christopher Tidy wrote: Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris Big thing was change to the surface preparation of the steel to either electrostatic wet application or full body dip of a high quality etching primer which I believe contains Zinc. This was combined with the use of high strength steels and "galvanized" steel in rust prone areas. Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Why the change to base plus clear coat? I took an auto body class in high school, we had lacquer and enamel, 44 years ago. The hood on my sons Toyota had faded and was blotchy. So I went to the paint store to buy paint. I thought I wanted lacquer, I was quickly educated that I wanted a base and a clear coat. It turned out good especially for an outdoor job. We did end up with a small hazy area, when we started the motor to move it in the garage, before the dew came. Just one area on the right side near the windshield. I suspect it would buff out, but he took the car back to college, so haven't tried. Mikek Clear coats retain their gloss much longer than standard base coats -- up to eight years for some current ones -- and they contain IR blockers that extend the color life of base coats. They've been standard for years. That is, for the common "three-wet" (primer, base, clear coat) systems used by most OEMs. As I mentioned earlier, Ford, among others, has gone to a "two-wet" system for commercial vehicles and probably will go that way for cars. The current two-wet system used by Ford supposedly maintains gloss for eight years without a clear coat, but it only works in light colors for now. These are chemically so far removed from our experience with lacquers and enamels that it takes an expert to explain them accurately. A number of years back, I had my '90 lumina van in to the dealers for some type of service and the service advisor recomended that I visit thier body shop about the clear coat failure on the (black) area above the front seating section. They gave me a "quote" of $750.00 reduced by 50% to $350.00 to return it to "as new". A few months latter, he practicaly begged me toget it fixed for free. I presume thet it didn't look good for GM's reputation. |
Modern car paint and rust
|
Modern car paint and rust
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:42:21 -0600
Ignoramus20725 wrote: Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? You got any repo lots around where they sell stuff? I've got a big one not too far away and it's very educational to look through. All sorts of models, years and condition with no cleanup, prepping done for resale. I spend most of my time looking underneath the vehicles. The front wheel well on the Honda CRV is quite interesting. Doesn't look like a very long lived design for this area and road salt. Another one that caught my eye was a Buick Rendezvous. The gas filler is located above the rear wheel well. The filler pipe is in the well with a thin protective material over some of it. The Chevy Colorado that has all the emergency brake cable connections inline with where the left front tire will throw all the road spray on them. The 2007 Chevy Silverado that had rear frame rails with major crusty rust trouble. Most people look at the body color/paint, interior... I get down and look all around underneath. The exhaust, drive shaft, suspension, wheel wells, emergency brake cables, frame rails :) -- Leon Fisk Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b Remove no.spam for email |
Modern car paint and rust
On 02/16/2017 8:06 AM, Leon Fisk wrote:
.... Most people look at the body color/paint, interior... I get down and look all around underneath. The exhaust, drive shaft, suspension, wheel wells, emergency brake cables, frame rails :) Years and years ago (before 1978 as hadn't made the TN from VA move yet) used to travel to Cleveland and Wickliffe, OH, regularly for employer as had a major subsidiary/vendor there. Once coming back to catch the corporate flight back to Lynchburg that evening, an old rust-bucket pickup literally did hit a serious pothole in the pavement and the frame buckled behind the cab to the pavement. Created quite a backup pretty quickly; fortunately I was able to get past and on to make the flight but was educational! I remember also that all the freeways were just littered with mufflers and other body parts that had rusted to the point of falling off...not what we were used to in Lynchburg, VA, or even in KS where, while it's cold, it's so much drier don't have the rust issues. -- |
Modern car paint and rust
On 2/16/2017 7:42 AM, Ignoramus20725 wrote:
On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? A bit of an open ended question. I have a 97 Toyota T-100 that still looks beautiful and runs great. Will admit we had the sides of the bed repainted, not because of any problem but because we used as a work truck and the idiots that loaded it rubbed their belt buckles on the bed as they loaded it. They put a bunch of scratches in the paint. I'm in the Florida sun and after 20 years the roof and hood still look good, we do garage it though. Mikek --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Modern car paint and rust
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:42:21 -0600, Ignoramus20725
wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Yes. -- In order to become the master, the politician poses as the servant. --Charles de Gaulle |
Modern car paint and rust
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:13:56 -0600
amdx wrote: snip I have a 97 Toyota T-100 that still looks beautiful and runs great. Will admit we had the sides of the bed repainted, not because of any problem but because we used as a work truck and the idiots that loaded it rubbed their belt buckles on the bed as they loaded it. They put a bunch of scratches in the paint. I'm in the Florida sun and after 20 years the roof and hood still look good, we do garage it though. They have a reputation in the rustbelt :) https://duckduckgo.com/html/?q=toyot...t+recall&kd=-1 -- Leon Fisk Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b Remove no.spam for email |
Modern car paint and rust
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:42:21 -0600, Ignoramus20725
wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? 25 years if you take care of them. 5 to 7 if you don't. My daughter's Honda is10? years old and the body is still spotless - and she has had virtually no repairs. It is serviced regularly - the first years by the dealer now by her Fiance who is a HD Truck mechanic. |
Modern car paint and rust
"Ignoramus20725" wrote in
message ... On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? My 2000 CRV still looks nearly new, because I welded up a few small rust holes and wax it yearly. -jsw |
Modern car paint and rust
On 2/16/2017 10:55 AM, Leon Fisk wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:13:56 -0600 amdx wrote: snip I have a 97 Toyota T-100 that still looks beautiful and runs great. Will admit we had the sides of the bed repainted, not because of any problem but because we used as a work truck and the idiots that loaded it rubbed their belt buckles on the bed as they loaded it. They put a bunch of scratches in the paint. I'm in the Florida sun and after 20 years the roof and hood still look good, we do garage it though. They have a reputation in the rustbelt :) https://duckduckgo.com/html/?q=toyot...t+recall&kd=-1 WOw! I'll need to climb under and check it out. I expect I won't see any problems, it's been a Florida truck all it's life, so no snow or salt on the underside. It just rolled over 100,000 miles in the last two weeks. Hmm, another 20 years will make me 81, I might need to purchase another truck before I die. ;-) Thanks for the heads up on the rust problem. Mikek --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Modern car paint and rust
On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:56:10 -0600, amdx wrote:
On 2/16/2017 10:55 AM, Leon Fisk wrote: On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:13:56 -0600 amdx wrote: snip I have a 97 Toyota T-100 that still looks beautiful and runs great. Will admit we had the sides of the bed repainted, not because of any problem but because we used as a work truck and the idiots that loaded it rubbed their belt buckles on the bed as they loaded it. They put a bunch of scratches in the paint. I'm in the Florida sun and after 20 years the roof and hood still look good, we do garage it though. They have a reputation in the rustbelt :) https://duckduckgo.com/html/?q=toyot...t+recall&kd=-1 WOw! I'll need to climb under and check it out. I expect I won't see any problems, it's been a Florida truck all it's life, so no snow or salt on the underside. It just rolled over 100,000 miles in the last two weeks. Hmm, another 20 years will make me 81, I might need to purchase another truck before I die. ;-) Thanks for the heads up on the rust problem. Mikek --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus If it has no rust yet, get a good oil type rust prevention spray on it. Do they have Krown or RustChek down there? Or mabee Rusty Jones?? |
Modern car paint and rust
On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:56:10 -0600
amdx wrote: snip WOw! I'll need to climb under and check it out. I expect I won't see any problems, it's been a Florida truck all it's life, so no snow or salt on the underside. It just rolled over 100,000 miles in the last two weeks. Hmm, another 20 years will make me 81, I might need to purchase another truck before I die. ;-) Thanks for the heads up on the rust problem. No biggie but it you get around to looking I would be curious to know how it looks :) A friend/neighbor bought a 1976 Chevy K20 Pickup from Montana last summer. Made a trip to trailer it back. I had a 1976 C10 Shortbox Pickup that was ridiculously rusted out by 1980. Bottom of the tailgate, doors, front fenders, front of the hood, inner box fenders... It was two years old when I bought it and immediately had it rustproofed. It still looked good then... Anyway the truck he brought back is in immaculate condition. I had warned him about that year and rust but was I ever wrong. Still has the original paint. He just did some routine maintenance, tires, exhaust, cab mounts... and drove it. It has been appraised at $18000 to $22000 if I recall correctly. So where you live can make a big difference... -- Leon Fisk Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b Remove no.spam for email |
Modern car paint and rust
On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:45:56 -0400, Leon Fisk
wrote: On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:56:10 -0600 amdx wrote: snip WOw! I'll need to climb under and check it out. I expect I won't see any problems, it's been a Florida truck all it's life, so no snow or salt on the underside. It just rolled over 100,000 miles in the last two weeks. Hmm, another 20 years will make me 81, I might need to purchase another truck before I die. ;-) Thanks for the heads up on the rust problem. No biggie but it you get around to looking I would be curious to know how it looks :) A friend/neighbor bought a 1976 Chevy K20 Pickup from Montana last summer. Made a trip to trailer it back. I had a 1976 C10 Shortbox Pickup that was ridiculously rusted out by 1980. Bottom of the tailgate, doors, front fenders, front of the hood, inner box fenders... It was two years old when I bought it and immediately had it rustproofed. It still looked good then... Anyway the truck he brought back is in immaculate condition. I had warned him about that year and rust but was I ever wrong. Still has the original paint. He just did some routine maintenance, tires, exhaust, cab mounts... and drove it. It has been appraised at $18000 to $22000 if I recall correctly. So where you live can make a big difference... HUGE difference |
Modern car paint and rust
On 2017-02-16, Leon Fisk wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:42:21 -0600 Ignoramus20725 wrote: Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? You got any repo lots around where they sell stuff? I've got a big one not too far away and it's very educational to look through. All sorts of models, years and condition with no cleanup, prepping done for resale. I spend most of my time looking underneath the vehicles. The front wheel well on the Honda CRV is quite interesting. Doesn't look like a very long lived design for this area and road salt. Another one that caught my eye was a Buick Rendezvous. The gas filler is located above the rear wheel well. The filler pipe is in the well with a thin protective material over some of it. The Chevy Colorado that has all the emergency brake cable connections inline with where the left front tire will throw all the road spray on them. The 2007 Chevy Silverado that had rear frame rails with major crusty rust trouble. Most people look at the body color/paint, interior... I get down and look all around underneath. The exhaust, drive shaft, suspension, wheel wells, emergency brake cables, frame rails :) Very interesting. My wife had a CR/V for 10 years and it looked almost new despite being parked outside. She is a gentle car user, for sure, but still for Illinois it was impressive. Now she has a Honda Pilot, the same story, great quality vehicle. i |
Modern car paint and rust
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 7:25:30 PM UTC-5, Christopher Tidy wrote:
Am Dienstag, 14. Februar 2017 03:43:47 UTC+1 schrieb : If you want to talk to someone who specializes in this stuff, I may be able to get you some names. Thanks, Ed. That's a kind offer. Here's the question in a different form. I'm working on a book and I want to know how to get a coating with a similar performance (modern car paint is, as far as I can see, way better than anything I can get in the shop). It doesn't have be a unique or comprehensive answer, but it needs to be a practical and understandable method. Any idea of someone who could help? Best wishes, Chris Sorry for the delay, Chris. I had surgery, and ten days later, my wife had surgery. I haven't been online for a while. It sounds like you're talking about an aftermarket paint, right? Is it actually for cars, or something else? And are you thinking of "performance" in terms of rust resistance, adhesion, gloss, or what? Whenever I have questions like that, I go to DuPont, PPG, or similar companies and explain that I'm in need of an engineer, because I have technical questions. Sometimes customer service will direct me; other times, I have to go to marketing or press relations and explain that I'm writing something about it. That always works, although it can take a little time. Since you're writing a book, you should be able to leap that hurdle. If you're not comfortable doing that, let me know what info you want and I'll get you some names and contact info. If you'd rather do it my email, the address above is valid (edhuntress2 [at] gmail.com. Be aware that there are several approaches to protecting steel with aftermarket products: barriers; conversion coatings; and sacrificial coatings (zinc-loaded epoxy, for example). There is a lot of territory to cover. -- Ed Huntress |
Modern car paint and rust
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote:
On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. -- Ed Huntress |
Modern car paint and rust
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:03:45 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. A lot of today's vehicles have a 10 year rust "perforation" warranty. If you get a bubble in the paint you KNOW there is perforation allowing moisture in from the back. |
Modern car paint and rust
On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:03:45 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. A lot of today's vehicles have a 10 year rust "perforation" warranty. If you get a bubble in the paint you KNOW there is perforation allowing moisture in from the back. Right. Those warranties generally are for perforation. The eight and ten-year terms I was talking about are for gloss -- and they aren't guarantees. As I think I mentioned, the newer automotive paint systems are looking for gloss, usually for the clear coat, but in some cases for the base coat with no clear coat (like Ford's new system, which they aren't using for cars yet). -- Ed Huntress |
Modern car paint and rust
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:09:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:03:45 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. A lot of today's vehicles have a 10 year rust "perforation" warranty. If you get a bubble in the paint you KNOW there is perforation allowing moisture in from the back. Right. Those warranties generally are for perforation. The eight and ten-year terms I was talking about are for gloss -- and they aren't guarantees. As I think I mentioned, the newer automotive paint systems are looking for gloss, usually for the clear coat, but in some cases for the base coat with no clear coat (like Ford's new system, which they aren't using for cars yet). Even Ford's "clear coat" in the early 2000s isn't really "clear" - it is a translucent colour coat (It's pealing a few spots on the '02 Taurus. |
Modern car paint and rust
On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 11:49:35 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:09:42 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:03:45 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. A lot of today's vehicles have a 10 year rust "perforation" warranty. If you get a bubble in the paint you KNOW there is perforation allowing moisture in from the back. Right. Those warranties generally are for perforation. The eight and ten-year terms I was talking about are for gloss -- and they aren't guarantees.. As I think I mentioned, the newer automotive paint systems are looking for gloss, usually for the clear coat, but in some cases for the base coat with no clear coat (like Ford's new system, which they aren't using for cars yet). Even Ford's "clear coat" in the early 2000s isn't really "clear" - it is a translucent colour coat (It's pealing a few spots on the '02 Taurus. I'm keeping an eye on my 2004 Focus and my 2004 Sonata. So far, they're both bright and shiny, with no rust (except under the hood of the Focus, which has what looks like plain carbon steel fasteners under the hood. Stupid, to save maybe 50 cents over galvanized or stainless.) -- Ed Huntress |
Modern car paint and rust
On 22/02/17 04:57, wrote:
On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 11:49:35 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:09:42 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:03:45 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. A lot of today's vehicles have a 10 year rust "perforation" warranty. If you get a bubble in the paint you KNOW there is perforation allowing moisture in from the back. Right. Those warranties generally are for perforation. The eight and ten-year terms I was talking about are for gloss -- and they aren't guarantees. As I think I mentioned, the newer automotive paint systems are looking for gloss, usually for the clear coat, but in some cases for the base coat with no clear coat (like Ford's new system, which they aren't using for cars yet). Even Ford's "clear coat" in the early 2000s isn't really "clear" - it is a translucent colour coat (It's pealing a few spots on the '02 Taurus. I'm keeping an eye on my 2004 Focus and my 2004 Sonata. So far, they're both bright and shiny, with no rust (except under the hood of the Focus, which has what looks like plain carbon steel fasteners under the hood. Stupid, to save maybe 50 cents over galvanized or stainless.) A mate works in engine design and has worked on a number of projects for Ford and he hates their projects as he said they make you justify every change just to save fractions of a Euro cent. Likely someone has thought long and hard about those fasteners and decided they could get away with it. My mate mentioned the Ford baked potato joke which he said was funny but all too true http://www.carspyshots.net/showthread.php?t=9613 . |
Modern car paint and rust
On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 1:43:44 PM UTC-5, Christopher Tidy wrote:
Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris Here's how cheap Ford is. About 15 yrs. ago I was reading the latest Popular Mechanics auto advice column. A guy wrote in with a concern about his oil pressure reading in his new Ford F-150. He said he had noticed when it was started cold, the oil pressure always came up to the exact same level and never decreased once the engine got warm, as his previous pickup had done. The pressure always remained at the exact same place no matter engine temperature or RPM. The auto advice guy at PM said on his year/model of pickup, Ford had replaced the pressure transmitter with a pressure switch with a fixed resistance. When the switch closed, it would always deflect the oil pressure needle to the same location. In other words, an idiot light. As far as I've seen, no other auto manufacturer ever pulled one like that. Saved them what? $1.50 a truck? So, here you are doing 70 on the interstate all day and one or more cam bearings are starting to go. From personal experience, that's always a gradual decrease of oil pressure. By the time the oil pressure gauge on your P.O.S. Ford pickup drops to zero and the backup idiot light comes on, the engine has been operating way too long on insufficient oil pressure and is likely already trashed. A guy I worked with had a new Ford pickup. I read him the column and he said,"That's just the way my truck acts!". Now I don't know if they still practice this world class chicken^&*(, but I've had my last Ford. |
Modern car paint and rust
On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 5:30:16 AM UTC-5, David Billington wrote:
On 22/02/17 04:57, wrote: On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 11:49:35 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:09:42 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:03:45 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. A lot of today's vehicles have a 10 year rust "perforation" warranty.. If you get a bubble in the paint you KNOW there is perforation allowing moisture in from the back. Right. Those warranties generally are for perforation. The eight and ten-year terms I was talking about are for gloss -- and they aren't guarantees. As I think I mentioned, the newer automotive paint systems are looking for gloss, usually for the clear coat, but in some cases for the base coat with no clear coat (like Ford's new system, which they aren't using for cars yet). Even Ford's "clear coat" in the early 2000s isn't really "clear" - it is a translucent colour coat (It's pealing a few spots on the '02 Taurus. I'm keeping an eye on my 2004 Focus and my 2004 Sonata. So far, they're both bright and shiny, with no rust (except under the hood of the Focus, which has what looks like plain carbon steel fasteners under the hood. Stupid, to save maybe 50 cents over galvanized or stainless.) A mate works in engine design and has worked on a number of projects for Ford and he hates their projects as he said they make you justify every change just to save fractions of a Euro cent. Likely someone has thought long and hard about those fasteners and decided they could get away with it. My mate mentioned the Ford baked potato joke which he said was funny but all too true http://www.carspyshots.net/showthread.php?t=9613 . Ha-ha! That's a good one. -- Ed Huntress |
Modern car paint and rust
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:57:35 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 11:49:35 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:09:42 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-5, Clare wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:03:45 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 8:42:27 AM UTC-5, Ignoramus20725 wrote: On 2017-02-12, wrote: Right. It's better coatings, better primers and protection, and better application. Read, water-based coatings that often are based on urethanes; phosphate and weldable, etching primers; galvanizing in rust-prone areas; and electrophoresis and electrostatic application. The first water-based coatings -- used into the '80s by some manufacturers -- had poor adhesion and didn't weather well. They're MUCH better now. All of this became more necessary as body panels got thinner, with the use of AHSS (advanced high-strength steels; a continuing evolution of the HSLA [high-strength, low-alloy] steels that were first used in the '70s). Rust is potentially a bigger problem than ever because the steel is thinner. Ed, if I buy a modern car like a Honda, how long can I realistically expect them to last? Jeez, that's above my pay grade, Ig. There are just too many variables. I can tell you, though, that eight years is more or less the industry benchmark these days, and when you dig into their technical literature, you'll find that ten years is a frequent target for the latest treatments. A lot of today's vehicles have a 10 year rust "perforation" warranty. If you get a bubble in the paint you KNOW there is perforation allowing moisture in from the back. Right. Those warranties generally are for perforation. The eight and ten-year terms I was talking about are for gloss -- and they aren't guarantees. As I think I mentioned, the newer automotive paint systems are looking for gloss, usually for the clear coat, but in some cases for the base coat with no clear coat (like Ford's new system, which they aren't using for cars yet). Even Ford's "clear coat" in the early 2000s isn't really "clear" - it is a translucent colour coat (It's pealing a few spots on the '02 Taurus. I'm keeping an eye on my 2004 Focus and my 2004 Sonata. So far, they're both bright and shiny, with no rust (except under the hood of the Focus, which has what looks like plain carbon steel fasteners under the hood. Stupid, to save maybe 50 cents over galvanized or stainless.) Stainless never used under the hood - nor Galvanized We used to use either electro-zinc or more commonlt cadmium plating - but it is virtually impossible to do cadmium plating in North America today with EPA rules. The choice is plain steel American bolts or Chinese Cadmium. What would YOUR choice be??? |
Modern car paint and rust
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:29:44 -0800 (PST), Garrett Fulton
wrote: On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 1:43:44 PM UTC-5, Christopher Tidy wrote: Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris Here's how cheap Ford is. About 15 yrs. ago I was reading the latest Popular Mechanics auto advice column. A guy wrote in with a concern about his oil pressure reading in his new Ford F-150. He said he had noticed when it was started cold, the oil pressure always came up to the exact same level and never decreased once the engine got warm, as his previous pickup had done. The pressure always remained at the exact same place no matter engine temperature or RPM. The auto advice guy at PM said on his year/model of pickup, Ford had replaced the pressure transmitter with a pressure switch with a fixed resistance. When the switch closed, it would always deflect the oil pressure needle to the same location. In other words, an idiot light. As far as I've seen, no other auto manufacturer ever pulled one like that. Saved them what? $1.50 a truck? So, here you are doing 70 on the interstate all day and one or more cam bearings are starting to go. From personal experience, that's always a gradual decrease of oil pressure. By the time the oil pressure gauge on your P.O.S. Ford pickup drops to zero and the backup idiot light comes on, the engine has been operating way too long on insufficient oil pressure and is likely already trashed. A guy I worked with had a new Ford pickup. I read him the column and he said,"That's just the way my truck acts!". Now I don't know if they still practice this world class chicken^&*(, but I've had my last Ford. They have virtually ALL done it on at least one model, and it was not a cost saving measure, in the main. It was because they had customers complaininh about high cold oil pressure, or low hot idle oil pressure, and they were all wasting WAY too much time and effort trying to explain why it was "normal". To avoid class action lawsuits for faulty oil pressure they simply made a n "idiot guage". Looks like "higher content" than an idiot light. |
Modern car paint and rust
Garrett Fulton wrote:
On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 1:43:44 PM UTC-5, Christopher Tidy wrote: Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris Here's how cheap Ford is. I was looking at something about the new 2018 Mustang and they were saying it was the largest V8 ever installed. I don't remember if it was for just among Mustangs or Fords in general or in anything else though. |
Modern car paint and rust
"Garrett Fulton" wrote in message
... On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 1:43:44 PM UTC-5, Christopher Tidy wrote: Hi folks, Quick question. Many cars from the 1980s used to rust badly. Sometime in the 1990s, this changed - and quite suddenly. Does anyone know what specific changes were made to the paint composition and surface treatment? I can only find vague allusions in most articles. Thanks, Chris Here's how cheap Ford is. About 15 yrs. ago I was reading the latest Popular Mechanics auto advice column. A guy wrote in with a concern about his oil pressure reading in his new Ford F-150. He said he had noticed when it was started cold, the oil pressure always came up to the exact same level and never decreased once the engine got warm, as his previous pickup had done. The pressure always remained at the exact same place no matter engine temperature or RPM. The auto advice guy at PM said on his year/model of pickup, Ford had replaced the pressure transmitter with a pressure switch with a fixed resistance. When the switch closed, it would always deflect the oil pressure needle to the same location. In other words, an idiot light. As far as I've seen, no other auto manufacturer ever pulled one like that. Saved them what? $1.50 a truck? So, here you are doing 70 on the interstate all day and one or more cam bearings are starting to go. From personal experience, that's always a gradual decrease of oil pressure. By the time the oil pressure gauge on your P.O.S. Ford pickup drops to zero and the backup idiot light comes on, the engine has been operating way too long on insufficient oil pressure and is likely already trashed. A guy I worked with had a new Ford pickup. I read him the column and he said,"That's just the way my truck acts!". Now I don't know if they still practice this world class chicken^&*(, but I've had my last Ford. ================= My 1991 Ford Ranger has the gauge package instead of lights and all but Oil are functional. The Oil gauge uses a pressure switch and a resistor that you can bypass if you install a variable-resistance sender. http://forums.tccoa.com/37-work-prog...auge-pics.html I bought the $20 sensor and may install it if I have to remove the dash for another reason. However the gauge as-is instantly shows whether the engine has adequate pressure or not, and the dial face isn't graduated in pressure units. Is there a reason other than cost for not using stainless hardware under the hood? I've been using it to replace broken plastic clips, though not graded steel bolts. -jsw |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:32 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter