Single Stage vs base-clear paint

Andy Wylie · March 18, 2008, 06:36:25 AM

Quote from: MikeH on February 21, 2008, 04:36:12 PM
Elmo, your'e right of course about the dangers associated with breathing these paints.? You'll note I said with a proper respirator and gun.?

Note Elmo said airfed respirator, don't be tempted to use an ordinary respirator as isocyanates are hydroscopic and attracted to the moisture in your eyes.

mvair · March 18, 2008, 01:26:18 AM

Thanks for all the comments on this topic. I still have not made up my mind for sure. The only thing I have decided is to get the car painted soon. Most parts of California are required to switch to the new water-borne paint in just a few months. If I wait too long, there will no decision to make!

MikeH · February 22, 2008, 09:34:14 AM

That is a beautiful old coupe. It looks so nice and original in black. I can't see why anyone would
object to a brilliant shine. I have several Chrysler factory photos of new cars in the early thirties
at dealer showrooms and auto shows and those cars fairly gleamed. They look as shiney in those
photos as the shinyest finish availabe today. If the body work is not perfect though, the luster
highlights the flaws. I personally feel the high gloss enhances the look of any car, new or old.
An originally restored car is just that - whether it's shiney or dull.

plym_46 · February 21, 2008, 08:59:50 PM

Mine was painted with single stage urethane, color sanded and buffed.? It was deemed too shiney by the judges at the Vermont Plymouth meet.? in other words I lost points.

That said I like it better than base clear for ease of touch up, is in scratch and ding repair.? It had been 6 years since paint and it needs a general buffing this spring.

MikeH · February 21, 2008, 04:36:12 PM

Elmo, your'e right of course about the dangers associated with breathing these paints. You'll note I said with a proper respirator and gun. Anyone who fools with this stuff should make sure he knows what he is doing. I for one do my own painting, have for years and am perfectly healthy because I
have taken precautions. I don't even mix the stuff without a mask. I gave up smoking 30 years ago too.

Mike

elmo · February 21, 2008, 04:30:45 AM

as i said before it is your choice what you paint your car with ,but i must answer a couple of statements from MikeH. Iwould like to know how you can make base/clear look like a lacquer finish , and if you can why use base/clear ,also the statementthat lacquer deterioates, all paint will if not looked after properly. I could show you some cars that i sprayed over 30 years ago in acrylic lacquer and they still look almost as good as when they were first painted . which has nothing to do with my work , the owners have looked after them like they should have been, as for the lacquer being bad for the enviroment it is no worse than the gas we feed our cars .also the hardener that is used in base/clear and most two pot paints is full of isosyanate which in can tell you from experiance is not very good for your health, it is an acumulative poison and once in your system stays there and the more you use it the more it builds up. it should never be used unless a airfed respirator and a spraybooth designed for it are used. in other words two pot paints are not for the ameture painter , and in fact in some countrys it is against the law to sell it other than a qualified painter.i am sorry if i seem to come across to strong but i can tell you from experiance about isosyanate and would not like anyone to suffer in the future from using it without the right equipment

MikeH · February 20, 2008, 11:02:03 PM

I personally think either base/clear or single stage is the way to go.

I think it's splitting hairs to compare them. Both are much better than the old stuff like acrylic enamel,
or any kind of lacquer.

As for authenticity either one can be made to look like a lacquer finish or an or a synthetic enamel
finish. I know there are some purists in the club who swear by lacquer, but enjoy it while you can
because it is becoming unavailable because of air pollution issues.

The reason I like the single stage is it just seems more suitable for an old car. It sprays just like
enamel and if you know what you're doing, you can get just that hint of orange peel that totally
replicates the old enamel finishes. It dries very quickly which means it can be sprayed outside
or in the garage and color sands and buffs easily. It's very resistant to chipping or staining, covers
extremely well. Some restorers are reluctant to spray their own cars, but with the right respirator
and a good gun, anybody can do it as long as you prep and clean properly and use the the right
hardener and reducer. If you hang a curtain, let it dry, block it down and shoot it again. If you
get a few nubs, color sand them out and wheel it down with your buffer.

After painting a number of cars over the years with acrylic lacquer I can tell you I will never go back.
They look absolutely beautiful for a while but will not hold up to the sun, or solvents. And lacquer is very brittle so it can chip especially on edges. If you get it on too thick (which is common) it will deterorate. And lacquer thinner is so hot it reacts poorly with enamel undercoats, plastic, etc.

The exhorbitant cost of a professional paint job today was mentioned. You have to have a pretty
nice car to make it worth a $2,000.00 to $5,000.00 expenditure. You can pay a little less for hardened acrylic enamel, but it's old technology compared to the modern urethanes.

There may be folks who don't like it for one reason or another. Mayble the job was done poorly,
maybe it was cheap paint, but if you go with high quality paints like PPG, DuPont, Sikkens, RM,
Sherwin-Williams, etc. you won't be sorry. Either base/clear or single stage will give you the best
finish possible, and both are easy to touch up.

Blue-Skies · February 20, 2008, 07:27:15 PM

Very happy with the single stage paint on my '50...

Click here for a shiney pic... http://www.50plymouth.com/03-otr/Tulsa07/tulsatrip124.jpg

and this is with 1,500 miles of road grime on the car on the way home from Tulsa last year...

Works for me.

Pete

57plymouth · February 20, 2008, 03:01:22 PM

Quote from: MikeH on February 19, 2008, 08:35:43 PM
Single stage urethane looks great.? Can be color sanded, and is very durable.? You might check-out PPG Concept.

Mike

That's exaclty what's on my truck and I am not happy with it.

You can say what you will, but no single stage paint looks as good as clear coat. It's too much work to strip and prep a car to make it look bad with single stage.

Jim Benjaminson · February 20, 2008, 02:59:53 PM

Your car was originally painted in enamel. Why? A better shine and less maintenance over the years. The super shiny paints don't look right on an old car (my opinion) and a well polished enamel will shine with the best of them - plus you don't have to wax it every time you take it out. Nitrocellulose got a lot of "press" but it requires (required) a lot more work to maintain its lustre. And it has a tendency to crack over time which may add "patina" to the car but thats about all....

Jim Yergin · February 20, 2008, 11:31:13 AM

elmo54,
My local paint and body shop supplier no longer carries acrylic lacquer paint. I need more to finish my car, can you recommend a good source?
Thanks.
Jim Yergin

elmo · February 20, 2008, 01:49:37 AM

Its not for me to say what paint to put on your car, it all depends on what you are going to use it for .but i will say as a car painter for at least the last 40 odd years ( actually i shoudn;t admit but closer to 45). if it was mine i would'nt put base,clear on it theres nothing wrong with the paint in fact it is great for modern cars or hot rods for which it was mainly bought out for , the oldys never had anywhere that gloss when they came out.You say the paint your car came out in is not available now, well depending on where it was built it would have had either single stage spraying enamel (baked on ) or nitrocellulose lacquer. spraying enamel is still available , but again in my humble opinion is rubbish, unless your are prepared to put in a lot of work waxing it at least twice every month, nitocellulose lacquer as far as i know is no longer available, but acrylic lacquer is , and the only difference is one has an nitrocellulose base and the other an acrylic resin base which makes it more durable , plus an ease of touch up that you will not get with the other types of paint you mentioned. but as i said before it all comes down to your choice

MikeH · February 19, 2008, 08:35:43 PM

Single stage urethane looks great. Can be color sanded, and is very durable. You might check-out PPG Concept.

Mike

Wm Steed · February 19, 2008, 12:39:02 PM

I had my '39 Plym painted with single stage paint. Personally I don't care for the 'wet look' that clear coat has. The clear coat paint also has a tendency to yellow, turn milky and/or peal. The majority of the people that look at my '39 think it is painted with two stage paint. It is also kind of funny that at first look, many people think my car is a 'kit car' (fiber-glass) because the body and body alignment is so good.

You might find that a really good single stage paint job is more difficult to do than the two stage base-clear....Bill

57plymouth · February 18, 2008, 07:16:02 PM

I know that if I went through all the trouble to strip a car, fix the body work, block the primer over and over, I'd use good paint. Base-clear is the only way to go. Why bother even spraying it if you are only going to use some crappy enamel. Just use a brush. It won't look nearly as good, and in five years it will be flat and crappy. Then what have you accomplished?

Base-clear. Do it one time and do it right. Don't throw your money in the trash.

mvair · February 18, 2008, 05:08:25 PM

I am getting ready to have the body of my '41 painted. I have always planned to go with a single stage enamel. Now I want to confirm that my decision is correct. I want to show the car as a factory original restoration. I know that means I should use a single stage paint. Having said that, it seems people are more often drawn to a car that has a real shine and less often to one that looks orginal with less luster. What's the opinion of those reading this? Modern paint costs hundreds of dollars a gallon and a straight foward paint jobs cost several thousand dollars. I don't want to spend this kind of money trying to be "original" and have the car show less than it's best. This is espeically true since the "original" paints are no longer available anyway.

Thanks for your opinion.