Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 65
  1. #31
    The Old Grey Whistle Test togwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida, USA - London, England
    Posts
    5,464
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Accumulator
    Huh, I thought it was 0.6 mil :think: And I would`ve gotten that number from you Anyhow...







    What about that reclearing? It is as simple as reshooting the panel with only clear (no basecoat)?


    The following are the maximum allowable clear coat reductions the major USA car manufacturers will allow before the paint warranty becomes void; Chrysler- 0.5 Mil (12µ) Ford – 0.3 Mil (7.5 µ) GM – 0.5 Mil (12µ) (Source - Automotive International)
    What gets overlooked too often is that one must be a student before becoming a teacher.

  2. #32
    Rasky's Auto Detailing RaskyR1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Eden Prairie, MN
    Posts
    5,011
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hey Fermani...



    Since we are talking about all this it would be interesting to hear/see how the leveled hood on your car has held up over the last 2 years now? For those who may not know, David removed significantly more clear than the manufacture recommends on the hood of his brand new Fusion (Ford .3 Mil). On top of that, the car is also exposed to the Florida elements 24/7, and it`s also being washed using Dawn or harsh touch-less washes with no added protection on half the hood (Opti-Guard on the other half).



    David, did you by any chance take before and after PTG readings on the hood? I`m assuming you removed a good 15 microns (.6 Mil) , if not more...



    Only reason I bring this up is that I`ve seen a lot of conflicting information on this topic (UV migration) and it would be nice to see solid data or evidence on the matter.





    David`s car



    Thanks,

    Rasky

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    86,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TOGWT
    The following are the maximum allowable clear coat reductions the major USA car manufacturers will allow before the paint warranty becomes void; Chrysler- 0.5 Mil (12µ) Ford – 0.3 Mil (7.5 µ) GM – 0.5 Mil (12µ) (Source - Automotive International)


    Good heavens! That wouldn`t allow for much serious correction at all.



    I do think they`re erring on the side of caution though; I`ve taken Fords and GMs down much more than that with no issues (yeah...lots of variables and my vehicles don`t sit in the sun too much).

  4. #34
    MarcHarris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    First and foremost, this is a great thread and many thanks to Jon for taking the time to post and share some of his valuable information with the community: always a pleasure to read what he has to say.



    While I appreciate what both Jon and Ron are bringing to this discussion from the scientific aspect of things, I`m very much bothered in what I`m reading in some ways. It`s important to know and understand what happens and why in paint correction / paint systems, but I feel there are important points that are completely missing. One such area is touched on by Bryan:



    Quote Originally Posted by gmblack3
    At least 80% of the readings that I have taken with my Advanced 200 PTG show the clear makes up approx 2/3 of the total thickness. This of course only covers composite, plastic or other non-metal panels. So if I show 5 mils total, 3 mils of that is usually clear. As always YMMV!


    Oddly enough, I`ve been noticing similar results (usually around 50% of the total thickness being the clear-coat on my identical Deflesko 200 Advanced) on composite materials. I don`t think this is far from the truth. Take into account we`re limited to reading plastic the majority of the time (number one composite body material on the majority of cars), and those bumpers, mirrors, etc are not being painted the same way the rest of the car is. While the shell`s are being sprayed by robots all at once, many bumpers and mirrors are coming directly from suppliers. In addition to coming from a completely different place, I`d like to know what affect flex-agents have on paint systems: specifically clear-coat. While it may be just one added ingredient, that one added ingredient means the formula for the paint is different.

    Without a doubt there`s a lot of research and development going into automotive finishes: especially for the OEM side of things, but I feel it`s important to point out that not all panels are painted in the same way. Manufacturers do a lot of fancy testing to make sure their paint systems will hold up to wear and tear, but suppliers play a large role in all of this too, and often they`re not the exact same systems.





    This leads me to me other main point, which is the way the industry looks at things compared to how detailers look at things. Let`s be frank: having your car looking like-new or better-than-new is not a necessity. The overwhelming majority of the population would consider us crazy (and does) for the extremes we go to in order to make cars look their best. The industry has guidelines and standards for how cars need to be made for a desired result. With the overwhelming majority of the population not caring what they steer around nor how it looks, the industry must cater to their number one buyer. Detailers however look at the potential a vehicle has and how that car can potentially look if cared for correctly. I think Bob summed my feelings towards all this "premature clear-coat failure" and "jeopardizing paint systems" talk:



    Quote Originally Posted by Auto Concierge
    Who knew.....................man I guess my clients for the last 17 years plus have been extremely "Lucky" as I have been taking away thier UV protection everytime they see me. Maybe it`s time for me to do something else.


    Now we all know Bob`s a very shy guy, and it usually takes a lot of prying to get his honest opinion, so take what he`s saying in context: if what was being through-out this thread was true: we`d all be running around with a ton of clients that have major paint issues; mainly their clear would flaking off in large sections / they`d be getting "crow`s feet" lines from clear-coat failure. But it`s not. The reason is simple: the industry is full of crap / their rules don`t completely apply to us.



    This is meant with no offense to any of the gentleman that I hold in high regard. Jon, Ron, Dr. G, etc all have great backgrounds and have likely done more for professional car care than I ever will. Never the less, we`re talking about an industry (car manufacturing) that is only looking out for themselves. If you remove more than half a mil of clear-coat you`re basically voiding your paint`s warranty because you`ll ruin the car? Sure. Saab gives their owners instructions that their cars shouldn`t be waxed? Right.

    Manufacturers test things in the condition it is produced.



    The first half of these two following sentences is 100% true, the second part is the deduction that OEM manufacurers believe in due to those truths:

    Modern clear-coat`s don`t need to be waxed, so they shouldn`t be.

    They don`t need to be polished, so they shouldn`t be.





    The big guns don`t want clear-coat removed simply because of the numbers. If they put out 100,000 cars with half the clear-coat removed, they`re going to see huge spikes in paint issues. They`re making their rules and recommendations based off the majority of the population, and the majority of the population treats their cars like absolute crap, and I feel that`s extremely important to point out. We are not the majority of the population nor are our clients.
    Marc Harris from AutoLavish Fine Automobile Care of Michigan

  5. #35
    The Old Grey Whistle Test togwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida, USA - London, England
    Posts
    5,464
    Post Thanks / Like
    Some very valid points have been raised thus far, and I for one really appreciate ‘real world’ experience from guys who do this day in day out, as always the results will vary from one person to the other for so many reasons.



    The main point of this thread was an emphasis on ultra violet protection removal as opposed to how much clear coat can be removed, they are interchangeable up to a point as the UV protection is contained within the clear coat



    As much as I dislike putting CMA clauses (These numbers are offered as a guide only, as there are too many variables to provide any more than an approximation), they are necessary to explain that there are very few absolutes in detailing




    Worth a second look - http://www.autopia.org/forum/guide-d...l?daysprune=-1





    [We are not the majority of the population nor are our clients.]



    A valid point, so we owe it to them to take the best care we can as ethical professionals to look after the vehicles they place in our care
    What gets overlooked too often is that one must be a student before becoming a teacher.

  6. #36
    Dr. G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Ketcham
    The good doctor is not addressing one thing on the clearcoat and it`s migration of the UV blockers.

    Yes, they are even thoughout the clear when applied, however, as part of the curing process, the majority of the UV Blockers end up in the top .5 mil (1/2 of a mil).

    This is why many often start to observe a "softening" of the clear when they abrade over .5 mil off either by sanding or buffing.

    Simply put, the clear is not as "dense", IE "hard" below .5 mil of the clear-part of the curing process, however is what creates that high gloss of the clearcoat.

    This also why the vehicle manufacturers (based upon the technical input of the paint vendors to them) insist in their technical information publications, that "no more than .3 mil may be removed or reapplication of the clearcoat must be performed", as the paint engineers are aware of the migration of the UV blockers during the curing process of the clear.

    Once that "density" is violated, premature failure of the clearcoat is most often the result within a few months.

    Grumpy


    Ron, while you are very knowledgeable in this area and I have a great deal of respect for you, I respectfully disagree and I believe you are confusing fumed silica used for increasing paint hardness with UV absorbers. UV absorbers do not add to the hardness and are heavier than clear coat resin (for instance benzotriazole which we used in most paint formulations has a specific gravity of 1.17 which is heavier than water and much heavier than solvents of course) so there is no reason to beleive that it migrates to the top of clear. On the other hand fumed silica is very light and does migrate to the top of clear coat as the solvents evaporate and the paint cross-links and hardens. Many of you have made note of the fact that after polishing the top 0.1-0.2 mils of ceramiclear paints, the exposed clear is much softer than before. But I have never seen or heard anyone mentioning that after polishing paint 0.1-0.2 mils of paint they noticed increased fading!



    Over time UV absorbers migrate throughout the whole paint system till equilibrium is reached. With porous substrates such as TPO based plastic bumpers or other parts, they even migrate into the plastic panels. That is why 8-10 years ago, plastic parts used to fade faster than the rest of the car and made the paint look two tone. One of the projects I worked on with Mitsubishi in 2003 was on this very problem and by using Optimum Car Wax on the paint it kept plastic parts from fading. The UV absorbers can migrate from wax into the paint at temperatures over 70F. This was shown by John Gerlock who worked at Ford Motor Company research labs and proved that UV transfers from Carnauba wax into paint at temperatures of 70F and above (Patent 5,487,914). I have spoken with John Gerlock on this subject and have met several times with John Hughes (before his departure in 2005) and Gerri Bonani at the Ford training center and worked on several projects with them. As Ron mentioned, the GT at the Ypsilanti training center was painted using Sherwin Williams mica yellow paint system which looked pistachio green from some angles and orange from others. David F. you might remember the training center is a concrete building with no windows to protect any new technology from being stolen (at least that is the explanation I got).



    Over time, as the car manufacturers learned about UV migration into base coat, they started adding UV to the base coat to minimize the transfer while it reached equilibrium. With porous substrates such as plastic parts, they use a greater amount of UV absorbers to compensate for the migration into the substrate. The 0.2 mil is the maximum paint that they are allowed to remove on the assembly line at the factory during their paint sanding & polishing process to remove dirt nibs. This number is based on testing we were doing with Optimum Polish at GM plants as well as Chrysler testing center. When we wet sanded, compounded and polished with Optimum system, the amount of paint removed was less than 0.1 mil since these products are fairly mild compare to most other polishes. This does not mean that the clear coat will peel off if you remove 0.3 mils or 0.6 mils. There are many factors involved and each car plant may have a unique paint system that is designed for their specific needs and the thickness varies from one plant to another so there is no way to make such generalizations. One thing is for sure that if you keep removing clear coat, at some point you will go through it!



    Back in 2003 I co-authored a paper with Gene Praschan, who was the Paint Engineering Manager at GM for over 10 years, and the testing was done by Bayer Corporation which is a major supplier of isocyanate resins to Dupont, PPG, SW etc. The title of the paper is "Evolution of Automotive Paint and Protectant Technology" (you can do an on-line search if you like to look at it since I do not want to post a link here). The main point of the article was to inform people that there is a very limited amount of clear coat and to keep them from over polishing and unnecessarily removing their clear coat and replacing it with wax! Since then fortunately new polymer technologies have become available to add clear coat to the existing layer without having to repaint the whole car and with a fraction of the cost. Depending on the resin technology, these clear coats can be more resistant to scratch and marring, more resistant to chemical etching, and more resistant to oxidation, therefore minimizing the need for polishing. Even if you have to polish it off at some point, you can always add a new layer without removing the thin layer of factory clear and avoiding the possibility of premature failure of the paint system and the need to repaint!



    David,

  7. #37
    Rasky's Auto Detailing RaskyR1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Eden Prairie, MN
    Posts
    5,011
    Post Thanks / Like
    Great information Dr. G! Thank for posting it here! :thumb:

  8. #38
    The Old Grey Whistle Test togwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida, USA - London, England
    Posts
    5,464
    Post Thanks / Like
    I’m by no means an authority on paint composition and as in all things more than prepared to learn new things, but I thought that Benzotriazole was used as a corrosion inhibitor and Nano Zinc Oxide was used as an ultra violet inhibitor
    What gets overlooked too often is that one must be a student before becoming a teacher.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Keokuk, Iowa
    Posts
    3,436
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thank you, we are not really far apart on this.

    The silca contributes to the locking of the UV blockers (PPG patented UV Blockers Solex is one of the main ones), for without such a component in the formulation the UV blockers tend to disipate much faster than one would like.

    The silica, as you point out, contributes to the "harder/denser" portion of the top of the clear.

    Which goes back to the way that so many in the contacts that we have known (unfortunet for me, many are either retired, out of the business or dead) that I worked with.

    Daryl passed away, Hartman got moved, Hughes got let lose, Bonnani is all tied up with the new center in Inkster, etc.

    Let alone what has happened in the paint suppliers.

    Leaves me out of the loop these days.

    The ceramic issue is the result of John and Daryl and myself working with it, since Chrysler was experimening with them at the Windsor paint test facility.

    None of us were impressed once a micron or so of the ceramic clear was sanded or buffed away, but that was over 6 years ago.

    Things move on, they change and therefore I may only refer to what I learned at the time when I was active.

    Grumpy

  10. #40
    Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NoVA
    Posts
    7,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Very interesting reading, thanks for contributing gentlemen!

  11. #41
    Dr. G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Ketcham
    Thank you, we are not really far apart on this.

    The silca contributes to the locking of the UV blockers (PPG patented UV Blockers Solex is one of the main ones), for without such a component in the formulation the UV blockers tend to disipate much faster than one would like.

    The silica, as you point out, contributes to the "harder/denser" portion of the top of the clear.

    Which goes back to the way that so many in the contacts that we have known (unfortunet for me, many are either retired, out of the business or dead) that I worked with.

    Daryl passed away, Hartman got moved, Hughes got let lose, Bonnani is all tied up with the new center in Inkster, etc.

    Let alone what has happened in the paint suppliers.

    Leaves me out of the loop these days.

    The ceramic issue is the result of John and Daryl and myself working with it, since Chrysler was experimening with them at the Windsor paint test facility.

    None of us were impressed once a micron or so of the ceramic clear was sanded or buffed away, but that was over 6 years ago.

    Things move on, they change and therefore I may only refer to what I learned at the time when I was active.

    Grumpy


    Ron,



    I am very sorry to hear about Daryl Porter passing away. I am actually shocked since he was not that old! He was a great friend and very knowledgeable and I learned a lot from him. I met Daryl at NACE in 2004 and he invited us to his labs in Auburn Hills and from then on we met there several times a year; basically anytime we had something new he wanted to see it. He was one of the few old timers that was not afraid of change and was always looking for new systems and new ideas. He also had many great stories one of which was about renting Shelby Mustangs or other hot rods for a weekend then painting it in a garage and race all weekend then painting it back and returning it on Monday.



    I stayed in touch with Daryl for a while after he retired and always had it in my plans to call and meet with him in my next trip to Detroit. Like I said, he was not that old!

  12. #42

    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Keokuk, Iowa
    Posts
    3,436
    Post Thanks / Like
    He was one of a kind, worked with him in the old Finish Kare days, than when with AI.

    He was doing some teaching on the side at a Tech College after retirement, plus was working on finally restoring his collection of muscle cars, etc.

    Ever see his home garage, lifts, etc, etc, better than most dealerships, etc.

    Heart attack claimed him, quickly, which is not all that bad of a way to go.

    I had noticed during the last couple of years that he did not have good color, was a little short of energy, etc. but just let it go.

    Grumpy

    (PS, he had me come up to do some testing on a couple of your compounds, sort of "well, what do you think? sort of thing. I did my bit and had to be honest, "great stuff", and it is )

  13. #43
    Dr. G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TOGWT
    I’m by no means an authority on paint composition and as in all things more than prepared to learn new things, but I thought that Benzotriazole was used as a corrosion inhibitor and Nano Zinc Oxide was used as an ultra violet inhibitor


    Jon,



    This is one of the pitfalls of the Internet. If you search for benzotriazole, it will show you that they are used as a corrosion inhibitor for metals. However, benzotriazoles are a family of compounds that contain the following moiety:a cyclic compound with the linkage –N=N–NH– connected to a benzene ring. In the automotive industry as Ron knows better than I do, cars are dipped into several tanks of phosphates and other inorganics which provide corrosion protection before primer is sprayed. Benzotriazoles used for UV protection are much more complex ( for example: 2-(2`-Hydroxy-3`,5`-di-tert-butylphenyl)-5-chloro benzotriazole is one of the many triazole UV blockers used in the automotive industry). I should mention that most paint manufacturers combine HALS (hindered amine light stablizers) with benzotriazoles for their synergistic effects. Lastly while transparent zinc oxide is used in house paints and hand lotions, we never used it in manufacturing clear coat paints since it would affect the clarity of the finish.



    David,

  14. #44
    Dr. G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Ketcham
    He was one of a kind, worked with him in the old Finish Kare days, than when with AI.

    He was doing some teaching on the side at a Tech College after retirement, plus was working on finally restoring his collection of muscle cars, etc.

    Ever see his home garage, lifts, etc, etc, better than most dealerships, etc.

    Heart attack claimed him, quickly, which is not all that bad of a way to go.

    I had noticed during the last couple of years that he did not have good color, was a little short of energy, etc. but just let it go.

    Grumpy

    (PS, he had me come up to do some testing on a couple of your compounds, sort of "well, what do you think? sort of thing. I did my bit and had to be honest, "great stuff", and it is )


    Ron,



    I never got to visit his garage but he always told me that he was doing a lot of paint projects there. We always feel like we will have another chance another day but... you are right though. Thank you.



    David,

  15. #45
    CCH Auto Appearance, LLC C. Charles Hahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Lansing, MI USA
    Posts
    8,783
    Post Thanks / Like
    Can we get some plain-English translators in this thread please? :



    Even my two years of Chemistry back in high school is proving worthless right now
    Charlie
    Automotive Appearance Specialist - Serving Greater Lansing, Michigan
    http://www.cchautoappearance.com/

 

 
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-26-2014, 08:15 PM
  2. Removal of Paint from Clear Coat
    By togwt in forum Autopia Detailing Wiki
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-15-2012, 07:11 AM
  3. Clear Coat and UV Protection Removal
    By togwt in forum Car Detailing
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-13-2011, 05:35 PM
  4. scratch removal: with clear coat?
    By shadow85 in forum Car Detailing
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-22-2008, 04:05 PM
  5. Smr And Clear Coat Removal, On Average??
    By matt69oh in forum Car Detailing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-01-1970, 12:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •