This is why you measure paint!
This is a 2018 Mazda. I’ll have more later but this is why a responsible detail shop will measure paint thickness! Some people will go after this with a rotary and wool pad! https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...4e54f2de08.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: This is why you measure paint!
If that is in Mils, then its 70.8406 Microns... Total Thickness... Not Clear Coat Total Thickness...
This is just terrible news on a new 2018 Mazda !!!
If a shop tells you they are going to use a rotary and wool on your new car, you need to run away from those drunk clowns fast...
Glad you are always on top of it, Mike !
Dan F
Re: This is why you measure paint!
For those not familiar, that’s thinner than a post it note! Thank you!
Re: This is why you measure paint!
That is crazy thin! Curious Mike why you chose Mills instead of microns? I know their have been many threads on the topic but I`m still curious.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Re: This is why you measure paint!
Just always trained that way, just never switched?
Re: This is why you measure paint!
Wow, what model Mazda is that? that is super thin!!
Re: This is why you measure paint!
Re: This is why you measure paint!
Are they cutting back on clear coat, paint, or both on the new cars to save a few bucks? When I got my car painted I picked out the type of clear and had them put 3 coats on. Looked great, but wow a ton of orange peel that had to be sanded.
Re: This is why you measure paint!
Re: This is why you measure paint!
I see Mazda hasn`t changed this for the better; that`s even a tiny bit thinner than our last one was.
Mike lambert- Thanks for posting this! Very timely too, as we`ve been discussing wetsanding/orange peel on a few threads lately.
Eh, forget wetsanding, that`s not thick enough for much correction period so I hope it doesn`t get marred up. You planning to coat it with Modesta?
Re: This is why you measure paint!
I wouldn’t attempt to remove any texture on a newer car! Despite what others are doing. That greatly diminishes the life of the paint. Yes it will get Modesta, that is all we offer now. Thank you!
2 Attachment(s)
Re: This is why you measure paint!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mike lambert
For those not familiar, that’s thinner than a post it note! Thank you!
Thanks for sharing. It`s nuts that this new car paint is so thin!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PearTree
Curious Mike why you chose Mills instead of microns? I know their have been many threads on the topic but I`m still curious.
You asked Mike, but I`ll chime in with why I choose what I do. For me, it reminds of a tachometer with a dual range readout. Two pics below do essentially the same thing: read engine RPMs. One does it at a constant range, while the other has a dual range. The dual range one, if you notice, has a certain range that is more pronounced. It`s for an application where that range is more important than the lower RPMS
Attachment 35395 Attachment 35394
When I started using a PTG, and when I first learned about it, the measurements were in Mils. After playing with it a bit, and trying out the different settings, I switched and continue to use microns. Why?
For me, it`s like that dual range tachometer. I want to "zoom in" to an area that is easier to read. Example:
Here are some readings I just took from my hood: 118, 115, 112. Say this was a 2 step correction, I would have started with 118 microns, then 115 after the 1st step, and finally ended up at 112 microns.
Okay. I easily see that I went from 118, to 115, to 112. Easy peasy
Those same readings (using the conversion) in mils are: 4.6456, 4.5276, and 4.4094. Now I`m looking at decimal points, or tenths/hundredths of a number!
I don`t want to be trying to calculate numbers in my head while working on a panel.
Conclusion: For ME, it`s just easier to read whole numbers versus decimals
Re: This is why you measure paint!
I will ask the inevitable question for those of us uneducated on today`s automotive paint production methods; What IS an "acceptable" paint thickness for a new car??
Just Jesus
I like your thought process about whole numbers using microns. I makes sense as long as you are familiar with the unit of measurement and can relate to how much it is for what you are measuring.
I only say that because we in the United States still use Imperial/English standard units of measurements for length (miles/yards/feet/inches/mils) where the rest of the world used the metric system (Kilometers/meters/centimeters/millimeters/microns?). Why America has not gone to the Metric System is because we have no experience in relating to how much a millimeter is; IE because we have not been taught or use tools to measure those values, we have no concept or mental relationship to relate to it. I think Accumulator brought out the fact that is 1974 (1974!!!) that an act of Congress mandated that the USA would convert to the Metric System by the year 1985. Why didn`t this happen? Simple. Our manufacturing and tooling (drills, cutting tools, measuring, and dies used to make fasteners and metal shapes) would have to change over make parts and raw materials to conform to this "new" measuring system and that would be cost-prohibitive to the entire US economy, SOOOOO the law was never enforced. Oh, there was some "concessions" made, like having highway signage on US Interstates denote distances in Kilometers and Miles (something you may see today) and industries COULD use it if they desired, which some do because it is "required" (IE, mandated) IF you want to export your products to foreign countries/entities, like the European Union. As a mechanical designer and draftsmen, my schooling was very much inches and fractions and to this day I am "old school" and can only relate to this system. (Yes, I still do conversions from millimeters to inches with a calculator or chart). That said, education and familiarity by daily usage with the Metric System is the only way we Americans will convert to its usage. Those of you in the medical and chemical fields know the Metric System very well because that is the defacto measuring system taught AND used by individuals in those fields of study and careers. OK, so this is SOOOOOOOOO off-topic to measuring today`s automotive production paint thickness, so I digress......
Re: This is why you measure paint!
I don’t think you can answer that question? I think the question needs to be nowadays is what is now the acceptable amount of paint you can remove over the life of the car, and still keep the integrity?
Re: This is why you measure paint!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mike lambert
I don’t think you can answer that question? I think the question needs to be nowadays is what is now the acceptable amount of paint you can remove over the life of the car, and still keep the integrity?
Agree. It`s not like most people care how much paint there is or how much correction it can stand.
And with it being *SO* easy to cut off a lot of clear in moments these days, it could be a recipe for disaster long-term. But few people really think of vehicles as long-term investments any more, so I doubt many will really care about that either.
For those of us who *do* care, IMO the #1 priority oughta be not marring it in the first place.
Regarding the Metric System- as a kid back in the `60s I was taught both English and Metric side-by-side and expected to know both. In first grade.