Paint Thickness Gauges
- Thread starter Danspeed1
- Start date
Anthony A said:
As far as posting my blunders in detailing, I've done so on many occasions. Just nothing as bad as burning through clear.
You're sitting here basically calling everyone who uses a PTG that doesn't measure on a layer level a hack (you just aren't coming right out and saying so). It's not hard to see what you're trying to accomplish.
RaskyR1
Rasky's Auto Detailing
I see both sides to this debate. I've had my PTG save me on a few cars by discovering some thin areas that had previously been buffed aggressively...had I not taken measurements on the car prior to working on it I could have potentially rubbed through.
I'm also with Midflux in that I can spot a repaint a mile away.
Still, you are correct that it can give a false sense of security and we never really know for sure how much clear is in a given area. Regardless, it's a tool that can be used if you choose, and it at least gives you a better idea of what your working with. Most often for me I'd say it's used to measure how much I remove.
On the car I did belwo there was an area around a scratch that had 30-40 microns less material than the rest of the panel. Clearly someone else had already buffed in an attempt at removing the scratch....without a PTG I could have been in trouble.
http://www.autopia.org/forum/pro-de...-paint-correction-rasky-s-auto-detailing.html
Just my $.02
Rasky
I'm also with Midflux in that I can spot a repaint a mile away.
Still, you are correct that it can give a false sense of security and we never really know for sure how much clear is in a given area. Regardless, it's a tool that can be used if you choose, and it at least gives you a better idea of what your working with. Most often for me I'd say it's used to measure how much I remove.
On the car I did belwo there was an area around a scratch that had 30-40 microns less material than the rest of the panel. Clearly someone else had already buffed in an attempt at removing the scratch....without a PTG I could have been in trouble.
http://www.autopia.org/forum/pro-de...-paint-correction-rasky-s-auto-detailing.html
Just my $.02
Rasky
Mindflux said:
I said no such thing and I did not imply it either. I have made no accusations against anyone as you claim I have. You can't back it up because your talking crap.
You are the obvious troll not me.
As for what I'm trying to accomplish. It's not calling people hacks for using PTG. Just pointing out the flaws in them and that they should not be thought of as the ultimate answer to determining paint thickness. Why this would bother you is amazing. I think people like you are dangerous to online forums. Labeling people trolls because they have an opinion that differs from yours. Weaker people would bow to your BS and than not express their opinion any more out of fear they will be attacked by the likes of you. Well I'm not one of them and you have nothing in your arsenal that scares me in the least. Back under your bridge troll.
Wow, this thread got out of control quick. I am sure all this crap in here is going to be really helpful to myself an others looking for a paint thickness gauge.
Makes common sense... here's the perspective of someone fairly new (at least compared to most of these guys who have 20+ years in) who does not and has not worked with a PTG:
First, I rather have it, than not have it. Its NOT the be all and end all of mistakes. First you need to be able to properly choose compounds, pads, and accurately work a DA or Rotary or your sunk anyway.
Secondly if I had one this is how I would use it. I would first do a visual inspection. Working in a body shop at one time it is possible to tell when something has been repainted. There is always some sort of indicator. Generally, the factory does not include fish eyes anywhere in the paint. A top dollar job is nearly perfect but there is always some sort of indicator suggesting a repaint. I would also visually inspect each panel for more or less orange peel, and all the moldings and trim (especially the hidden ones) for overspray. If that didn't yield any results I would move to the PTG. Generally, and I think most of us will agree, the hood, roof, and trunk lid are the first to get hammered are are not a good indicator of paint thickness. However if I went over all the panels with the PTG and found that they were all within +or- 15% reading of each other i would have a good indicator that either A. I have a fairly decent amount to work with, or B. panels are all the same... indicating no repaint. It is very unlikely IMO that a repaint by hand would have the same paint thickness as paint from the factory... so I would AT MINIMUM know if I found a panel with much more or much less paint thickness that it was likely compounded to death or repainted.
Coming from someone "inexperienced" there is no replacement for experience.
I am an Automotive Technician by trade. I hated my job so I left to persue other ventures. I found I am more comfortable behind a desk. From time to time people tell me how great my work is and how I am wasting talents. I have no desire to do the job. Once in a while I would take a walk though the shop,... there would ways be some kid from Lincoln Tech struggling with something. I have only a few years on these kids (or at least that's what you guys are going to believe :rofl ) and yet so much more experience has helped me help them.
One more thing... for any of you who have worked with a GM Tech II scan tool or a Snap-on RedBrick... you know that reading codes only points you in the direction of the problem (and sometimes it doesn't even do that). It takes experience and knowledge of the product to really pinpoint the main issues. You will always know the technician that is experienced from the one that is not. They both solve the problem in the end, but the experienced guy has thrown less parts at the car....
Now can we please get back on track?
DG
Makes common sense... here's the perspective of someone fairly new (at least compared to most of these guys who have 20+ years in) who does not and has not worked with a PTG:
First, I rather have it, than not have it. Its NOT the be all and end all of mistakes. First you need to be able to properly choose compounds, pads, and accurately work a DA or Rotary or your sunk anyway.
Secondly if I had one this is how I would use it. I would first do a visual inspection. Working in a body shop at one time it is possible to tell when something has been repainted. There is always some sort of indicator. Generally, the factory does not include fish eyes anywhere in the paint. A top dollar job is nearly perfect but there is always some sort of indicator suggesting a repaint. I would also visually inspect each panel for more or less orange peel, and all the moldings and trim (especially the hidden ones) for overspray. If that didn't yield any results I would move to the PTG. Generally, and I think most of us will agree, the hood, roof, and trunk lid are the first to get hammered are are not a good indicator of paint thickness. However if I went over all the panels with the PTG and found that they were all within +or- 15% reading of each other i would have a good indicator that either A. I have a fairly decent amount to work with, or B. panels are all the same... indicating no repaint. It is very unlikely IMO that a repaint by hand would have the same paint thickness as paint from the factory... so I would AT MINIMUM know if I found a panel with much more or much less paint thickness that it was likely compounded to death or repainted.
Coming from someone "inexperienced" there is no replacement for experience.
I am an Automotive Technician by trade. I hated my job so I left to persue other ventures. I found I am more comfortable behind a desk. From time to time people tell me how great my work is and how I am wasting talents. I have no desire to do the job. Once in a while I would take a walk though the shop,... there would ways be some kid from Lincoln Tech struggling with something. I have only a few years on these kids (or at least that's what you guys are going to believe :rofl ) and yet so much more experience has helped me help them.
One more thing... for any of you who have worked with a GM Tech II scan tool or a Snap-on RedBrick... you know that reading codes only points you in the direction of the problem (and sometimes it doesn't even do that). It takes experience and knowledge of the product to really pinpoint the main issues. You will always know the technician that is experienced from the one that is not. They both solve the problem in the end, but the experienced guy has thrown less parts at the car....
Now can we please get back on track?
DG
donut. said:
There's nothing to debunk. I never said PTG's read only the clear, I just said that just because they don't doesn't make them worthless.
Look, guys. I've been here 10 freaking years. I've seen just about everything there is to see in detailing. I've got no reason to sit here and try and convince you of something other than what you want to believe so I'm going to leave this alone.
Have fun arguing your point to thin air. Everyone else is happy with how their PTG's work, and if they weren't you'd hear about it here in the form of "MY PTG SAID I HAD 5MILS SO I USED M105/UC/SIP (whatever flavor of the month polish it is) AND A WOOL PAD AND BURNED THROUGH THE CLEAR! WHAT'S WRONG WITH MY PTG?"
Dan
Well-known member
donut. said:
Really? I think he's being pretty calm and someone else is being a bit combative.
Anthony A said:
Pot meet kettle. Here you are calling me a troll for having an opinion different from yours. Oh the huge manatee!
As for "backing up his crap". It's futile! You won't accept any method of gauging clear other than your own so there's no point arguing them. (here you go spouting your BS as gospel and expecting everyone to agree. sorry, not me)
In fact, I never once said my way was the right way, the only way or the way anyone else should be doing it. It's MY way of gauging thickness (based on criteria I use such as paint condition, thickness of overall layers, etc). If nobody agrees, fine! But it's working just FINE for me.
Mindflux said:
Nice try but I posted that after you accused me of being a troll and making accusations about others. Using what I posted after you make an accusation against me has to be the most childish thing I have seen in a long time on a forum. You still haven't given an example so your talking crap.
I called you a troll for trying to cause crap which you were doing by accusing me of things and not backing it up not because your opinion differed. You stuck your foot in your mouth and now your dancing around trying to confuse the issue and BSing which is a typical coward maneuver of a guy who stuck his foot in his yap. Did you really think you could talk crap to me and not get called on it?
Mindflux said:
Now we know the source of Mindflux's problem here. I did not bow as he thinks I should to his veteran status. That came through in your post about being here 10 years and seeing everything there is to see in detailing but now it's confirmed. Get over your self and let others have an opinion that might be different from yours and not get your nose disjointed about it.
Check my sigh up date I hardly qualify as a newbie.
Mindflux said:
We are in agreement there the problem is your not walking the talk. You say this but than jump on me when I have a different view than you. That doesn't add up.
Mindflux said:
4 years signed up and about that many following the forum before I signed up so I have been around about as long as you. Not that it means anything how long a person has been here. Has nothing to do with detailing experience.