why orange peel exists...

[Saintlysins]

Quote by MORBID: "So many factories (and bodyshops) would rather deal with OP than trying not to get OP and having something worse happen. The probelm is bodyshops are suppose to cut and buff the paint out as part of the finishing process of the job. No such thing exists at the manufactuering plant. It would cost too much in labor."





Morbid nailed it, as did other posts. I’ll add a bit more detail;

To get an Orange Peel Free finish from the spray gun, through all the multiple steps required is certainly going to increase (dramatically) other possible defects which require extensive labor to fix/repair. Gun spit, hangers, paint slide, edge pucker, edge roll-off, drips, are only some of the problems … then there are time constraints. The manufacturers won't/don’t have time to wait for flash over or multiple layers – or as stated before, but with more info; or to pull the car out of the booth and micro-sand (wet-sand) the paint to a perfectly flat finish, detail the whole car to a spotless/dustless condition, apply another coat from scratch (more work here than we need to get into), repeat a multitude of times all the way through to clear/finish coats.



I agree your painter gave a very simplistic answer, but at the same time, it’s so much more about economics in relation to what the ‘average person’ considers acceptable. I like the remarks about the Hummer H2’s … it’s the classic example of how the ‘average person’ can’t see the horrible finish because they’re blinded by how big it is ... kind of like not seeing the forest because the trees are in the way.

 

[Twista616]

MORBID nailed it on the head...actually everyone is fairly right here, the only way you can get a perfect relection is to eliminate the orage peel...thats where we come in!! That Bentley is perfect. The reflection is soo crisp...i looked at it, and I thought it was just a wall at first...then I saw the wheels!

 

[David Fermani]

But, how many OP'd finishes can be 100% (or even close) corrected with our efforts? I think it can be reduced significantly, but with the risk of sacrificing other things....



There's going to need to be alot of clear there to make things totally flat in actuality. I know shops that add extra clear, so that they can sand down comfortably to create a flat finish. It would be a reasonable risk on alot of OEM finishes to try that on.

 

[whitejavaS500]

Paint flatness doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for Range Rover's either.

Ehh, I disagree. The hood on my Range is good, but some of the side panels, not so much.

 

[BigChevMan]

It all has to do with the process used. GM and the like try to make money based on volume. Their process is designed to be quick and cost effective. Ferrari, lambo and the likes are based on quality.

 

[OCKlasse]

Phantoms have no OP as well...

 

[Invigor]

For the most part, OP exists to hide small defects in factory flaws. There are many reasons on how it can come to be, but that's why it's there. Someone else also said it, but because 90% of people out there don't know what it is and don't know any different.



If it's a showroom quality trailer queen, then yea, sand it down and reclear it to perfection...but for you average every day car, pretty low OP can be had at the hands of a good painter...it's nothing to get your panties in a twist about.



If you get your car fixed and complain about the OP I dare you to put a spray gun in your hand and do better. A lot of shops move lots of business and sometimes the painters just have a bad day, and it sucks that sometimes it ends up to be your car being sprayed at that time.

 

[imported_truzoom]

For the most part, OP exists to hide small defects in factory flaws.

Can you back this up? I was under the impression that OP is a by-product of the painting process, not a result.



I mean, whenever I do custom paint work, I don't intentionally add orange peel to the finish; it just happens to form because I use rattle cans with fast evaporating solvents. Like Setec Astronomy said earlier, the auto mfgs are under strict EPA guidelines, so they'll have to use a paint process that results in lower VOCs.



Heck, aside from the solvent/pigment mix of paint, I don't know how some engineer would intentionally create orange peel to be functional.

 

[Invigor]

I mean, whenever I do custom paint work, I don't intentionally add orange peel to the finish; it just happens to form because I use rattle cans with fast evaporating solvents. Like Setec Astronomy said earlier, the auto mfgs are under strict EPA guidelines, so they'll have to use a paint process that results in lower VOCs.

Which is why USA is the only country in the world not switching to waterborne, eh? (well ok, I think Italy is resisting too) The VOCs of waterborne are incredibly lower than solvent borne considering 70% of the solvents in WB is water. There are a few out there that DO use waterborne (mostly in Europe), but not many in USA.



I've never been to a factory and asked one of the paint technology engineers to blatantly say "we make sure there's good orange peel before they're out the door" but if a person can spray perfectly with zero OP, they can certainly configure a machine to do the same. I'm pretty sure on a Bentley, it's not your average straight from the gun paint job...I'm sure there's a bit of sanding and respraying by hand happening.

 

[David Fermani]

Which is why USA is the only country in the world not switching to waterborne, eh? (well ok, I think Italy is resisting too) The VOCs of waterborne are incredibly lower than solvent borne considering 70% of the solvents in WB is water. There are a few out there that DO use waterborne (mostly in Europe), but not many in USA.



I've never been to a factory and asked one of the paint technology engineers to blatantly say "we make sure there's good orange peel before they're out the door" but if a person can spray perfectly with zero OP, they can certainly configure a machine to do the same. I'm pretty sure on a Bentley, it's not your average straight from the gun paint job...I'm sure there's a bit of sanding and respraying by hand happening.

You're not too accurate about this. There are tons of assembly plants in the US that are waterborne as well as tons of body shops. I've been and have gone to several of both. Within a few years, there won't be a choice. Everything will be waterborne. Shops are making the switch every day and paint manufacturers are providing the support.



As far as OP, it's impossible to spray a panel and get zero OP. It requires a certain amount of sanding, no matter how well a panel is prepped or sprayed. At the OEM level, line managers have OP charts that check the level of OP. They then adjust it from there to their desired varience.

 

[Don GM]

Have you ever noticed the finish/OP on a black H2 Hummer? It may be the worst there is.

H3 Hummers as well

Surprisingly, I've found that for an economical car maker Hyundai has some great quality paint from about 2003+.

 

[Saintlysins]

I have to back “David Fermani� on this – not only because he’s right, but because Invigor is so wrong with that accusation about the USA. It’s easy to throw stones at American car companies who use VOC based paints when Canada doesn’t have a nationally based car company they need to put a finish on.

Indirectly ... CANADA is responsible for allowing the USA to continue using VOC’s if you’d like to make crazy accusations like : “Which is why USA is the only country in the world not switching to waterborne� ... as your country is allowing all automakers (American, European and Asian) to exploit reduced regulations by the "The Minister Of Environment" in trade for manufacturing jobs. But this wouldn’t be the only retort. You forgot that more Asian vehicles (some made in 3rd world countries) are sold than any other in the world! They’re far from having the regulations regarding VOC’s (among other toxins) than North American or European auto manufacturers. (Not including the Eastern Block Countries, which make this entire VOC topic laughable regardless of production volumes.)

Please don’t make false accusations about the USA without looking at where you’re throwing rocks from. We’re far from a perfect nation, yet we’re a lot further than the “only country in the world� that hasn’t switched to low-VOC automotive finishes. There are countries that certainly have the right to cast a stone at our reluctance to change, but it’s far from being Canada on paint VOC issues.



Staying on the theme of orange peel – or the lack thereof - is directly related to how much it costs to make an orange peel free finish? No man can do it flawlessly time and time again. It’s not worth the time to set up a machine to do as there are just too many variables involved to get it right in the presence of paint type and gravity just to start. And other than the tiniest fraction of the populous, (most of that fraction can be found on this site no one else can see what we see, nor care, so there’s no incentive to put that much time, energy, manpower and money into perfect, orange peel free, mass production, spray-gun finishes regardless of paint type in the past, present or future.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

...so there’s no incentive to put that much time, energy, manpower and money into perfect, orange peel free, mass production, spray-gun finishes regardless of paint type in the past, present or future.

Part of the OP discussion (in this and other threads) is the more recent appearance of common OP. My older GM cars ('88 & '90) had much less OP than my recent ('05 & 06) GM cars. I think the observation has been that newer cars have more OP than in the old days, hence the thought that VOC reduction is the culprit.



Edit: I guess I should just finish this thought....Bence, who as an auto journalist, has probably been in more auto plants than anyone on this board, says the OP is to hide panel defects. With the possible combination of aluminum, steel, galvanized steel, and several types of plastics (reinforced and not) on a vehicle today, a uniform surface finish might be impossible across all panels, therefore, instead of telegraphing the underlying finish with smooth paint, making a uniformly rough (orange-peeled) surface sounds like a practical compromise that a paint engineer might make.

 

[David Fermani]

Part of the OP discussion (in this and other threads) is the more recent appearance of common OP. My older GM cars ('88 & '90) had much less OP than my recent ('05 & 06) GM cars. I think the observation has been that newer cars have more OP than in the old days, hence the thought that VOC reduction is the culprit.

Or, they were just single stage, which shows & creates much less OP.

 

[Scottwax]

I don't inspect bodywork daily, but what I have seen that comes out of a body shop usually has MORE orange peel than most new $20k+ cars.

Depends, but yeah, I've seen some absolutely hideous orange peel on repaints. So bad the paint has no shine.

 

[David Fermani]

Bence, who as an auto journalist, has probably been in more auto plants than anyone on this board, says the OP is to hide panel defects.

I'd really like to know about what kind of defects he's referring to? It's highly unlikely (IMHO) that there's that extensive of "defects" in sheetmetal and/or finish for OP to be there for. That just can't be the case. I need for info on this.



I'd have to say one of the most obvious places for a flaw or defect to be noticed would be where the 1/4 panel and/or uni-side gets welded to the roof. It's almost impossible to see that joint, and there a ton of filler there (from the factory). That's not obbious because there's OP there?

 

[David Fermani]

I also have to add that whether you're spraying water or solvent, you're still getting OP. Just because a factory is waterborne, doesn't exctly mean there's less OP.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

Or, they were just single stage, which shows & creates much less OP.

No, those were BC/CC.

 

[Invigor]

Thanks for the heads up...my paint instructor must just not like Americans or something. They beat it into us about waterborne, and really the only thing I like about it is it's lack of stink...it's not nearly as overwhelming as a mixing room full of solventborne...infact it doesn't smell at all. January 1, 2009 is when it becomes illegal to sell solventborne up here...so they say.



I originally made the comment about WB for the VOC comment..not the OP. It's easy to OP with either paint with my shaky hand



:bow sorry for the ill-accusation and thanks for the clear up

 

[Setec Astronomy]

I'd really like to know about what kind of defects he's referring to? It's highly unlikely (IMHO) that there's that extensive of "defects" in sheetmetal and/or finish for OP to be there for. That just can't be the case. I need for info on this.

Sorry, I chose my words poorly. I remember in the 80's when galvanized steel was being introduced for body panel material. The automakers wanted to use double-side galvanized, but they couldn't get an adequately smooth finish on the galvanized panels, so they only used the galvanize on the inner surfaces (referring to lower body panels in rust prone areas). Class A finish? I believe there are some difficulties in getting various panel materials, as I mentioned, to have a uniform surface finish, as compared to the old days when everything was steel and stamped in the same manner. Today you might have a variety of materials produced in a variety of ways. I believe they improved the galvanized finish, but it may not meet that Class A (?) finish that they used to get. Some of the "defects" could also be flaking of the zinc during the forming process.



Just as a point of reference, and I know you have toured auto plants as well, but the factory setting is much different than in a body shop. In the shop if they get a panel that has a surface finish that doesn't match, they can do something about it, rework it in some manner...that just isn't going to happen on the assembly line.