Types of Paint for Antiques or Classics

[Guest groscap]

What type of paint do you think should be used on original restorations of 1920's era automobiles?

Nitrocellulose lacquer, enamel, base coat/clear coat?

Would the use of any one of these versus another add or detract points in judges opinions?

[Bhigdog]

Lacquer looks great and is probably "correct". It's easy to work with and fix problems. Down side it's brittle, chips easily and crazes over time. Catalized enamel closely mimics lacquer when sanded and buffed. Same comments as lacquer except it doesn't craze like lacquer. Base/clear looks fantastic but also out of place on a vintage automobile. Easy to work with, hard to repair.

I'm not a judge but my understanding is "type" of paint is not judged. Color and quality of finish is judged.

All the above is only my opinion and therefore open to correction and argument.........Bob

[Guest palosfv3]

The world of automotive painting has constantly evolved over the time. Within the next couple of years many areas of the US will no longer be able to purchase or use most solvent based paints. Waterbourne will be the norm over the next decade and the debate will continue. I guess that the major factor in determining what material will be used ,will be the rarity of the car and the desire of the current caretaker. Painting a 65 Mustang in urethane is no real big issue unless its one of the rarest of the rare. When restoring one of these unique autos paint isnt the only item that needs this scrutiny . I'm currently debating this same issue for a car we will be starting work on . I'm interested in hearing what others have to say on this subject. I recently posted a similar question on restoring a historically significant 1950's custom . Your paint query is one of many that need discussion in a restoration.

[Guest groscap]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bhigdog</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I'm not a judge but my understanding is "type" of paint is not judged. Color and quality of finish is judged.

</div></div>

I guess I was referring to what "looks right". As you stated, base/clear coat doesn't look right on these older cars. I usually work with acrylic enamels, but I always seem to get a slight orange peel type of look that seems to be the norm for newer production cars. Most people don't seem to notice it, but I always see it! I would like to get a perfectly smooth deep finish.

I haven't sprayed any lacquer for about 20 years. I've seen Bill Hirsch's nitrocelulose lacquer advertised and was thinking about trying some.

Anyone used it before?

[Bhigdog]

Acrylic enamels, such as Dupont Centari, with hardener added look like lacquer. Like lacquer they're hard enough to be buffed to a glass like shine. A slight orange peel and small amounts of dirt are really not a problem. Put on enough paint, I usually shoot 4 wet coats, and there is enough thickness to stand a color coat sanding ending with 1500 grit or finer paper. That will take out any slight dryness or dirt nibs. Then buff. The process is the same if you use lacquer........Bob

[Durant Mike]

The problem I see is that many cars today are over restored and do not have the original look that the car did when manufactured. I have a picture of an assembly line for the Durant car company in 1923. It shows them painting the bodies of cars with black paint coming from what looks like a garden hose. I'm sure that paint job had runs and thin spots etc. When I repaint my car I will try and use a good enamel that will hold up to time and no clear coat or very little if at all. I am also a new AACA judge and I believe that as long as the color is period correct and the paint job is good you should be OK with the AACA. Now Pebble Beach that is something different since you are competing against so many cars that are restored by professional shops where the owner had more money than brains and probably never has turned a wrench on their own car. I would go with a Urethane Enamel in a proper period color and not worry about it. The new paints today are much better than the old lacquer and will hold up much better and longer. I doubt that a judge would even take the time to look and see if it was lacquer or enamel. Could he tell? Remember most judges only have a few moments to go over a car and move on to the next. As long as the paint is not cracked, worn and in decent shape. No rust etc. I think you will be OK.

[Guest imported_pete324rock]

Good topic! Anyone know what G.M. used for paint in the mid-fifties? And isn't lacquer more forgiving for the do-it yourselfer? I probably don't see as many cars as some but I sure have a hard job finding paint that I agree isn't overdone for the period.You can really appreciate original paint the rare times that you see it.

[Bhigdog]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">isn't lacquer more forgiving for the do-it yourselfer? </div></div>

Lacquer is very forgiving. It dries fast so isn't prone to runs and it's easy to repair because the repair paint eats/blends right into the old coat. Base/clear is about as forgiving to shoot but has a some other problems lacquer does'nt have. Enamel is probably the toughest to apply.

They all have good/bad points............Bob

[Mark Shaw]

With regard to painting antique cars, I used Interlux Brightside Polyurethane on my 13 Buick. It comes in Dark Blue #4316 that replicates the original Blue/Black color offered in 1913. It looks very original on both the wood and metal parts of the car.

Since the car has a wood body, I used paint made for wood boats. Modern automotive paints are just too inflexible for a wood bodied car. It is a one step paint that smooths out nicely so touch-ups can easily be applied with a brush. It was only $30 per quart too.