1922 Studebaker Big Six Paint

[Kfigel]

Spent the winter bringing back the original paint on my '22 Studebaker.  Had a lot of success in bringing all the body parts (fenders, hood, outside cowl cover, windshield frame, etc.) EXCEPT for the body proper to a nice gloss finish (see front hood photo).  The body itself is not "responding" and is still is dull and faded (see photo of just in front of the windshield).  I used all Meguiar's cleaning and polishing products.  Any thoughts on what the difference might be?  Would the bodies themselves have been originally painted with a different paint system? 

[JustDave]

Try using a little corn starch with your cleaner,be ready for a workout

[Rusty_OToole]

At one time it was common to paint chassis fenders and running boards with a tough black Gilsonite paint and the body with a softer colored paint. So you had a car with black fenders and blue, green, or maroon body. If this describes your car maybe the black paint has stood up to time and weather better than the other.

[Kfigel]

1 hour ago, JustDave said:

Try using a little corn starch with your cleaner,be ready for a workout

I will, thanks.

[Kfigel]

35 minutes ago, Rusty_OToole said:

At one time it was common to paint chassis fenders and running boards with a tough black Gilsonite paint and the body with a softer colored paint. So you had a car with black fenders and blue, green, or maroon body. If this describes your car maybe the black paint has stood up to time and weather better than the other.

Could be...the whole car sure appears to be black, and the parts that are coming back to a gloss finish are definitely black (all four fenders, outside cowl vent lid, engine hood, vertical splash panels above the running boards, windshield frame, sloped sections from the front fenders to the bottom of the engine hood).  Maybe the body "shell" and four doors were painted a dark blue with a different paint system in a different part of the shop during manufacture (?). 

For an original paint car it would really pop if I could get the body looking as good as the rest of it.  Thanks 

[W_Higgins]

It is also possible that the surface you're trying to rub out is not the original finish.  You're there to assess it and I'm not, but so many times I have seen things declared as "original paint" when it is not.  It is exceedingly rare to find any car that hasn't had at least one refinishing campaign on part of it during the first cycle of its life.  In the era all manner of do-it-yourself products were marketed towards owners so they could repaint at home rather than use a professional shop.  Finishes back then were not generally long lived and were subjected to much more abuse than we tend to experience today.  

[Kfigel]

1 hour ago, W_Higgins said:

It is also possible that the surface you're trying to rub out is not the original finish.  You're there to assess it and I'm not, but so many times I have seen things declared as "original paint" when it is not.  It is exceedingly rare to find any car that hasn't had at least one refinishing campaign on part of it during the first cycle of its life.  In the era all manner of do-it-yourself products were marketed towards owners so they could repaint at home rather than use a professional shop.  Finishes back then were not generally long lived and were subjected to much more abuse than we tend to experience today.  

Yes, and thank you.  I refer to the finish as original because, believe it or not, I know the history of the car from new (not that I was around in '22).  Because of that I have a very high confidence level that the car is original, and especially, has not been repainted.  Anything is possible, though, and I guess what puzzles me is that it's very specific that the body "shell" and doors are the only finishes not "responding".  I guess this is what the hobby is all about.       

[Bloo]

It was common in those days to look at a "body" (no fenders, hood, radiator shell or chassis) as a separate item painted separately. As others already mentioned the paint was often of different composition and/or color.

 

Get some of this and a couple pieces of soft cloth (but not microfiber). One damp to polish with, and one dry to finish. I know it's expensive, but this product is capable of miracles that similar products are generally not. Try an inconspicuous spot first and rub like crazy. Don't use a machine. If it works, work on a small area at a time by hand, no more than a square foot. Wax after. Don't use on crazed paint, because it is light colored and will get in the cracks. If this won't bring up a shine, nothing will.

 

Go by the part number, NOT the appearance of the bottle. Accept no substitutes.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 19, 2020 by Bloo (see edit history)

[Kfigel]

1 hour ago, Bloo said:

It was common in those days to look at a "body" (no fenders, hood, radiator shell or chassis) as a separate item painted separately. As others already mentioned the paint was often of different composition and/or color.

 

Get some of this and a couple pieces of soft cloth (but not microfiber). One damp to polish with, and one dry to finish. I know it's expensive, but this product is capable of miracles that similar products are generally not. Try an inconspicuous spot first and rub like crazy. Don't use a machine. If it works, work on a small area at a time by hand, no more than a square foot. Wax after. Don't used on crazed paint, because it is light colored and will get in the cracks. If this won't bring up a shine, nothing will.

 

Go by the part number, NOT the appearance of the bottle. Accept no substitutes.

 

 

 

 

I will, and thanks

[W_Higgins]

4 hours ago, Kfigel said:

Yes, and thank you.  I refer to the finish as original because, believe it or not, I know the history of the car from new (not that I was around in '22).  Because of that I have a very high confidence level that the car is original, and especially, has not been repainted.  Anything is possible, though, and I guess what puzzles me is that it's very specific that the body "shell" and doors are the only finishes not "responding".  I guess this is what the hobby is all about.       

 

The only 100% way to know would be with paint analysis and that can get pricey.  I'm curious, do places like the jambs respond the same way?  Though not a 100% guarantee I would expect that a lot of times when something was refinished the jambs were not.  If you get a different result there that might provide a clue as to what your next step should be.  Is it crazed or rough whereas the other stuff you polished that came up was only oxidized?

[Rusty_OToole]

Maybe the paint is just dried out. I have a vague memory of revitalizing dull paint on old cars with some kind of oil  or liquid. Maybe some paint experts can chime in. Like I said it is only a vague memory from many years ago and I may be wrong.

Edited July 19, 2020 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

[wayne sheldon]

Most paints in those days dried slowly. All-metal pieces like fenders and hoods were often dried in ovens, not terribly high temperatures, but enough to bake the paint somewhat more quickly which also made it tougher and easier to handle during the assembly line work. Bodies, with their wooden structures, did not respond well in ovens. Even at 150 degrees, the wood could react badly, nails loosen, joints fracture. So bodies were not generally baked until they became mostly all steel. The paints used on bodies was usually softer than the paints on fenders and hoods, and generally did not weather as well.

[58L-Y8]

The painting process before the advent to Duco was a time-consuming, laborious one, a real production bottleneck.  Paints were applied with brushes, first multiple coats of primer with rub downs with fine grit between each, plus lengthily dry cycles.  Next was the color coats with the same process, finally it was varnished to seal and protect the multiple layers.  This was the process for color coats,  The black Gilsonite paint Rusty mentioned was used on the parts what were likely to take the most dirt and hits from road stone etc.   Black, because it absorbed heat fastest, was used on metal parts that could withstand a baking/drying oven. Its the reason behind the old saying about Ford in any color as long as its black. Ford, because of the high production volumes, had to use the paint and process that would dry the fastest.   It was also easy to match/touch-up when damaged.  

 

The Big Six body, if dark blue, was painted with the process described, might respond with very fine grit rubbing and a varnish coat.  Try a small spot first to see if this is so.

Edited July 19, 2020 by 58L-Y8 (see edit history)

[Kfigel]

21 hours ago, W_Higgins said:

 

The only 100% way to know would be with paint analysis and that can get pricey.  I'm curious, do places like the jambs respond the same way?  Though not a 100% guarantee I would expect that a lot of times when something was refinished the jambs were not.  If you get a different result there that might provide a clue as to what your next step should be.  Is it crazed or rough whereas the other stuff you polished that came up was only oxidized?

Good point to check the jambs...I did that today and they appear and respond the same way the body shell and doors do.  I'd have to say the body paint not coming back looks more faded and weathered than oxidized.  I'm going to try the methods/products mentioned to me in this post this coming week.

[Kfigel]

20 hours ago, Rusty_OToole said:

Maybe the paint is just dried out. I have a vague memory of revitalizing dull paint on old cars with some kind of oil  or liquid. Maybe some paint experts can chime in. Like I said it is only a vague memory from many years ago and I may be wrong.

I think you're right, the paint just seems tired and dull; like a flat finish.    

[Kfigel]

17 hours ago, wayne sheldon said:

Most paints in those days dried slowly. All-metal pieces like fenders and hoods were often dried in ovens, not terribly high temperatures, but enough to bake the paint somewhat more quickly which also made it tougher and easier to handle during the assembly line work. Bodies, with their wooden structures, did not respond well in ovens. Even at 150 degrees, the wood could react badly, nails loosen, joints fracture. So bodies were not generally baked until they became mostly all steel. The paints used on bodies was usually softer than the paints on fenders and hoods, and generally did not weather as well.

I think that's what I'm looking at, paint that hasn't weathered well.  Thanks for the info, all the pieces certainly help to understand what may be going on.

[Kfigel]

3 hours ago, 58L-Y8 said:

The painting process before the advent to Duco was a time-consuming, laborious one, a real production bottleneck.  Paints were applied with brushes, first multiple coats of primer with rub downs with fine grit between each, plus lengthily dry cycles.  Next was the color coats with the same process, finally it was varnished to seal and protect the multiple layers.  This was the process for color coats,  The black Gilsonite paint Rusty mentioned was used on the parts what were likely to take the most dirt and hits from road stone etc.   Black, because it absorbed heat fastest, was used on metal parts that could withstand a baking/drying oven. Its the reason behind the old saying about Ford in any color as long as its black. Ford, because of the high production volumes, had to use the paint and process that would dry the fastest.   It was also easy to match/touch-up when damaged.  

 

The Big Six body, if dark blue, was painted with the process described, might respond with very fine grit rubbing and a varnish coat.  Try a small spot first to see if this is so.

This is interesting...back in my memory I think I saw a period ad or writeup on these cars actually being a dark blue and not necessarily black, but am not sure.  Your explanation would point to my car having two paint systems/methods that here 98 years later are reacting differently.  I will try a very fine grit rubbing compound.   

[Rusty_OToole]

I like the idea of lightly wet sanding with 1000 to smooth then sealing with a clear coat. This used to be a regular maintenance item in the old days on coach built cars. They were not waxed but washed and dried with a chamois and rubbed down and varnished every year or 2. I don't know what sort of clear  paint or varnish is compatible with the old paint over the long term. Does anyone make the same kind of varnish they used on cars 100 years ago?

Edited July 20, 2020 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

[58L-Y8]

1 hour ago, Kfigel said:

This is interesting...back in my memory I think I saw a period ad or writeup on these cars actually being a dark blue and not necessarily black, but am not sure.  Your explanation would point to my car having two paint systems/methods that here 98 years later are reacting differently.  I will try a very fine grit rubbing compound.   

Before you use any fine grit rubbing compound, it would be wise to consult with paint care specialist who can advise best how to revive and preserve that factory-applied finish. I've read they use a 1500 or 2000 grit wet sand so as not to remover much of the color layer.  Valspar varnish was a commonly advertised product then for auto finishing.  Proceed carefully and you should be able to achieve an acceptable result.

[W_Higgins]

In all of the era books I've collected on this the last step in a varnish job is a "body varnish" that is flowed on and that's it.  The practice we have today of ultra fine sanding and buffing as a final step seems not to have been a thing at that time.  In some places what they call "polishing" is wiping with a dry chamois.  The lingo really has a way of morphing over time. 

 

I have cans of original finish that I have collected and experimented with, even using the 39060 mentioned above, and what I applied to a test card doesn't like it.  Not to say that it won't work in this case as it is so much older and likely harder, but I would proceed cautiously in an inconspicuous area.  I put it on the test card a bit over a year ago and just now got it out to rub again.  The 39060 leaves it satin.  Even the next step 06064 won't bring it up.  After it sits for quite awhile again it might come back.  It doesn't get rock hard like the paints we're spoiled with today and sometimes issues like fingerprints when soft will settle back out over time.  Another thing to watch for with these compounds is when they are used on the modern urethanes for which they are intended, if you get a blob or splatter on an adjacent panel that you don't clean up, when you wipe it later you will see spotting as though the paint has swollen.  Nothing that can't be fixed, but given that it will do that to the durable paints we have today I would be very leery about what it might do to what we're talking about now if it is indeed a varnish based finish.

 

Though every hardware store around sells "varnish", there again the word has morphed over time and what is available today is nothing like what was available then.  If you're going to go over it with anything available today study the contents by getting the MSDS sheet to see what's really in it rather than going by a name.  Most commonly available "varnishes" today are urethanes.  

 

 

[nickelroadster]

Whether or not you are able to improve the looks of your paint, it really looks pretty good now for a 98 year old job.  I will pay attention to all the posts here as I am learning something all the time

[Buffalowed Bill]

Here are some pictures of a 1922 "Chummy" Roadster. A good friend built two 1922's, this is one of them. The last I knew one or both of the cars were owned by the heirs to the estate of another friend, Allen Barth (Harrington, Washington). I have always believed that the color was correct for the 1922 Studebaker.

arch?q=1922+Studebaker+chummy+roadster&rlz=_enUS749US779&oq

Edited July 20, 2020 by Buffalowed Bill (see edit history)

[Buffalowed Bill]

Sorry about the interloper car. You should also be able to find other pictures of the 22, it has been for sale in the recent past. 

[Buffalowed Bill]

[Kfigel]

Thanks for all the info from everyone.  I'll carefully try the suggestions but my first motto always is "Do No Harm".  I just found it interesting that there sure seems to be a distinct difference between the two painted areas.  Good input on why that may be the case. 

[John_Mereness]

Rubbing Compound is too aggressive for old paint - a watered down microfinishing compound is probably as aggressive as you can get - it is an arm power and time thing and not a machine buffing machine and short sheeting the bed thing.   And, a good old fashioned past wax will keep it nice for a year or so.  A friend had perhaps the fines original 1929 Lincoln Limousine and he very carefully used Turtle Wax Cleaner Wax on it = also looked nice for a year or so.   Do circles no bigger than your hand and accept it is the black hole of time.