1932 - 902 Club Sedan- PIN STRIPING - HOW TO PAINT??

[Guest box]

I will be painting my car with Nitro-Cellulose Lacquer - 3 body colors and pin striping being the fourth color. What is the best way to paint pin-striping? Paint pin-striping first and cover with tape of proper width - then paint the body colors OR paint the body color first then mask off and paint the pin-striping??? Or is there another procedure for painting - how did the factory do it? Need help soon.........Kurt

[Restorer32]

We would paint the body first then have our local pinstriper stripe it by hand. Packard pinstriping was usually very narrow, about 1/16" wide or so. In my opinion pinstriping should be used sparingly. Too much and you end up with a circus wagon.

[mrpushbutton]

It's been my experience that you paint the whole car first, let it dry, put the car together then call the pinstriper. A good pinstriper is worth every penny they earn, and they make it look deceptively simple.

Why Nitro-Cellulose? (other than "that's the way they made it") Over the long haul I've been much happier with acrylic lacquer. I worked for a large collection for 12 years. We had a Packard that was restored by a well-known restorer who specializes in Packards. The only thing I could find fault with was the paint--it was nitro-cellulose and would not hold a shine. when we took the car out to shows the only product that would give it a temporary shine (equal to other cars) was Pledge furniture polish. 3M Imperial hand glaze didn't do it, Maguuire products wouldn't do it. All of the acrylic laquer cars we had (many of which were older restorations) kept a high quality of finish.

[Guest Randy Berger]

My 400 is acrylic lacquer and its drawback is that it is very brittle and chips easily when compared to one-step urethane. I don't know who painted your nitro-cellulose but I have seen jobs where that paint almost looked wet because it shined so well. Perhaps the application was at fault. It will need much more frequent polishing than acrylic or urethane.

Speaking of polish I use Zaino Brothers out of New Jersey - great stuff. I never wax anymore - too lazy.

[Packard enthus.]

Yes, modern "two part" paints are superior in every respect to the lacquer-based. Here's the problem. There are still enough of us left, who can tell the difference, and will smirk when we see a otherwise well-restored old car REALLY shine.

The human eye is a remarkable instrument - even if you are not trained in or otherwise familiar with the way light behaves when it hits a surface, you "know" that many of the old cars at car shows are WAY too "shiny".

Properly applied, nitro cellulouse lacquer has a nice shine, and will hold it for many years under the conditions the average old car buff maintains his car (of course it is nowhere near as durable as the more modern finishes, but not many of us leave our collector cars out in the elements week after week).

I cannot fault people for painting their cars with modern two-part paints, if they are going to be daily drivers, or are trying to compete in some fancy public car show.

Again, NO question these modern paints, especially if a "clear coat" is properly applied and then compouned, are far more spectacular than an old solid color nitrocellulose paint job. But that's just the point. Some of us have made a compromise or two in order to keep our collector cars servicable. I suggest we do NOT compromise with anything as obvious as a paint job.

You can still get nitrocellulose lacquer from any of several old car suppliers, and the nice thing about it, is that even us amatuers, with a little practice, can do a "factory" type job that will look historically correct.

[Dave Mitchell]

The striping on the body was done after the car was painted originally and needs to be done that way now. I have factory photos showing the bodies being striped both with a small striping wheel and with a brush. Restorer 32 is right, the stripes are thin, in fact maybe thiner than 1/16. There is a good striping painter in Chicagoland who has done cars for me and I think you could get him to come to do your car or take it to him. You should be able to find factory photos of a 32 that show the extent of the original striping. A few years ago I judged an all original 32 Packard sedan from Kansas that still had its original paint and striping - you might want see that car or at least get photos of it for reference.

I would respectfully suggest that you consider modern paint as in my experience you will have much better luck with it. I have cars with all original paint from the 30s, cars repainted with both types of lacquer, a car with part of its paint original lacquer and part with modern lacquer, cars with single stage modern and base clear modern. I would say that it isn't the paint, but who puts it on, and then sands and buffs it that will determine if it looks like a modern paint or not, and will keep people from snickering at your paint. I used lacquer to match a couple of cars that only needed partial paint jobs, and getting it to look like the old paint is a very, very time consuming process, frought with peril, and it simply doesn't hold up or spot in well, even in climate controlled conditions. It didn't last that well to begin with, and it is worse now as many of the original components have been taken out of lacquer for environmental and health reasons. You can not buy paint that is exactly like that made in the 30s to spray on your car now. Furthermore the paint companies do not have the support for these products that they do for modern paints. If you prime in lacquer, it will shrink much more than a modern primer, as will the paint. I have a car painted about 9 years ago with modern DuPont single stage urethane that looks like paint from the 30s and is still so nice that the paint alone gets great complements today. It took a lot of work to make it look that way, but it is great and holds up much better than the lacquer we put even more work into.

[Packard enthus.]

David in his above "post" brings up an interesting point about paint restoration finish I fully agree with - that is, if you get a chance to see a REALLY authentic car, look at it VERY carefully - you can learn a lot !

We were lucky in the Southern Calif. Region of the CCCA, in that we had a member who had not one, but TWO just about "new" early 1930's Cadillac V-12's. If I recall correctly, they had about four thousand miles on them, somehow escaping the ravages of time. They STILL SMELLED NEW!

When I ran judging events for the CCCA, I used to love to use these cars as examples of what a 100 point car is - oh - let me explain, in those years, Classic Car Club Of America judging was based on how close the car was to its condition on delivery day as a new car. Our idea of "authenticity" in those years meant we most certainly could and DID take points off for over-restoration !

Of course that would be absurd these days - today, most car shows are public events, and many of them charge the general public to attend. It is only fair that you give the public what they want to see, i.e. a really spectacular show, so car shows today want their judging to reflect that the most spectacular car should win. My - how times have changed - in earlier years of the old car hobby, the general public, if they even knew what we were doing ( saving old cars ) they would have thought we were nuts, they certainly didn't bother to attend our events like they do today.

If you follow Dave's suggestion, and are lucky enough to closely examine an authentic original car from the classic era,you will find the fit and finish was far more subtle than what restorers today MUST do to please crowds at public car shows. Those original paint jobs were not perfect ! Even on the largest and most expensive luxury cars we call "classics" !

I am confident that if you got hold of a time machine, and grabbed a car from the pre-war era right off a dealer's floor, and took it straight to a major car show of today, you'd be lucky if they awarded you a can of dog food !

So - there's the problem - what do YOU want to do with YOUR collector car ? I do disagree with Dave about paint chemistry to this extent - I am unclear precisely what ingredients he feels are not now present in notro-cellulose lacquer that were in lacquers from the classic era. I cannot over-emphasize how true Dave's comments are about preparation. I personally have painted two cars on the same day with the same batch of laquer, and found changes in how they "laid on", pointing out how valid Dave's comments are about the difficulty of "matching" ( an that was in the relatively dry and stable climate of Southern California ! ).

Bottom line - it is YOUR car and YOU know best what you want to do with it. If you are a stubborn old coot like me, and want REAL "authenticity", plan on people walking right by your paint job, to marvel at the latest "hi tech" restoration.

[Guest box]

What type of paint would you suggest for doing it youself restorer painting in your garage? The long drying time is the problem with dust and dirt.Can the modern paint be sanded and buffed to remove imperfections? Kurt

[Restorer32]

Unless you are determined to do it yourself you would be better off to find a painter who would guide you in doing the preparation work, which accounts for a very large percentage of the total labor, and then spray the car for you when the preparation was done to his satisfaction. You could then do the color sanding and final polishing. With the cost of paint and primer these days you could easily waste what it would cost you to have it sprayed professionally. You certainly don't want to spray any of the two stage paints without proper safety equipment, unless you have a secret death wish.

[Packard enthus.]

Please..everyone who is thinking of doing their own painting - LISTEN to Restorer 32's comments ! Especially about breathing the vapors !

The vapor from ANY paint you spray is dangerous to inhale without the correct breathing equipment. This holds true even for the relatively benign older paint chemistry. But for the modern two part paints, the stuff is D E A D L Y ! As in, you can get REALLY dead from inhaling even a whif of the stuff. That is why VERY special breathing apparatus is required.

Even with the correct breathing equipment for the paint involved, and a good spray gun ( I prefer the latest "low pressure high volume" guns) it is just about impossible for an amatuer to get a good finish with the modern two-part paint. You WILL get either "orange-peel" and / or "runs". To a lesser degree, this is also true with the old-style enamels on some pre-war cars. Nitro cellulouse laquer IS a bit easier to work with - many amatuers have gotten excellent results. But again, as Dave notes, there are three words that are the KEY to ANY paint job..PREPARATION....PREPARATION...oh yes...and more PREPARATION...! And note again Dave's comments - while I maintain you CAN get an authentic finish with old-style nitro-cellouse, he's right - it will be nowhere near as "shiny" or durable as a modern paint.

[Guest box]

I under stand the safety concerns and have good breathing equipment.This will be 3 car I painted see pic 1928 Chevy in Nitro Cellulose Lacquer. I have used 3 part primer block sanded 3 times and will seal primer this week. Back to question what type of modern paint can be fixed I only user lacquer. Kurt

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unless you are determined to do it yourself you would be better off to find a painter who would guide you in doing the preparation work, which accounts for a very large percentage of the total labor, and then spray the car for you when the preparation was done to his satisfaction. You could then do the color sanding and final polishing. With the cost of paint and primer these days you could easily waste what it would cost you to have it sprayed professionally. You certainly don't want to spray any of the two stage paints without proper safety equipment, unless you have a secret death wish. </div></div>

I bet you it would be hard to find a painter who would agree to paint over an amateur's preparation work.

[Tom M]

Kurt,

Nice job on the chevy.

[Restorer32]

Note I said "spray the car for you when the preparation was done to HIS satisfaction". We've done this several times though invariably the owner doing his own work does not understand the degree of perfection or the amount of time required in the prep work stage to produce an outstanding paint job.

[Packard enthus.]

yup - so true !