Tervehdys!
Entisöin 220 (w187) 1952 mallista vanhusta ja nyt homma on edennyt maalausvaiheeseen. Kysymys kuuluu, että minkälaista maalia pitäis päälle laittaa, acryyliä vai lakkapintaista? Väri on musta. Onko museotarkastajalla sanottavaa maalin tyypistä? vaikuttaa kai asiaan, että alkuperäistä ei varmaan saatavana. Maalarit on suositelleet lakkapintaista? OK?
Lisäksi, onko kellään tiedossa mikä on ko. mustan värinumero.
220 -52 projekti
50-luvun mersun maalaus
-
kaappariovi
- Sisäänajossa
- Viestit: 7
- Liittynyt: Ti 26.10.2004 12:00
- Paikkakunta: Lieto
-
adenauer300
- Asiantuntija
- Viestit: 1866
- Liittynyt: Ma 14.04.2003 13:05
- Paikkakunta: Espoo
Voi helvata. Paikallisen ihmeautokorjaamon mies justiinsa mulle selitti, millaisella maalilla noita wanhoja kannattaa maalata, että lopputulos on oikeanlainen ja kestävä.
Ja arvatkaa, painoinko mieleen luennosta mitään...
Käyn siinä ensi viikolla taas, siis korjaamolla. Pitänee kysyä tuolloin uudestaan, että mitäs maalia siihen piti.
Ja arvatkaa, painoinko mieleen luennosta mitään...
Käyn siinä ensi viikolla taas, siis korjaamolla. Pitänee kysyä tuolloin uudestaan, että mitäs maalia siihen piti.
S124 300TD -93
W123 200 -84
W111 220SeB -64 edelleen projekti...
EX BMW 520i -84
EX MB 190 -89
EX MB 300TE 4matic -89
EX Land Rover Discovery Tdi -97
W123 200 -84
W111 220SeB -64 edelleen projekti...
EX BMW 520i -84
EX MB 190 -89
EX MB 300TE 4matic -89
EX Land Rover Discovery Tdi -97
-
Matti Äyräväinen
- Vakiokalustoa
- Viestit: 151
- Liittynyt: Ma 24.11.2003 14:47
Re: 50-luvun mersun maalaus
Autosi maalityyppi selviää varmasti tyyppikilvestä (ainakin 50-luvun lopun malleissa), se on joko selluloosaa tai keinohartsia. Selluloosa on kemiallisesti heikkoa mutta hyvä kiillottaa (naarmuuntuu myös helposti). Keinohartsi menettää kiiltonsa suhteellisen nopeasti ja on huonosti kiillotettavaa. Suosittelen tavallista kaksikomponentti akryyliä, jota on helppo korjailla, jos tulee tarvetta. Toki kaksikerros akryylikin (värimassa+lakka) on varteenotettava vaihtoehto.
Matti Äyräväinen
Matti Äyräväinen
Tässä aiheesta STD automotive restoration kirjasta: Voin suositella kaikille harrastajille saa Alfameristä ja ei maksa kuin n30€. /380 sivua:
Jos tämä loukkaa tekijänoikeuksia niin poistakoon ADmin tämän jutun tästä:
The Choice of Paint for Restoration
The choice of finishes for restoration work usually invoIves some level of compromise between authenticity 'lid practicality. Early cars that were painted with varnish re not refinished in this material because cost, lack of availability, and extremely limited durability combine to -,iake the use of original varnishes impossible. Instead, these cars are refinished in nitrocellulose and acrylic lacquers, which somewhat approximate the appearances of he original varnishes.
Cars originally finished in nitrocellulose lacquers are •ametimes restored in these finishes. Although nitrocellulose lacquers came off the shelves of the major line automotive paint jobbers more than two decades ago, they are still readily available from several reputable specialty suppliers. Bill Hirsch's line of these paints is certainly as good or better than the original nitrocellulose finishes. The problem with using nitrocellulose paints is that their durability is very inferior to that of modern acrylic lacquers and their need for maintenance is con¬stant. They scratch easily, and their surfaces oxidize quickly. On the good side, they are easy to feather sand and spot in - if you can match colors. That's a big "if" because some of the mixing colors for these paints have shelf lives of about six months, and the mixed paints tend to darken substantially after that. Saving some repair paint for a future emergency after you spray a car is usu¬ally futile, particularly if reds or browns are involved. And trying to match the presently available nitrocellulose paints by formula usually doesn't work; there just isn't that much control in their manufacture anymore. Hand or spectrometer matches are usually the best that you can do.
Some people, myself included, advocate using acrylic lacquers to replace nitrocellulose originals. I feel that the appearance of the acrylics is very close to that of original nitrocellulose finishes, and durability is much better. The ability to repair acrylic lacquer finishes is also very good. If you can find a paint chip for a standard color in a mod¬ern paint that is close to the original color that you are trying to duplicate, you are assured of being able to se¬cure additional matching paint for repair or respray for years to come. And the major manufacturers control their color consistency rigorously, so a match should be easy. Remember, if you start with a nitrocellulose paint, there is no conversion possible of the formula for that paint to a modern acrylic finish.
Cars that were originally painted in baked enamels can still be refinished in "synthetic" or alkyd enamels. Paints of this type, like Ditzco and Dulux, are still somewhat available from major manufacturers. But this availability is limited and will doubtless end in the near future because there is a decreasing market for alkyd enamels. I have no particular objection to refinishing cars that were originally finished in synthetic enamels with acrylic enamels, and I have no objection to adding the best gloss and durability additives available to acrylic enamels to make them even better finishes. But I think that it is an act of barbarism to color sand and buff out acrylic enam¬els in restoration work. There is something so totally wrong about the appearance of the resulting finish that it makes me shiver. This is because the older enamels could not be buffed, and the whole point of using them was the gloss that they had without wheel marks. The fact that the hardeners available for acrylic enamels make it possible to buff them out does not mean that you should do this. The ultimate horror in this regard is the combination of orange peel and wheel marks that can be seen in many examples of contemporary body shop practice. That's okay on new cars, but it looks awful on old ones where this situation could never have existed when they were new. It should also be pointed out that when catalyzed
acrylic enamels, such as Centari, Delstar, Acrylyd, Dia¬mont, Ultra Base 7, etc. are used in conjunction with ap¬propriate gloss additives, they produce beautiful finishes that air dry to an appearance that is very much like that of the old synthetic enamels. They are much easier to apply because they flow out more easily and they come out of tack faster.
Finally, we come to the modern exotic finishes such as basecoat/clearcoat systems, epoxy-acrylics, and polyure¬thanes. No one would argue that these are not inherently beautiful finishes, but they are totally and visibly in¬authentic for most restoration purposes. They can be dif¬ficult to repair, and the problems of removing some of them will plague future restorers. All of this will probably rule out their use when the authentic restoration of old car bodies, chassis, and suspension parts is the issue.
If you have trouble distinguishing what the finish on your car is or was originally, you may be able to deter¬mine this from the paint plate on the car, by reference to the appropriate shop manual, or by consultation with a paint jobber who still has the manufacturer's color books for the period when the car was built. Generally, the fin¬ishes on lacquer painted cars can be dissolved in lacquer thinner. Thinner or reducer will not dissolve cured, air dried, or baked enamel. Before the mid-1950s, most cars, including Fords and Chryslers, were painted in baked enamel. The exceptions were GM and some of the inde¬pendent automakers, who used nitrocellulose lacquer finishes on their cars. After the mid-1950s, acrylic lac¬quers steadily replaced nitrocellulose lacquers - you ac¬tually had to pay considerable extra for the option of a "Lucite" finish on a GM car in the mid and late 1950s. Ford, Chrysler, and some others experimented with "su¬per" enamels in the late 1950s and early 1960s but gener¬ally went to acrylic enamels by the 1970s.
To sum up: In most cases, it is best to find a modern, nonmetallic color that closely approximates the original color that you want to use. If the original finish was a lacquer, an acrylic lacquer can be used, and if it was a synthetic enamel, an acrylic enamel can be used. If you want to go the route of absolute authenticity, nitrocellulose lacquers and alkyd enamels should be used, but durability will be sacrificed if this is done. And, of course, if one of the old enamels is used, don't attempt to buff it out unless it has been fortified with additives and crosslinkers that make this possible. I would advise against using clearcoat/basecoat systems in restoration work. They can be very beautiful, but they are inauthen¬tic to all but the most recent cars and they can be very difficult to repair.
Jos tämä loukkaa tekijänoikeuksia niin poistakoon ADmin tämän jutun tästä:
The Choice of Paint for Restoration
The choice of finishes for restoration work usually invoIves some level of compromise between authenticity 'lid practicality. Early cars that were painted with varnish re not refinished in this material because cost, lack of availability, and extremely limited durability combine to -,iake the use of original varnishes impossible. Instead, these cars are refinished in nitrocellulose and acrylic lacquers, which somewhat approximate the appearances of he original varnishes.
Cars originally finished in nitrocellulose lacquers are •ametimes restored in these finishes. Although nitrocellulose lacquers came off the shelves of the major line automotive paint jobbers more than two decades ago, they are still readily available from several reputable specialty suppliers. Bill Hirsch's line of these paints is certainly as good or better than the original nitrocellulose finishes. The problem with using nitrocellulose paints is that their durability is very inferior to that of modern acrylic lacquers and their need for maintenance is con¬stant. They scratch easily, and their surfaces oxidize quickly. On the good side, they are easy to feather sand and spot in - if you can match colors. That's a big "if" because some of the mixing colors for these paints have shelf lives of about six months, and the mixed paints tend to darken substantially after that. Saving some repair paint for a future emergency after you spray a car is usu¬ally futile, particularly if reds or browns are involved. And trying to match the presently available nitrocellulose paints by formula usually doesn't work; there just isn't that much control in their manufacture anymore. Hand or spectrometer matches are usually the best that you can do.
Some people, myself included, advocate using acrylic lacquers to replace nitrocellulose originals. I feel that the appearance of the acrylics is very close to that of original nitrocellulose finishes, and durability is much better. The ability to repair acrylic lacquer finishes is also very good. If you can find a paint chip for a standard color in a mod¬ern paint that is close to the original color that you are trying to duplicate, you are assured of being able to se¬cure additional matching paint for repair or respray for years to come. And the major manufacturers control their color consistency rigorously, so a match should be easy. Remember, if you start with a nitrocellulose paint, there is no conversion possible of the formula for that paint to a modern acrylic finish.
Cars that were originally painted in baked enamels can still be refinished in "synthetic" or alkyd enamels. Paints of this type, like Ditzco and Dulux, are still somewhat available from major manufacturers. But this availability is limited and will doubtless end in the near future because there is a decreasing market for alkyd enamels. I have no particular objection to refinishing cars that were originally finished in synthetic enamels with acrylic enamels, and I have no objection to adding the best gloss and durability additives available to acrylic enamels to make them even better finishes. But I think that it is an act of barbarism to color sand and buff out acrylic enam¬els in restoration work. There is something so totally wrong about the appearance of the resulting finish that it makes me shiver. This is because the older enamels could not be buffed, and the whole point of using them was the gloss that they had without wheel marks. The fact that the hardeners available for acrylic enamels make it possible to buff them out does not mean that you should do this. The ultimate horror in this regard is the combination of orange peel and wheel marks that can be seen in many examples of contemporary body shop practice. That's okay on new cars, but it looks awful on old ones where this situation could never have existed when they were new. It should also be pointed out that when catalyzed
acrylic enamels, such as Centari, Delstar, Acrylyd, Dia¬mont, Ultra Base 7, etc. are used in conjunction with ap¬propriate gloss additives, they produce beautiful finishes that air dry to an appearance that is very much like that of the old synthetic enamels. They are much easier to apply because they flow out more easily and they come out of tack faster.
Finally, we come to the modern exotic finishes such as basecoat/clearcoat systems, epoxy-acrylics, and polyure¬thanes. No one would argue that these are not inherently beautiful finishes, but they are totally and visibly in¬authentic for most restoration purposes. They can be dif¬ficult to repair, and the problems of removing some of them will plague future restorers. All of this will probably rule out their use when the authentic restoration of old car bodies, chassis, and suspension parts is the issue.
If you have trouble distinguishing what the finish on your car is or was originally, you may be able to deter¬mine this from the paint plate on the car, by reference to the appropriate shop manual, or by consultation with a paint jobber who still has the manufacturer's color books for the period when the car was built. Generally, the fin¬ishes on lacquer painted cars can be dissolved in lacquer thinner. Thinner or reducer will not dissolve cured, air dried, or baked enamel. Before the mid-1950s, most cars, including Fords and Chryslers, were painted in baked enamel. The exceptions were GM and some of the inde¬pendent automakers, who used nitrocellulose lacquer finishes on their cars. After the mid-1950s, acrylic lac¬quers steadily replaced nitrocellulose lacquers - you ac¬tually had to pay considerable extra for the option of a "Lucite" finish on a GM car in the mid and late 1950s. Ford, Chrysler, and some others experimented with "su¬per" enamels in the late 1950s and early 1960s but gener¬ally went to acrylic enamels by the 1970s.
To sum up: In most cases, it is best to find a modern, nonmetallic color that closely approximates the original color that you want to use. If the original finish was a lacquer, an acrylic lacquer can be used, and if it was a synthetic enamel, an acrylic enamel can be used. If you want to go the route of absolute authenticity, nitrocellulose lacquers and alkyd enamels should be used, but durability will be sacrificed if this is done. And, of course, if one of the old enamels is used, don't attempt to buff it out unless it has been fortified with additives and crosslinkers that make this possible. I would advise against using clearcoat/basecoat systems in restoration work. They can be very beautiful, but they are inauthen¬tic to all but the most recent cars and they can be very difficult to repair.
w124 200D
Alfa Romeo 164 TS/91
MF 165/69
Mazda B2200 87
Alfa Romeo 164 TS/91
MF 165/69
Mazda B2200 87