Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

[Joseph C.]

When I last painted a Corvette (5-6 years ago), lacquer was the only way to go. I've been told that lacquer paints are no longer available, and after stumbling and fumbling around the Internet and other sources for the past week, I've concluded that is the case. Is that correct?? No more lacquer!?!? If so, what is an acceptable substitute so far as NCRS judging standards are concerned? Any help would be GREATLY appreciated!!

[Gene M.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

We just got lacquer about a year ago. PPG brand, I'm fairly sure they still make it.

You will need a lot more of it since coverage is piss poor compared to when I was younger...........

[Michael J.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

I had mine painted a year or so ago, and I think the paint shop used this supplier.

http://www.paintforcars.com/acrylic_lacquer_paint.html

[Terry M.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

I can get all the lacquer I want, but it is not your father's paint -- as Gene mentions.

You may want to spend some time attending an NCRS paint seminar at one of the Regionals this Summer to educate yourself about NCRS paint finish requirements. The Cliff notes are: Lacquer is NOT required for a no-deduct paint job. A lot of other requirements ARE in place, and they can all be summed up by the phrase: Typical Factory Appearance.

[Tom L.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Just finished painting my car in PPG lacquer. It's most certainly available.

[Dick W.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

It just may not be available in your state, CT. I can get it in NC but have to travel a considerable distance to get it. The quality of the material is not what it used to be, nor are most, if not all, mixing colors available. Formulas for the older cars are not applicable today. You will have to color match. Also most of the metallics use metallic particles that are different that what the factory used and will definitely look different than original

[Thomas O.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

My 73 bright yellow (952) has a small area of road rash on the left front area and a two other very small areas. I would like to have these areas spoted in. I really don't want to spend the big dollars for a complete paint. Will the new lacquer do the job in a decent manner? Your comments will be appreciated. thanks, tom

[Dick W.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Thomas, the biggest task you will have is finding someone that can shoot, color match, and blend the color in. Most painters today have never sprayed lacquer. DuPont and PPG used to have a blending solvent that would "burn" the spot repair in, but all these products have been discontinued.

[Donald T.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

You can get all the lacquer you want. Just place your order and it will be at your door within a week.

http://www.autocolorlibrary.com/

[Michael J.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

You may want to spend some time attending an NCRS paint seminar at one of the Regionals this Summer to educate yourself about NCRS paint finish requirements. The Cliff notes are: Lacquer is NOT required for a no-deduct paint job. A lot of other requirements ARE in place, and they can all be summed up by the phrase: Typical Factory Appearance.[/quote]

In my '67 judging manual it says: "The factory applied paint system for all 1967 models was acrylic lacquer. The obvious use of any other coating system such as enamel, urethane coatings, or the obvious application of clear lacquer shall receive A TOTAL DEDUCTION ON ORIGINALITY POINTS." Is this not correct?
I have not had my car judged yet, but I was also told to just use the 3M glaze on the lacquer as a wax would make it "too shiny". Typical factory appearance?

[Dick W.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

In my '67 judging manual it says: "The factory applied paint system for all 1967 models was acrylic lacquer. The obvious use of any other coating system such as enamel, urethane coatings, or the obvious application of clear lacquer shall receive A TOTAL DEDUCTION ON ORIGINALITY POINTS." Is this not correct?
I have not had my car judged yet, but I was also told to just use the 3M glaze on the lacquer as a wax would make it "too shiny". Typical factory appearance?[/quote]

Key word is OBVIOUS. The formentioned guideline for paint give you a go, no go, set of rules to determine the actual deduction, if any. At one time one of the California chapters posted the guide sheet on their web site. I do not know if it is still there

[Terry M.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

You may want to spend some time attending an NCRS paint seminar at one of the Regionals this Summer to educate yourself about NCRS paint finish requirements. The Cliff notes are: Lacquer is NOT required for a no-deduct paint job. A lot of other requirements ARE in place, and they can all be summed up by the phrase: Typical Factory Appearance.

In my '67 judging manual it says: "The factory applied paint system for all 1967 models was acrylic lacquer. The obvious use of any other coating system such as enamel, urethane coatings, or the obvious application of clear lacquer shall receive A TOTAL DEDUCTION ON ORIGINALITY POINTS." Is this not correct?
I have not had my car judged yet, but I was also told to just use the 3M glaze on the lacquer as a wax would make it "too shiny". Typical factory appearance?[/QUOTE]

Michael -- it is not as simple as your copy of the TIM&JG makes it. The current method of judging paint was promulgated about 3 to 5 years ago. The laminated "cheat sheet" (I hasten to add that my personal opinion is that term is all too appropriate) I have shows an NCRS copyright of 2008, but me thinks we started using the paint flow chart before that. Not all the judging manuals have been updated yet -- and then there are those that are still in use which were printed even longer ago. Of course The Judging Chairman's message about paint in The Restorer caused a stir at the time -- but that stir has obviously subsided int he interim.

When the flow chart allowing for points addition to that full deduct for non-typical factory finish of paint was first introduced I recall the statement that this was temporary to allow those with cars already painted with BC/CC to navigate the system with some certainty of the points outcome. I don't believe the intent was to allow folks a means to put over restored cars through the system. My belief (maybe I should say: hope) is that before I check out the term temporary will have a definition.

[Chuck S.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

...Michael -- it is not as simple as your copy of the TIM&JG makes it. The current method of judging paint was promulgated about 3 to 5 years ago. The laminated "cheat sheet" (I hasten to add that my personal opinion is that term is all too appropriate) I have shows an NCRS copyright of 2008, but me thinks we started using the paint flow chart before that....Of course The Judging Chairman's message about paint in The Restorer caused a stir at the time -- but that stir has obviously subsided int he interim...

LMAO!!!

TM, you can be responsible for a spontaneous explosion of laughter yourself...I'm going to have to get me one of them "cheat sheets", or alternately, read the JC's message on paint. (Snicker)

[John H.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Here's the paint judging flow chart.

[Michael J.]

Re: Lacquer paint substitutes and judging

Interesting about the "appears" and "obvious" type subjectives here. Frankly, I would much rather have had a BC/CC paint on the car, as I think lacquer to be an inferior paint, it is soft, chips easily, and fades easily as well as the "orange peel" look after a while. But I was under the impression a top flight car could not make it with BC/CC, guess there is a lot of "judgement" out there for the judges to use. I also think it is easy to tell the difference, if you really want to