A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

[Mike R.]

Can anyone tell me if the finish on the A arms should be more or less glossy than the frame?

[Russ S.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

The A arms should be glossy.

[Gary B.]

A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Mike,

If you're talking about a '65, as your profile suggest, then the JG probably says the A-arms should be gloss, and that should be significantly glossier than the frame. But there are judges who will deduct for A-arms that are too glossy, as in being able to see your reflection in the paint, so choose the gloss level for your A-arms carefully.

Gary Beaupre

[John D.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

russ,
In my experience any type of black gloss to semi gloss shuould be fine. In judging I have only seen deductions for over-restoration on powder coated arms with heavy black (way too shiny) finish.

[Tracy C.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Can anyone tell me if the finish on the A arms should be more or less glossy than the frame?

Slightly more gloss than the frame. Gloss is a relative term. Originals were not "comb your hair in the reflection gloss" but more of a semi gloss.

tc

[Chuck S.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Slightly more gloss than the frame. Gloss is a relative term. Originals were not "comb your hair in the reflection gloss" but more of a semi gloss...

From my observations, TC is correct.

If you want it real, then not REAL glossy. Whether they deduct for it or not is secondary in my world. I had my front control arms done to perfection (included natural ball joints brushed to beautiful matte natural and perfectly masked). At least until I realized full gloss was not real; then it was back to the bead blast cabinet and try again. Sometimes, I wish I hadn't been such a perfectionist.

[Michael H.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Pretty sure the coating on front control arms for 63-67 was chassis black, not paint as we know it. (yes, that gooey stuff) This coating would have been roughly the same as the coating on the frame.
I would guess the "gloss factor" to be in the range of 70%.

One difference between the frame and control arm coating gloss factor would be the fact that frames were stored outside and control arms were not. It didn't take long at all to dull chassis black. Just the trip on an open rail car would have an effect on the gloss.

I think the control arm coating on later C3 cars changed at some point to a coating that was closer to paint.

I agree, no 63-67 front control arm should be 100% gloss black, especially the gloss black from a spray can which has a high content of clear.

[John D.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

mike,
FWIW...The part drawing for the lower control arm states "paint with Pontiac Varnish no. 630 black trichlorethylene or equivalent"

Nor sure what that is though...is it paint or a preservative of some sort ?

[Brian M.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Weren't they dipped?

[Terry M.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

I can tell you what 1 1 1 trichlorethylene is. It is a very powerful solvent and water displacer. It is also a carcinogen and thus is hard to get now days. The utility industry used to use it in huge quantities -- and it was the main ingredient in the old style Brake Clean.

There was a huge environmental situation in the town of Lyle, Illinois, in which a manufacturing facility disposed of enough of this stuff by pouring it on the ground that it contaminated the drinking water for nearby residences. Google ought to have some interesting results for it.

[Michael H.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

mike,
FWIW...The part drawing for the lower control arm states "paint with Pontiac Varnish no. 630 black trichlorethylene or equivalent"

Nor sure what that is though...is it paint or a preservative of some sort ?

I wonder if the description of the coating was different for the original 3832349 control arm assembly?

I know later (70's?) arms had a much more durable coating.

[John D.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Mike,

No finish specified on the assembly drawing or on the detail drawing for the control arm itself p/n 3742071.

john

[Michael H.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Mike,

No finish specified on the assembly drawing or on the detail drawing for the control arm itself p/n 3742071.

john

Thanks John.

I was just discussing the coating on the control arms on C2 cars with Jorjorian a few days ago and he agreed that the coating was chassis black, or something very similar.

I cleaned the engine and some areas on the control arms on my new/6 month old 64 coupe with gunk, the old engine cleaner. It was only on for a few minutes but when I washed it off with water, the chassis black immediately came off of the control arms. (and the frame rails and steering gear) I was surprised that what I assumed was paint at the time was so cheap/easily disolved.

Jorjorian had a similar experience years ago on a car that still had most of it's chassis black on the control arms.

[Grant W.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Can anyone tell me if the finish on the A arms should be more or less glossy than the frame?

HI Mike

GM frame paint or conditioner in the Gallons is like a satin semi gloss if that makes sense,

Semi Gloss is fine for your A arms.

If you want a little more than semi gloss. Here is what you can do.

When you coat Semi Gloss and it is still WET, Immediately just mist spray Gloss about 1 feet above the A arm. Some of the Gloss mist will land and spread onto the Semi Gloss.
Do not really spray pointing directly on the A Arm downward. Spray it lateral like a fan over A arm.
Do the bottom first to get use to the technique.
Make sure you use the same mfg paint. You can Use GM gloss and GM semi Gloss or Krylon or Tremclad paint.
Hope this helps.
Grant

[Michael H.]

Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

HI Mike
GM frame paint or conditioner in the Gallons is like a satin semi gloss if that makes sense,
Grant

Grant, Is the GM reconditioning paint that you refer to the old 1050104 from years ago or is there a new number/product from GM?