A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level - NCRS Discussion Boards

A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Dick W.
    Former NCRS Director Region IV
    • June 30, 1985
    • 10483

    #16
    Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

    We used to flatten our paint to 80%-90% gloss for a arm paint. 70% for frames
    Dick Whittington

    Comment

    • Chuck S.
      Expired
      • April 1, 1992
      • 4668

      #17
      Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

      Originally posted by Michael Hanson (4067)
      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?
      The original question was in the context of a C3 (69), not a C2.

      I found 1050104 would be fairly close for the C3 frame (probably a little flat), and it is definitely too flat for the control arms...in my opinion.

      This is not rocket science, but it is tedious detailed work...buy some black enamel or urethane, then try mixing formulas adding flattener until the gloss is just slightly more glossy than correct frame gloss (previously determined).
      Last edited by Chuck S.; November 24, 2010, 09:31 PM.

      Comment

      • Grant W.
        Very Frequent User
        • December 1, 1987
        • 407

        #18
        Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

        Originally posted by Michael Hanson (4067)
        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?
        Hi Michael
        I only have the old 1050104, but I did talk to Joe Lucia long time ago and I think the new chassis paint in the new black and blue? cans from GM now is the same style of paint.
        Hope this helps. Grant

        Comment

        • Joe L.
          Beyond Control Poster
          • February 1, 1988
          • 43219

          #19
          Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

          Originally posted by Grant Wong (12133)
          Hi Michael
          I only have the old 1050104, but I did talk to Joe Lucia long time ago and I think the new chassis paint in the new black and blue? cans from GM now is the same style of paint.
          Hope this helps. Grant

          Grant-----


          The paint is still available under GM #1050104. However, as far as I can tell, it's not available through the GM parts system. Most of the Corvette parts vendors carry it, though. It runs about 100 bucks a gallon.
          In Appreciation of John Hinckley

          Comment

          • Mike R.
            Expired
            • August 30, 2009
            • 321

            #20
            Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

            Thanks Everyone, I have it now. I will paint the control arms a shade glossier than the frame. I have the frame back and it looks great. I will be starting to bolt parts on this weekend. Can't wait to start getting parts off the floor!

            I now have four different gloss levels of black paint in spray cans and a couple others for a paint gun. While I am not the conneseur of black paints that some of you are, I am on my way....

            I have to say that, of the spray cans, the John Deere Blitz Black sprays far better than the Krylon or Rustoleum. The John Deere spray cans work as well as a gun.

            Mike



            Originally posted by Grant Wong (12133)
            Hi Michael
            I only have the old 1050104, but I did talk to Joe Lucia long time ago and I think the new chassis paint in the new black and blue? cans from GM now is the same style of paint.
            Hope this helps. Grant

            Comment

            • Bob J.
              Very Frequent User
              • December 1, 1977
              • 714

              #21
              Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

              Originally posted by Michael Hanson (4067)
              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.
              I agree, on 63-68 (maybe later) the arms are painted in an asphalt based black coating, same as trailing arms and frames.
              Mineral spirits will disolve it just like gunk. Bob

              Comment

              • Joe L.
                Beyond Control Poster
                • February 1, 1988
                • 43219

                #22
                Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                Originally posted by Mike Rapoport (50767)
                Thanks Everyone, I have it now. I will paint the control arms a shade glossier than the frame. I have the frame back and it looks great. I will be starting to bolt parts on this weekend. Can't wait to start getting parts off the floor!

                I now have four different gloss levels of black paint in spray cans and a couple others for a paint gun. While I am not the conneseur of black paints that some of you are, I am on my way....

                I have to say that, of the spray cans, the John Deere Blitz Black sprays far better than the Krylon or Rustoleum. The John Deere spray cans work as well as a gun.

                Mike

                Mike------


                The John Deere Blitz Black is great paint and it does spray very well from the spray can. In fact, this paint used to be the late Dale Pearman's favorite paint. However, Dale was a C1 guy. There may be C1 applications for which the Blitz Black is a perfect match to the original paint used. However, as nice as the Blitz Black is, I don't know of any C2 or C3 applications for which its gloss level and finish texture is correct. It's "close" for some, though.
                In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                Comment

                • Joe L.
                  Beyond Control Poster
                  • February 1, 1988
                  • 43219

                  #23
                  Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                  Originally posted by Bob Jorjorian (1619)
                  I agree, on 63-68 (maybe later) the arms are painted in an asphalt based black coating, same as trailing arms and frames.
                  Mineral spirits will disolve it just like gunk. Bob
                  Bob-----


                  The asphaltic coating was used to at least 1969. I removed the original coating from my 1969 frame using rags soaked with petroleum solvent. It took a little bit of rubbing but the coating came right off, right down to bare steel. And incidentally, since my car has lived it's whole life in California, there was virtually no rust, at all.

                  Also, some folks think that this coating was black. However, it was not black. It was a very dark brown which appeared like black to many observers. When it came off on the solvent-soaked rags, it was very obvious it was actually dark brown and not black.

                  If the coating had been a paint, as some folks insist it was, there is absolutely no way it would have come off with the petroleum solvent.
                  In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                  Comment

                  • Paul J.
                    Expired
                    • September 9, 2008
                    • 2091

                    #24
                    Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                    Originally posted by Terry McManmon (3966)
                    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.
                    1,1,1 trichloroethylene is one heck of an industrial solvent. This, perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene), and the less toxic 1,1,1 tricholoethane were used heavily by industry before the passage of RCRA in 1976. Most of the usage that I've seen is for degreasing purposes.

                    Don't forget that before the 1970's, pouring the waste out the back door was a perfectly acceptable disposal method. Although some larger companies collected it for boiler fuel, etc. It is heavy and will sink to the water table. The more industrialized north and midwest has had more issues with contamination because the larger concentrations of heavy industry was there before the regulations were promulgated.

                    Comment

                    • Michael H.
                      Expired
                      • January 29, 2008
                      • 7477

                      #25
                      Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                      Originally posted by Bob Jorjorian (1619)
                      I agree, on 63-68 (maybe later) the arms are painted in an asphalt based black coating, same as trailing arms and frames.
                      Mineral spirits will disolve it just like gunk. Bob
                      I remember when the front control arms from the 1500 mile 65 FI conv were washed in solvent. The coating was gone almost instantly.
                      We made Greg, the guy that was restoring the chassis, use the correct chassis/radiator black from one of the major suppliers to restore the chassis and all the control arms. (I don't remember who the supplier was)

                      Comment

                      • Michael H.
                        Expired
                        • January 29, 2008
                        • 7477

                        #26
                        Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                        Originally posted by Joe Lucia (12484)
                        Bob-----


                        The asphaltic coating was used to at least 1969. .
                        My guess on the asphalt base coating on front control arms changed to some form of paint was around 69 when the arms were painted without the cross shafts/bushings in place? Maybe it was later?

                        The coating on the frame was changed from asphalt base to parafin base in 73 or 74. I have the "New Products Book" from GM around here somewhere that describes the change.

                        Comment

                        • Joe L.
                          Beyond Control Poster
                          • February 1, 1988
                          • 43219

                          #27
                          Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                          Originally posted by Michael Hanson (4067)
                          My guess on the asphalt base coating on front control arms changed to some form of paint was around 69 when the arms were painted without the cross shafts/bushings in place? Maybe it was later?

                          The coating on the frame was changed from asphalt base to parafin base in 73 or 74. I have the "New Products Book" from GM around here somewhere that describes the change.
                          Michael-----

                          I can't recall what the coating or paint was on the a-arms or the trailing arms of my 1969. I stripped and painted them a long time ago, but I just don't recall how I removed what was there.

                          However, a friend of mine is also the original owner of his 1969. He's agreed to let me do a "solvent test" on a small area of his a-arms and trailing arms. So, pretty soon, I should know. The only problem is that his is an early-build 1969 and mine is a late-build. So, it could have changed sometime during the 1969 model year.
                          In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                          Comment

                          • Ronald L.
                            Extremely Frequent Poster
                            • October 18, 2009
                            • 3248

                            #28
                            Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                            Back in the 70's we used tri chloroethylene as the safe replacement for benzene, liberally we soaked and removed grease from our hands, etc.

                            PPV spec referenced gave the clue that the solvent for this material was tri chlor, paint will never be an accurate replacement.

                            Service parts bought in the 70's were coated with semi gloss and or e coated - big difference.

                            Many may remember Ziebart - that material is essentially what this was, black wax, but wax does not color up like paint so it looked more brown.

                            Comment

                            • Chuck S.
                              Expired
                              • April 1, 1992
                              • 4668

                              #29
                              Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                              Originally posted by Joe Lucia (12484)
                              ...In fact, this paint used to be the late Dale Pearman's favorite paint. However, Dale was a C1 guy. There may be C1 applications for which the Blitz Black is a perfect match to the original paint used. However, as nice as the Blitz Black is, I don't know of any C2 or C3 applications for which its gloss level and finish texture is correct. It's "close" for some, though.
                              I can also remember the John Deere Blitz Black discussions here with Dale expounding the benefits of JDBB (Alas, don't ask me what I had for dinner yesterday). As I recall, weren't there actually several gloss levels available in Blitz Black?

                              Comment

                              • Joe L.
                                Beyond Control Poster
                                • February 1, 1988
                                • 43219

                                #30
                                Re: A arm gloss relative to frame gloss level

                                Originally posted by Chuck Sangerhausen (20817)
                                I can also remember the John Deere Blitz Black discussions here with Dale expounding the benefits of JDBB (Alas, don't ask me what I had for dinner yesterday). As I recall, weren't there actually several gloss levels available in Blitz Black?
                                Chuck------


                                If there were, I am unaware of more than one.
                                In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                Searching...Please wait.
                                An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

                                Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                                An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

                                Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                                An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
                                There are no results that meet this criteria.
                                Search Result for "|||"