Jon:
You are, of course, absolutely correct on that point. I was
referring to the
notion that using anything other than an enamel paint is technically
incorrect,
as the factory used a two pack enamel, with no clear coat.
There are other issues as well. The factory primered the car
while it was
disassembled, and then painted it with the wings on the car. So there
was no paint
between the wings and the tub. I had mine painted with the wings off the
car, so I have
paint in many places that were only primer originally. So in that
regard, my car is
incorrect as well. I ignored that concern, and opted for better rust
protection there
as well, in that all metal surfaces have paint AND primer on them.
So, any concours judge would ding my car for the incorrect type
of paint, and
the method used to apply the paint. It is, however, the correct color as
indicated on
the commission plate, Mimosa yellow.
Cheers,
Vance
-----Original Message-----
From: John Macartney [mailto:standardtriumph@btinternet.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2005 11:02 AM
To: Navarrette, Vance; 6pack@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Single Component Paint vs Clear Coat & Base
Vance Navarette wrote:
> > It looks great, but if my buddies look at it and say "Hey,
> >that's not correct!" then I will regret my decision. But only a
little.
Which begs the question 'what is correct'? Of course, the clear coat and
base is better from a durability perspective but the many cars I've seen
that have been repainted using either the traditional or modern
techniques,
often share one thing in common. The level of overall finish is usually
far
exceeds the original paint finish and quality of the car when new. With
that
in mind, tradtional or modern is more a question of semantics than
anything
else.
Jonmac
|