TCP paints

[pgerhardt]

Originally Posted by msmaron

HANDS DOWN.. I just spent $535.00 a gallon with activator for Andalusite Blue and worth every penny.

A simple question: Why?

[Ed Northrop]

So Brent have you ever used Restoration Shop paint I think if you did you would not compare it to Tractor Supply paint.

[pgerhardt]

Originally Posted by BRENT in 10-uh-C

I believe your logic may have backfired on you. PPG's Concept is rarely ever used in the collision industry simply because it is a single-stage material whereas the overwhelming majority of paint used in the collision field is BC/CC. Second, in the collision world, it is the insurance company's who have effectively caused the paint manufacturers to now produce a cheaper quality of paint (Omni, Nason, Limco, etc.) ...because as you stated, most of the consumers do not know the difference. Third, if you have ever looked at cheap implement paint after it has been sprayed for a year or so, there are two distinct characteristics, -the pigments are always cloudy, and the sheen has always died down. The bottom line is just this, there are different quality levels of reproduction parts for our Model-A, and there are different quality levels of paints. For some hobbyists, they cannot tell the difference between a quality reproduction part and an inferior repro part. Others, can easily spot the differences.

I like reasoned civil discussions regarding issues like this. I concede your point about collision work. But I have not been convinced by any specific hard information that any brand of paint is worth over $500 a gallon, nor that it is needed for our model A's. For reasonably priced paint you stated, "after a year...there are two distinct characteristics, -the pigments are always cloudy, and the sheen has always died down". But why? Are they more susceptible to UV light, oxidation, or air pollution? I do believe that even the most economical paint of today has to be better at retaining color & shine than the nitrocellulose lacquer originally used on model A's. Almost all period photos of model A's shows an almost flat finish!

So lets accept that $500/gallon paint will provide superior protection against UV light, air pollution, and oxidation. There is still the question of, does our pampered model A's that rarely see a rain drop, and spend 95% of their life under cover inside, really need $500/gallon worth of protection?

Let me be clear. If I was going to have any work done to my model A I would send it to Brent. (If I could afford him.) His pursuit of excellence is inspiring. But in this case I need to know exactly what I would be getting for my money before spending over $500/gallon to use the elite brand.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by Ed Northrop

So Brent have you ever used Restoration Shop paint I think if you did you would not compare it to Tractor Supply paint.

Hey Ed, yes I have. I have also used their Acrylic Laquer. I have used the Resto Shop urethane twice now. Their Black has a very noticible difference in the quality of pigments. The other colors was Washington & Riviera. Also, in comparison to the DCC line, the R/S paint does not build a shell hardness like the DCC. This affects the color sanding labor time and the buffing quality. Like I said above, to some folks, the lesser quality parts are good enough for their vehicle. For me, I have too much time & effort invested to this point to cut a corner to save several hundred dollars on a lesser quality product.

[29 model-a]

I agree with Brent, all the time and labor spent on my truck I'm not going to cut a corner at that point....

[art ebeling]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

I also agree. If you swallow the elephant don't choke on the tail.

[pgerhardt]

Originally Posted by BRENT in 10-uh-C

Hey Ed, yes I have. I have also used their Acrylic Laquer. I have used the Resto Shop urethane twice now. Their Black has a very noticible difference in the quality of pigments.

Interesting info, but not specific. What quality? Not black enough?

The other colors was Washington & Riviera. Also, in comparison to the DCC line, the R/S paint does not build a shell hardness like the DCC. This affects the color sanding labor time and the buffing quality.

That is good info. I am learning. Thanks

Like I said above, to some folks, the lesser quality parts are good enough for their vehicle.

Not a helpful comment.

For me, I have too much time & effort invested to this point to cut a corner to save several hundred dollars on a lesser quality product.

If this was my career and it effected my reputation and the worth of my services, I might feel the same.

[pgerhardt]

I must admit that this discussion has me intrigued. To be fair I should get some first hand experience with this superior product before passing judgment. I'll have two extra front fenders once I restore them. I could paint one with the "good stuff" to see how it well it applies, color sands, and buffs. Can someone supply a link to where I can order a quart and the color code or name of "model A black" to give it a try.

If I find that it is significantly different and really worth the extra money, I'll have no problem returning here to sing its praises!

[John Duden]

Originally Posted by BRENT in 10-uh-C

I believe your logic may have backfired on you. PPG's Concept is rarely ever used in the collision industry simply because it is a single-stage material whereas the overwhelming majority of paint used in the collision field is BC/CC. Second, in the collision world, it is the insurance company's who have effectively caused the paint manufacturers to now produce a cheaper quality of paint (Omni, Nason, Limco, etc.) ...because as you stated, most of the consumers do not know the difference. Third, if you have ever looked at cheap implement paint after it has been sprayed for a year or so, there are two distinct characteristics, -the pigments are always cloudy, and the sheen has always died down. The bottom line is just this, there are different quality levels of reproduction parts for our Model-A, and there are different quality levels of paints. For some hobbyists, they cannot tell the difference between a quality reproduction part and an inferior repro part. Others, can easily spot the differences.

i beg to differ on the fact that the paint gets cloudly over time. IF properly taken care of , washed, waxed, and not set outside implement paint holds up very good. We have tractors from the 70's that look like they were painted a year ago. AND WE USE THEM ALL SUMMER AND WINTER!
When you take care of things, things last

[Mike V. Florida]

A lot of people have used TCP paint and love it. It is their car and they have to live with the results.

If someone is doing the work for another person the buyer has to live with the results. As Brent said, some paint take longer to color sand than others. If you are paying the restorer just 50.00 and hour, the extra hours needed will soon surpass that the cost of the good paint and the extra hours could have been used on another car.

Fine point car looking for max points restored by another, I would expect the best products that will last the longest.

My car, I would use middle of the road products as my time is just that mine and I don't charge myself for my time.

[Mike V. Florida]

Originally Posted by pgerhardt

I must admit that this discussion has me intrigued. To be fair I should get some first hand experience with this superior product before passing judgment. I'll have two extra front fenders once I restore them. I could paint one with the "good stuff" to see how it well it applies, color sands, and buffs. Can someone supply a link to where I can order a quart and the color code or name of "model A black" to give it a try.

If I find that it is significantly different and really worth the extra money, I'll have no problem returning here to sing its praises!

There is black with blue pigments and black with yellow pigment. Bottom line there is no such thing as true black paint. A search will reveal a few threads on the subject of black.

[ronn]

I like reasoned civil discussions regarding issues like this. I concede your point about collision work. But I have not been convinced by any specific hard information that any brand of paint is worth over $500 a gallon, nor that it is needed for our model A's. For reasonably priced paint you stated, "after a year...there are two distinct characteristics, -the pigments are always cloudy, and the sheen has always died down". But why? Are they more susceptible to UV light, oxidation, or air pollution? I do believe that even the most economical paint of today has to be better at retaining color & shine than the nitrocellulose lacquer originally used on model A's. Almost all period photos of model A's shows an almost flat finish!

great discussion and ultimately, depends what your end goal is.

It can easily be argued that the antique and classic cars today are "greatly" over restored. Paint possibly being the biggest demon in the haystack.
as pger already mentioned, none of Henry's cars had the quality of paint finish
that is coming out today from top rate shops. On the other hand, fully understand Brent's point when he does a customers cars. Time is money.

Final point, I've mentioned before, fine point cars aren't for everyone!

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by ronn

I like reasoned civil discussions regarding issues like this. I concede your point about collision work. But I have not been convinced by any specific hard information that any brand of paint is worth over $500 a gallon, nor that it is needed for our model A's. For reasonably priced paint you stated, "after a year...there are two distinct characteristics, -the pigments are always cloudy, and the sheen has always died down". But why? Are they more susceptible to UV light, oxidation, or air pollution? I do believe that even the most economical paint of today has to be better at retaining color & shine than the nitrocellulose lacquer originally used on model A's. Almost all period photos of model A's shows an almost flat finish!

great discussion and ultimately, depends what your end goal is.

It can easily be argued that the antique and classic cars today are "greatly" over restored. Paint possibly being the biggest demon in the haystack.
as pger already mentioned, none of Henry's cars had the quality of paint finish
that is coming out today from top rate shops. On the other hand, fully understand Brent's point when he does a customers cars. Time is money.

Final point, I've mentioned before, fine point cars aren't for everyone!

Just a couple of final points here from me; less than 10% of the cars we restore are fine-point level restorations. Also remember that my job is to turn a customer's wishes into a reality. So I agree, fine-point is indeed not for most people.

Second, we still spray vehicles in lacquer if the customer requests that. As mentioned above, upkeep & maintenance on paint is why most hobbyists have chosen urethane paints. For those who truly want the look & experience of what the paint was originally should paint their car in lacquer.

Third, I guess comparing & discussing paint here is much akin to comparing & discussing engine oil. Some want the best available synthetic to achieve the best protection in their Model-A. Others will argue that today's cheap $.99 a quart oil is likely better than what was available back then, and they cannot tell any difference in performance or protection between using the cheap oil vs. the synthetic oil other than the price. At that point, all I can do is agree with them.

[pgerhardt]

Originally Posted by Mike V. Florida

A lot of people have used TCP paint and love it. It is their car and they have to live with the results..

This implies (probably not intentionally) that the results will be inferior.

If someone is doing the work for another person the buyer has to live with the results. As Brent said, some paint take longer to color sand than others. If you are paying the restorer just 50.00 and hour, the extra hours needed will soon surpass that the cost of the good paint and the extra hours could have been used on another car.

Agreed. When you are spending big bucks on a restoration labor is the the majority of the cost. the cost of (even very expensive) paint will be a small percentage of the total cost. I would also expect only the best for my hard earned money.

Fine point car looking for max points restored by another, I would expect the best products that will last the longest.

One could argue that points should be deducted for an overly perfect paint job since it doesn't present a model A as it was when new. I would judge the finish on the award winning roadster below (especially the fenders as too perfect for a fine point car. But that is another whole topic for another day!

My car, I would use middle of the road products as my time is just that mine and I don't charge myself for my time.

And I am sure your car is beautiful and no one would accuse you of settling for inferior parts or products.

[Terry, NJ]

Whatinhell is in PPG , DuPont, ETC. that makes them so expensive? The paint, primer, reducer, and Hardeners ran me over $350! (PPG Shopline) How can a gallon of anything cost that much, especially when it's it's mass produced? Unless it's vastly overpriced! How come the "Magic" paint company (suppliers to TSC) or the "Magnet paint co" who have been in business since 1915 can produce a gallon of good, servicible paint for far less? Just for laughs, I'd like to know what Henry Ford paid Ditzler for a gallon of paint. I guess he was on a 10% profit binder too!
Terry

[pgerhardt]

Originally Posted by BRENT in 10-uh-C

Second, we still spray vehicles in lacquer if the customer requests that. As mentioned above, upkeep & maintenance on paint is why most hobbyists have chosen urethane paints. For those who truly want the look & experience of what the paint was originally should paint their car in lacquer.

Which is why I am painting my 29 tudor in acrylic lacquer (picture 1). I am willing to deal with the extra maintenance to get that "new" old ford look. My friend's 29 tudor is coming out of a restoration shop with a beautiful base coat/clear coat finish which will literally outshine mine (picture 2). But that is not the look I wanted. Different strokes for different folks.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by pgerhardt

One could argue that points should be deducted for an overly perfect paint job since it doesn't present a model A as it was when new. I would judge the finish on the award winning roadster below (especially the fenders as too perfect for a fine point car. But that is another whole topic for another day!

Nah, today is good! .

Let me start by saying that when you judge a vehicle in fine-point competition, you really are only supposed to evaluate what is printed in the J/S book, and any adopted literature pertaining to that topic against what is on the vehicle.

With regard to "overly perfect" paint work, it first must be determined what you feel is over-perfect. Over-restoration is an area that points can be, -and ARE lost on. A great example is if the car obviously has BC/CC paint. Another item where deductions are made for over-restoration is the areas that were originally unbuffed.. This would be areas such as firewalls, underside of the hood, certain areas of the door jambs, underneath the body, etc. There was a trend to add flattener to the paint in those areas however some missed the mark there simply because they used a paint that flowed out too much and did not mimic the look of unrubbed lacquer.

With regard to the fenders on the car pictured above. I looked this car over at Bill Sturms (when it was still unfinished) with the intent to possibly purchase it. It is my opinion the fenders on this car are not over-restored. Therefore I am not sure what area(s) you feel are overdone on them, but let me point out a couple of things. Fenders originally were dipped in Alcyd Enamel, then scuffed and redipped in another coat of enamel paint before they were sent to a drying oven. The paint was first going over sheetmetal that did not have any filler or excessive primer build-up. Next, because the paint was applied thru a dipping process, the finish was smooth and without any orange peel or texture. The only faults that were seen on some fenders was evidences of runs in a key location or two. In today's restorations, restorers tend to 'over-restore' by using too much filler (Bondo) and primer thus making the fender thicker. Also, many hobbyist tend to overlook making both sides of the fender's paint texture-free (i .e.: no orange peel) when they restore. Could this be what you are seeing on that Roadster?

[mrtexas]

For the get what you pay for crowd one reason that TCP came out with the Restoration Shop line of paint is that PPG refused to let them discount Concepts. Prior to having their house brand they did sell PPG. I bought Concepts from them for my 29 roadster 7 years ago.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by Terry, NJ

Whatinhell is in PPG , DuPont, ETC. that makes them so expensive? The paint, primer, reducer, and Hardeners ran me over $350! (PPG Shopline) How can a gallon of anything cost that much, especially when it's it's mass produced? Unless it's vastly overpriced! How come the "Magic" paint company (suppliers to TSC) or the "Magnet paint co" who have been in business since 1915 can produce a gallon of good, servicible paint for far less? Just for laughs, I'd like to know what Henry Ford paid Ditzler for a gallon of paint. I guess he was on a 10% profit binder too!
Terry

To start with, the quality of the pigments, the quality of the ingredients, the EPA fees, and (the biggie) the R&D is what drives the costs up so much. Another thing that drives up the price in Concept is some of them actually have heavy metals in them.

Alos, anyone can steal technology, -or just use outdated technology, but someone must lead the way and that costs money. Kinda like saying it is foolish for anyone to buy a new car. The only issue with that mindset is someone needs to buy the new so the used will become available.

Terry, you'd better check your history again! Henry did not buy his Model-A paint from Ditzler.

[Terry, NJ]

I assume, rightly or wrongly, that paint uses finely ground metallic substances for pigments. Unrefined metallic oxides etc frequently are colored in ways and hues that don't reflect their coloration in the metallic state. For example, Turquoise, Malachite, Chrysacolla are green. Azurite is blue. None of which gives any hint of the color of the metal, copper. Iron can be either red or black. Wulfenite is a red tungsten ore, Vanadinite is also red. Some zinc ores (Zincite) and red, Ruby silver is of course ruby red. Other materials for pigments I can only guess at. The question is, will the materials (Plus mass produced solvents and other chemistry) drive the cost of a gallon of paint to the heights that we see today? The first car I ever painted was a 59 TR3 in 64,65. We used Centari that cost $15 a quart. The second was a 65 Ford P.U. in 74 Again, Centari at what ever it cost in those days. But no where near $100 + a gallon. Just as an aside, I was talking to a paint supplier once and he told me the most expensive paint was a paint that had crushed shells to give it an irridicense and sheen. $1200 a gallon.
Terry

Originally Posted by BRENT in 10-uh-C

To start with, the quality of the pigments, the quality of the ingredients, the EPA fees, and (the biggie) the R&D is what drives the costs up so much. Another thing that drives up the price in Concept is some of them actually have heavy metals in them.

Alos, anyone can steal technology, -or just use outdated technology, but someone must lead the way and that costs money. Kinda like saying it is foolish for anyone to buy a new car. The only issue with that mindset is someone needs to buy the new so the used will become available.

Terry, you'd better check your history again! Henry did not buy his Model-A paint from Ditzler.