John McGraw

I recieved the following response from PPG today on the question about lacquer production and future availability.

(Thank you for your interest in PPG Automotive Refinish Paints. PPG still manufactures DDL/lacquer paint. There are no immediate plans to discontinue this line of paint. Please remember that this line of paint can only be used for restoration projects. Hope this information will be helpful to you. If you have any further questions, please contact us.)

There we go guys, right from the horses mouth. Lacquer will be available for the forseeable future, and most availability problems are being driven by Jobbers who do not want to devote space to it or local laws, not Federal laws!
There probably will come a time when we all will have to buy lacquer from a very few national suppliers, as the volume of use continues to decrease and fewer and fewer local jobbers will stock the necessary components to mix it.

:seeya

SBR

Thanks for the info :cheers:

paintdaddy

Ditto,Next time I see my jobber Im gonna :cuss ,I cant stand a liar. :thumbs:

GDaina

:iagree:

That yahoo supplier of mine, jackin up prices every mont because of diminishing supplies.... :mad :cuss

Solidlifters

So the good news is they're gonna keep makin' it..........the bad news is that it ain't what it used to be. One paint chemist told me that when the enviro-whacko's got the lead removed from the paint, that's what made the difference. I don't know that for sure, but I do know that it doesn't sand and buff to the depth that the old stuff did, and it doesn't take a whole lot of sun exposure to make it turn flat.

I wonder if there's a way to add the lead back, like they're doing with some gas additives????

chris ritchie

Every time I hear something like:

- They don't make 'em like they used to.
- They don't make that anymore. The Government banned it is a variation of this.

It reminds me of:

- We had it tough when we were kids. When I was a kid we had to walk 10 miles to school - uphill each way, and barefoot in the snow too.
- They all do that. Don't worry about it.

It really means:

- I'm an old fart.
- It's too much trouble for me to bother with it.

John McGraw

Chris,
I agree with your statement. I have had many people try to tell me that the current acrylic lacquer is not as good as it used to be, but I have been shooting lacquer for over 30 years, and I cant tell the difference! The one thing I will tell you is that it is far superior to the old nitrocellulose lacquer.
That stuff was incredibly fragile and even more prone to chipping and cracking. It did however really buff out to an inccredible gloss!

I never do the final polish for at least 6 months, and in the case of my 60, I waited over a year. By doing this, the current lacquer gets really hard and will buff out very well. If a "factory correct" finish is desired, then buff it after a week keeping the color sanding to a minimum and call it good. Anything any better then that will probably cost you points at judging!

I hear that same comment about the DP90 epoxy primer too, that they ruined it when they took the lead out a couple of years ago, but I honestly can't tell the difference!
:seeya

58Mike

And in that vein, I'm not sure that I'm ready to call the people who think there shouldn't be lead in paint "enviro-wackos."

- Mike Greene

paintdaddy

:iagree: I use alot of the dp primers and the old stuff sprayed better .The only thing that Ive noticed is that the new stuff doesnt work as well as the old stuff as a sealer.BTW not to get mushy but this is how I feel in FCR :grouphug: I just noticed the new smilies :seeya

Solidlifters

Chris, with all due respect, I find the tone of your post to be a load of crap. Have you used the old stuff and the new stuff to compare or are you just taking pot shots? I bought 6 gallons of the "new" Dupont black about 10 years ago when they started chattering about discontinuing it (99S is the number I think????) and have struggled to get it to the luster we used to enjoy with it without clear coat, and I don't think it can be done. Even after sitting for almost 5 years in my shop, wet color sanding with paper even as course as 1000 quickly sticks the little chunks to the paper, much like paint that's too fresh to sand. I also had a similar result with Sherwin Williams on my 60 and ended up washing it back off and sending it out for base coat/clear coat, which I'm incapable of doing myself. Two of my 69's which have multiple Top Flights and Bloomington Golds have been painted for over 25 years with the old stuff and would still judge well from a paint standpoint. A local Corvette shop whose owner has judged both Bloomington and NCRS extensively and ran the workshops at Bloomington for several years, painted his daughter's 74 with whatever the correct orange color laquer is about 10 or 12 years ago and after less than 2 years, mostly outside, the car turned dead flat. That's when the discussion with the paint people began. The "we can't make it like we used to because of the lead" came from them.

I have shot laquer for over 25 years and it's different........period. It doesn't hold up as well and it doesn't color sand and buff the same.

As far as the catalyst style primers that somebody brought up, there's no question that they're far superior to the old stuff. Whether they spray as well now as they did when they were first introduced, I don't know, but overall I think there's no question they're far superior to the old laquer primers we all used.

As far as the enviro-whacko comment, if some folks don't like it.........sorry, that's the way I feel. I doubt seriously that removing lead from automotive paint has made any impact on the enviroment. I think it's just another silly decision based on hokus pokus science, sold to ignorant bureacrats by a special interest (as part of a package). Enviromental regulations reak with this type of BS, just like the current whacko's brain farts equating the SUV's to terrorism. News flash: old cars put more through the intake and spit more out the exhaust than any SUV. When we sit idle and let the whacko's sound legitimate because we don't have a dog in their fight of the week, pretty soon they're after OUR dog.

paintdaddy

:iagree: well said.Im fed up with tree huggers too. :grouphug: I think there are more important things to worry about in this world. :thumbs:

John McGraw

Solid lifters,
I too have experienced the same symptom you refer to with Dupont lacquers, and switched about 10 years ago to PPG lacquer and have never tried Dupont again! Now days the only brand available in Austin is PPG, as all other suppliers don't want to mess with it any longer.

Even with the PPG paint, I do find that I have to switch sandpaper more frequently when wet-sanding and the addition of a little dishwashing soap to my water bucket really keeps the paper from clogging. I allways color sand with 1500 grit followed by 2000 grit and consistently get a depth of gloss that usually has people thinking that it has a clear coat applied. Your comments about having to send a car out for BC/CC paint is one of the reasons that I still use lacquer.

I love being able to do all my own work and can't see my self sending a car out and paying big $ to have it painted. That being said, The next car that I have in progress is not a restoration and will not be painted with lacquer since it will be driven very often. I will have to learn to apply urethane paints with as good a result as I do with lacquer, and I am sure that the learning curve will be real steep. The one thing that is for sure, when I have to start sending my car out to have it painted, I will probably quit building cars!
The pride of doing all the work myself is part of what this hobby is all about to me.
I hope my comments were not taken as an attack on your post, as it was not intended to be. I am only trying to point out that lacquer is still a viable product for restoration work, no matter how many body shops tell you that it either is not available or will not look good. Body shops have their own agenda as well and they just flat don't want to mess with It anymore since BC/CC has become the standard for all new cars.

:seeya

Solidlifters

John I feel the same way you do. I'd welcome a product that I though I was capable of turning out decent results with. The problems with BB/CC are triple in my case: lack of technique, lack of a clean enough enviroment, extreme allergy to the catalyst. I can shoot laquer without a respirator with no immediate symptoms (of course I don't) but being in the same county with the catalyst gives me immediate asma like reaction. I'm told that I was sensitized by being around Imron years ago, and once you've got it, you've got it for life.

Around here, the going price for BC/CC on a close to ready to paint car is about 3K, much higher with their priming & blocking. With all these damn projects I've got, it represents a helluva investment, and the other big thing is like you said, the "I did it myself" pride. With sending frames out to be blasted/powdercoated, engines to the machine shop (I do at least still do my own assembly) and body shop paint, it almost seems like brokerage rather than restoration.

I'd like to hear more about the PPG stuff. I really hate the thoughts of putting BC/CC on the 59 & 62, with them both being original paint up until now.

Mac

The last thing you guys need is another opinion tossed in- so here it comes.

I think the reason paint shops have embraced BC/CC has less to do with the durability of BC/CC vs. lacquer and more to do with labour. There is more time involved in painting a car with lacquer. Between the multiple coats, wetsanding and buffing, it amounts a substantial amount of time and, as we all know, time=money.

Most paint shops want one thing- your money and anyone else's money they can get. The more jobs they put through the shop, the more money they make, but in order to keep your money, they have to produce a paint job that looks good and stays looking good for a couple of years so you don't come back yelling at them. Base/clear sprays on and stays on. No more wetsanding, no more buffing and the paint stays shiny for a couple of years.

The paint shop will tell you whatever it takes to convince you that BC/CC is better so they don't have to deal with the truth- there's nothing wrong with lacquer but it takes more work- they just want your money with the minimum effort.

Thus endth the Gospel according to Mac. :lol:

Solidlifters

I dunno Mac. I'm one of those who really does believe that BC/CC is a whole lot more durable. No question that it's a helluva lot more resistant to chips and door dings, and it doesn't seem to shrink, craze, or dull with age the way that laquer does. On the ones I've had BC/CC'd, they've been sanded and buffed also, so at least the after the sprayin' labor isn't all that much less.

The only reasons I'd consider still foolin' with laquer are the fact that I can do it myself, it's cheaper, and it's still looked upon favorably by the major judging organizations. For a driver, or any car that I'm keeping forever, I can see definate advantages to the new stuff, but just like you, that's just an opinion.

Mac

I didn't articulate myself clearly enough- we're on the same page, Solidlifters.

BC/CC is more durable in my experience and maintains it's finish longer with less maintence and for a car that's driven regularly, that's important. A car painted with lacquer needs to be cared for more carefully to maintain it's finish, but since we're dealing with cars that are generally garaged and well taken care of, that's not really a problem.

Most paint shops don't wetsand anything more than the occasional run and don't buff unless they have to. They want to shoot the paint and get the car out the door. With BC/CC, it's possible to do this. With lacquer, it's not possible to achieve that 'new paint' look without wetsanding and buffing, or at least, I've never been able to.

John McGraw

Solidlifters,
I would give the PPG DDL lacquer a try. I think that you will like it and will find that it rubs up to a high gloss. One little disclamier here, I never use a machine for my final rub and polish. I know it sounds old-fashioned but hand rubbing gives the best results, and even though it is time-consuming I still do it to prevent any swirl marks. I use the buffer on my street cars, but for cars where they are going to be scrutinized under metal halide lights, I don't want any swirl marks showing. Take a look at my signature pic, that is lacquer and the pic does not do the car justice!

One thing I never do anymore is use lacquer primer under my lacquer topcoat ! Most of the problems that I have had in the past with dulling down or sand scratches coming back after a few months have been directly related to the lacquer pirmer/surfacer asorbing thinner when the topcoat is shot and then the sand scratches swell. You wet sand and rub the paint and it looks beautiful, but 2 months later the scratches show again! The use of epoxy primer-surfacer will put a stop to this problem since the lacquer thinner will not swell the primer coat.
:seeya

paintdaddy

:iagree: but I think alot of the blame needs to be on the insurance companies.I dont do insurance work but I used to and they try to get the price down as low as they can and one of the first corners to cut is the buffing.Usually if a body shop knows they wont be buffing ,they will have a half million dollar booth.To me that has been the difference in the body shop vs. a specialized shop,but as said before you will pay for the job that you want. :seeya