Cellulose vs Modern Two Pack on a Classic?
Discussion
Obviously modern two pack paints are cleaner, more durable and general an improvement on cellulose and yet I often read in classic car magazines about older cars being restored using original cellulose paint.
What are people's views on this? As I gear up towards a re-paint for the Aston I am considering the alternatives, originality vs durability? I often hear people saying the finish on modern paints looks different to cellulose but is it, can you detect the difference? Can two pack be flatted down and polished to appear like cellulose?
Be interested in your thoughts...
What are people's views on this? As I gear up towards a re-paint for the Aston I am considering the alternatives, originality vs durability? I often hear people saying the finish on modern paints looks different to cellulose but is it, can you detect the difference? Can two pack be flatted down and polished to appear like cellulose?
Be interested in your thoughts...
TooMany2cvs said:
RichB said:
V8 FOU said:
Oh dear.
Cellulose / points /carbs again...
What do you mean?Cellulose / points /carbs again...
I'm interested in thoughts on this, I don't want an "us vs them" thread, that's not why I started it and it add nothing to the information I'm after.
As I said in my original post it will be a solid colour, not a metallic, and as it happens my preferred body shop uses two pack in preference to cellulose so that was the way I was leaning.
As I said in my original post it will be a solid colour, not a metallic, and as it happens my preferred body shop uses two pack in preference to cellulose so that was the way I was leaning.
Pie with sauce said:
Red is the weakest pigment Mark, so you see plenty of factory finishes displaying such fading. The best way if you want a deep, gleaming red is to (as you say) use 2K paint but use white undercoat.
But back to the reasons not to use cellulose, the weak red pigment and the resultant fading and chalkiness is a very important one, but in cellulose, this happens with other colours as well.
As I said, high maintenance.
That's interesting because the car is red and displays exactly the same marking as on that Capri when wet. The paint is 30 years old so I excuse it and polish it frequently to remove the marks but I don't particularly enjoy that aspect so it sounds like 2K is the way to go. Interested in anyone who has experience of adding a slight matting agent to get rid of the "looking through glass" aspect of the lacquer. But back to the reasons not to use cellulose, the weak red pigment and the resultant fading and chalkiness is a very important one, but in cellulose, this happens with other colours as well.
As I said, high maintenance.
p.s. I've also just read elsewhere that 2K colour can be mixed with the lacquer and sprayed on as a solid colour rather than a flat base coat and a clear lacquer. Is this what I'm looking for? Excuse my non technical description...
Edited by RichB on Saturday 22 November 21:12
Pie with sauce said:
You're confusing "clear-over-base" with 2K (two-pack).
p.s. I am indeed confused because I know bugger all about paint but thought it would be useful to find out a little before I talk to the body shops. p.p.s. but I do know how to adjust points and tune a triple SU carb set-up
tog said:
The front half of my Bristol was repainted in two-pack (by Mitchell Motors - http://www.mitchellmotors.co.uk - highly recommended) after a prang about seven years ago. The back half is twenty-ish year old cellulose. If I ever get around to repainting the back (or the whole thing) I shall certainly go for two-pack. It looks great, it is far easier to keep clean and polished, and it seems harder wearing (when I polish the back half the cloth goes dark blue instantly so it is clearly taking more paint off).
Well there's a coincidence, it's Andy Mitchell I am probably going to use p.s. Is your car looked after by Spencer Lane-JOnes?
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff