What is wrong with this paint job? Looks like brush strokes!
Discussion
Can anyone explain these 'marks' on my freshly painted car?
I bought a well known (on PH), freshly painted car and the bodywork looks like this (all over):
And this on the boot:
The latter looks like brush marks to me (but why would someone have used a brush) but I am not sure about the former.
These parts were meant to be primed, sanded and sprayed so should be perfect.
Has the primer not been sanded down correctly?
All ideas/ opinions welcome!
I bought a well known (on PH), freshly painted car and the bodywork looks like this (all over):
And this on the boot:
The latter looks like brush marks to me (but why would someone have used a brush) but I am not sure about the former.
These parts were meant to be primed, sanded and sprayed so should be perfect.
Has the primer not been sanded down correctly?
All ideas/ opinions welcome!
Squiggs said:
Pic 1 Too much primer and it's shrinking.
Pic 2 Sanding marks.
What did you have done & how much did you pay?
Actually looking again Pic one could also be sanding marks.
I paid nothing for the paint job but a lot for the car, on the basis it was freshly painted/ refurbished... I didn't view before I bought (I am 5,000 miles away) Pic 2 Sanding marks.
What did you have done & how much did you pay?
Actually looking again Pic one could also be sanding marks.
Edited by Squiggs on Monday 2nd June 22:08
I won't point you towards the thread as I don't want this to be like a name and shame type thing - I'm really just trying to understand the 'problem'.
Poor sanding makes the most sense to me but how could the painter have missed that!?
MrC986 said:
Is that French paint? ....only joking though I think you are right with very poor 'prep' & that they have tried to sand the one panel with a poorly used sanding machine.
It is French paint 
So, sounds like the only way round this would be a repaint? I assume with this being a problem in the primer layer that this is not 'correctable'?
Edited to add - helpful replies, thanks chaps!
RichB said:
Indeed, terrible preparation not rubbed down properly prior to painting.
But would these have been visible once the paint was dry?Is it just me or do we not think the painter would have looked at this and gone "I'm terrible at my job"?
Considering the former owners attention to detail, I am a bit miffed this got missed as the car has cost probably double what some other examples are going for...
dom9 said:
Poor sanding makes the most sense to me but how could the painter have missed that!?
One way or another it will be down to money (or rather lack of it).To produce a good job it takes a lot of care, attention to detail and therefore time ..... Time costs money!
Either it was taken somewhere that only does cheap quick jobs or the guy was only paid to do a cheap quick job.
Squiggs said:
One way or another it will be down to money (or rather lack of it).
To produce a good job it takes a lot of care, attention to detail and therefore time ..... Time costs money!
Either it was taken somewhere that only does cheap quick jobs or the guy was only paid to do a cheap quick job.
Totally understand and I am sure you're right... This is a bitter pill to swallow as I was expecting perfection To produce a good job it takes a lot of care, attention to detail and therefore time ..... Time costs money!
Either it was taken somewhere that only does cheap quick jobs or the guy was only paid to do a cheap quick job.
What would a 'good' full body spray set me back? I genuinely think I could do better than this with rattle cans
Sorry to see that. Looks like work marks accentuated by being too quick between coats at the primer stage, too heavy on each coat resulting in incomplete curing and the primer shrinking into the work marks. People do this rather than work through the grits, essentially filling work marks with primer rather than taking them out with paper. This would probably have looked ok ish coming out of the oven, but as the coats have fully cured over time, the shrinkage happened, and the defects are more visible on the top surface.
Basically, it is the result of a quick blow over. I bought a car like that back in the cellulose days, and eventually the paint started cracking and flaking. My resolution was to remove all the paint back the the metal and start again, as the coatings on the car were ridiculously thick, and no matter what I put on top, it would not have held it back. I am not saying this is what you have, but it needs to go back to the painter for assessment. At that stage, you will probably find out that the previous owner asked for a quick tidy up, rather than a decent job.
Basically, it is the result of a quick blow over. I bought a car like that back in the cellulose days, and eventually the paint started cracking and flaking. My resolution was to remove all the paint back the the metal and start again, as the coatings on the car were ridiculously thick, and no matter what I put on top, it would not have held it back. I am not saying this is what you have, but it needs to go back to the painter for assessment. At that stage, you will probably find out that the previous owner asked for a quick tidy up, rather than a decent job.
Thanks for all your help and advice, guys - much appreciated 
I may well have to chalk this one up to experience, not take the seller's word in the future and instead of owning a pristine example, just use it and abuse it as God (if there is a God of driving intended) intended. The frustrating thing is I paid the most I have seen one of these go for in the last few years, on the basis it was effectively 'good as new'. Between some other issues (mechanical and cosmetic) I am probably now at least £2k over the 'right' price as a finger in the wind estimate - ouch!
Squiggs said:
It's going to depend on what the painter thinks needs doing.
He may think it best to take it back to metal, he may think he can get away with flattening back - but it's going to require more work than a quick blow-over.
I would think a ball park figure might be around £5k
Jeez - that sounds painful! It may well not be every panel but it looks to be a few at the moment, with the boot being the worst...He may think it best to take it back to metal, he may think he can get away with flattening back - but it's going to require more work than a quick blow-over.
I would think a ball park figure might be around £5k
SeeFive said:
Sorry to see that. Looks like work marks accentuated by being too quick between coats at the primer stage, too heavy on each coat resulting in incomplete curing and the primer shrinking into the work marks. People do this rather than work through the grits, essentially filling work marks with primer rather than taking them out with paper. This would probably have looked ok ish coming out of the oven, but as the coats have fully cured over time, the shrinkage happened, and the defects are more visible on the top surface.
Basically, it is the result of a quick blow over. I bought a car like that back in the cellulose days, and eventually the paint started cracking and flaking. My resolution was to remove all the paint back the the metal and start again, as the coatings on the car were ridiculously thick, and no matter what I put on top, it would not have held it back. I am not saying this is what you have, but it needs to go back to the painter for assessment. At that stage, you will probably find out that the previous owner asked for a quick tidy up, rather than a decent job.
The pictures on the original thread don't look like a quick blow-over to me but then I really don't know about painting a car! I am 5000 miles away from the painter and the car is a few hundred away now.Basically, it is the result of a quick blow over. I bought a car like that back in the cellulose days, and eventually the paint started cracking and flaking. My resolution was to remove all the paint back the the metal and start again, as the coatings on the car were ridiculously thick, and no matter what I put on top, it would not have held it back. I am not saying this is what you have, but it needs to go back to the painter for assessment. At that stage, you will probably find out that the previous owner asked for a quick tidy up, rather than a decent job.
RichB said:
Did you have this work done and if so have you expressed your disappointment to the paint-shop? They may rub it down and re-paint it?
I didn't have the work done, sadly. I bought the car based on a Reader's Cars thread, showing the car being painted (in some detail) and the word of the owner that the paint was a decent job. I have sent the previous owner an email asking him whether he 'noticed' anything and whether the paint shop might be persuaded to do something about it but I don't hold out much hope...I may well have to chalk this one up to experience, not take the seller's word in the future and instead of owning a pristine example, just use it and abuse it as God (if there is a God of driving intended) intended. The frustrating thing is I paid the most I have seen one of these go for in the last few years, on the basis it was effectively 'good as new'. Between some other issues (mechanical and cosmetic) I am probably now at least £2k over the 'right' price as a finger in the wind estimate - ouch!
dom9 said:
SeeFive said:
Sorry to see that. Looks like work marks accentuated by being too quick between coats at the primer stage, too heavy on each coat resulting in incomplete curing and the primer shrinking into the work marks. People do this rather than work through the grits, essentially filling work marks with primer rather than taking them out with paper. This would probably have looked ok ish coming out of the oven, but as the coats have fully cured over time, the shrinkage happened, and the defects are more visible on the top surface.
Basically, it is the result of a quick blow over. I bought a car like that back in the cellulose days, and eventually the paint started cracking and flaking. My resolution was to remove all the paint back the the metal and start again, as the coatings on the car were ridiculously thick, and no matter what I put on top, it would not have held it back. I am not saying this is what you have, but it needs to go back to the painter for assessment. At that stage, you will probably find out that the previous owner asked for a quick tidy up, rather than a decent job.
The pictures on the original thread don't look like a quick blow-over to me but then I really don't know about painting a car! I am 5000 miles away from the painter and the car is a few hundred away now.Basically, it is the result of a quick blow over. I bought a car like that back in the cellulose days, and eventually the paint started cracking and flaking. My resolution was to remove all the paint back the the metal and start again, as the coatings on the car were ridiculously thick, and no matter what I put on top, it would not have held it back. I am not saying this is what you have, but it needs to go back to the painter for assessment. At that stage, you will probably find out that the previous owner asked for a quick tidy up, rather than a decent job.
Typically, the work marks are covered as the car emerges from the shop, but show through more over time as the mess underneath cures, and the new coatings sink at different rates into the scratches through different existing materials. I have a Rav4 daily snotter which has had a small repair the the rear quarter showing the exact same issues. Knew it was there when I bought it, and as I thought, It got worse over a few months and then stabilised. Nobody notices till I point it out, and frankly it is not worth the effort to put it right on mine.
You may find someone with more rotary / DA skill than I possess who could improve the look, but I am pretty sure that the faults will be below the basecoat, which means either prep properly and repaint over the top, or to do the job properly, get it all off and start again.
SeeFive said:
Sorry, I haven't seen the thread you mention, but I couldn't possibly tell from the pics of a paint job in progress on the internet either, but I can see from the result in your pics that the prep is abysmal. One pic shows machine marks, the other shows hand sanding marks (the ones you describe as brush marks). You need to physically see real close up and feel the prep to ensure that you are ready for paint. Sadly, it would appear that this was not so in the case for your car. A quick blow over normally is a reasonable paint job, bulled to within an inch of its life with poor prep underneath.
Typically, the work marks are covered as the car emerges from the shop, but show through more over time as the mess underneath cures, and the new coatings sink at different rates into the scratches through different existing materials. I have a Rav4 daily snotter which has had a small repair the the rear quarter showing the exact same issues. Knew it was there when I bought it, and as I thought, It got worse over a few months and then stabilised. Nobody notices till I point it out, and frankly it is not worth the effort to put it right on mine.
You may find someone with more rotary / DA skill than I possess who could improve the look, but I am pretty sure that the faults will be below the basecoat, which means either prep properly and repaint over the top, or to do the job properly, get it all off and start again.
This is interesting and good stuff... May be somewhat unfair to the previous owner to suggest that he would have known the extent of the problems then? Though he did have it for months after painting, before it was delivered to me. Could it be months before you'd see any signs of this?Typically, the work marks are covered as the car emerges from the shop, but show through more over time as the mess underneath cures, and the new coatings sink at different rates into the scratches through different existing materials. I have a Rav4 daily snotter which has had a small repair the the rear quarter showing the exact same issues. Knew it was there when I bought it, and as I thought, It got worse over a few months and then stabilised. Nobody notices till I point it out, and frankly it is not worth the effort to put it right on mine.
You may find someone with more rotary / DA skill than I possess who could improve the look, but I am pretty sure that the faults will be below the basecoat, which means either prep properly and repaint over the top, or to do the job properly, get it all off and start again.
Just trying to get a feel for whether I have been deliberately misled or not and don't want to say at this point that I have. It was December that it was painted, so about 6 months ago now.
Edited by dom9 on Tuesday 3rd June 17:22
dom9 said:
This is interesting and good stuff... May be somewhat unfair to the previous owner to suggest that he would have known the extent of the problems then? Though he did have it for months after painting, before it was delivered to me. Could it be months before you'd see any signs of this?
Just trying to get a feel for whether I have been deliberately misled or not and don't want to say at this point that I have. It was December that it was painted, so about 6 months ago now.
Most paints will fully cure and finish releasing their chemicals in about 6-10 weeks.. I would expect clear signs of this type of error pretty soon after painting - just days after, and certainly inside a month.Just trying to get a feel for whether I have been deliberately misled or not and don't want to say at this point that I have. It was December that it was painted, so about 6 months ago now.
Edited by dom9 on Tuesday 3rd June 17:22
My daughter recently had had a little paint in the rear of her mx5 - bumper and blend into wings etc. it is a b
d 3 layer pearl white colour (about a dozen different spray outs to get a perfect match). That will not see my DA polisher for 3 months to make sure it's fully cured. So if this guy had it for 6 months after paint, he should have been able to see the defects appear in that time - all IMHO of course.Thanks to all of you for taking the time to discuss this and go through it with me... Half the battle is understanding the problem!
I haven't said what it is yet as I don't want to draw any negative attention to the previous owner until I fully understand the problems as the thread it was bought from (if that makes sense) was very much about how thorough the restoration was and the high level of care and detail paid to everything. To say I am disappointed is a fair understatement. These aren't life changing sums of money either, so there is no point topping myself over it but I do feel let down at the moment. It is rare enough to bother restoring but I paid top whack. Starting to look like I could have had a cheaper car, untouched (probably with less miles) and had a fair bit of work done to my standards for the same money. Don't get me wrong, some of it is VERY good but when the engine has a nasty knock (though probably not too sinister/ internal) and the bodywork is shoddy, that constitutes most of the point of buying a restored car, to me.
It was laid up at the previous owners, prior to delivery (I paid a month or two before it was delivered). He certainly had it for a number of months (not weeks) after painting but maybe that is more like 3-4 months now. But it certainly sounds like these were issues that could/ should have been spotted. Certainly those scratches on the boot look 'deep' enough that they would be fairly visible soon after. The other 'swirls', well, maybe they took more time.
Very frustrating indeed to be honest. The attention to detail and 'perfection' of this rebuild was what sold it to me and with the description and work put in on the rebuild thread, there was no reason to think I would have these issues.
I guess this is a case of caveat emptor and if you don't view the car (it wasn't possible from the US and I didn't want to miss out if it was as described) then it's always going to be a gamble! Live and learn, I guess!
RichB said:
Just OOI you've not mentioned what car it is.
I had to look up what OOI meant - I must be getting old!I haven't said what it is yet as I don't want to draw any negative attention to the previous owner until I fully understand the problems as the thread it was bought from (if that makes sense) was very much about how thorough the restoration was and the high level of care and detail paid to everything. To say I am disappointed is a fair understatement. These aren't life changing sums of money either, so there is no point topping myself over it but I do feel let down at the moment. It is rare enough to bother restoring but I paid top whack. Starting to look like I could have had a cheaper car, untouched (probably with less miles) and had a fair bit of work done to my standards for the same money. Don't get me wrong, some of it is VERY good but when the engine has a nasty knock (though probably not too sinister/ internal) and the bodywork is shoddy, that constitutes most of the point of buying a restored car, to me.
SeeFive said:
Most paints will fully cure and finish releasing their chemicals in about 6-10 weeks.. I would expect clear signs of this type of error pretty soon after painting - just days after, and certainly inside a month.
My daughter recently had had a little paint in the rear of her mx5 - bumper and blend into wings etc. it is a bd 3 layer pearl white colour (about a dozen different spray outs to get a perfect match). That will not see my DA polisher for 3 months to make sure it's fully cured. So if this guy had it for 6 months after paint, he should have been able to see the defects appear in that time - all IMHO of course.
Another very helpful post, thank you!My daughter recently had had a little paint in the rear of her mx5 - bumper and blend into wings etc. it is a b
d 3 layer pearl white colour (about a dozen different spray outs to get a perfect match). That will not see my DA polisher for 3 months to make sure it's fully cured. So if this guy had it for 6 months after paint, he should have been able to see the defects appear in that time - all IMHO of course.It was laid up at the previous owners, prior to delivery (I paid a month or two before it was delivered). He certainly had it for a number of months (not weeks) after painting but maybe that is more like 3-4 months now. But it certainly sounds like these were issues that could/ should have been spotted. Certainly those scratches on the boot look 'deep' enough that they would be fairly visible soon after. The other 'swirls', well, maybe they took more time.
Very frustrating indeed to be honest. The attention to detail and 'perfection' of this rebuild was what sold it to me and with the description and work put in on the rebuild thread, there was no reason to think I would have these issues.
I guess this is a case of caveat emptor and if you don't view the car (it wasn't possible from the US and I didn't want to miss out if it was as described) then it's always going to be a gamble! Live and learn, I guess!
dom9 said:
I guess this is a case of caveat emptor and if you don't view the car (it wasn't possible from the US and I didn't want to miss out if it was as described) then it's always going to be a gamble! Live and learn, I guess!
I feel your pain. I know it is a bit "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted", but you know there are a whole bunch of us on here that will view a car for you and report back accurately should you want to buy here form the US again. A quick post will get local volunteers every time.I hope you get it sorted as painlessly as possible. The US is a good place to be to get that done properly and reasonably economically compared to £100 per hour rates (to public) for a good body / paint shop in the UK.
Gassing Station | Bodywork & Detailing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff