Posted From: 126.96.36.199
|Posted on Tuesday, 09 December, 2008 - 10:56: |
Can anybody help me discover the paint code for RR Maroon? I believe its a Silver Shadow colour.
(Message approved by david_gore)
Post Number: 14
|Posted on Wednesday, 10 December, 2008 - 11:33: |
Some time ago I was trying to get colours for a Silver Cloud and found PPG of Adelaide prompt and helpful
Post Number: 37
|Posted on Tuesday, 16 December, 2008 - 10:01: |
I agree an agent for PPG would be your best bet. Most auto parts supply stores have touch up paints from OEM manufacturers, their guide book should also tell you.
Problem, most places in the world with greenie law makers, no longer sell lacquer clear and paints. In that case you might as well get close as you can. Modern paints are near impossible to get an original better looking match..............
Post Number: 1532
|Posted on Tuesday, 16 December, 2008 - 23:39: |
This being a friendly discussion, Steven I must politely disagree. I regard the claims of matching difficulties made by some paint merchants as mere throwaway disclaimers to rid them of low-margin sales.
Standox and Glasurit (BASF) can match any colour exactly using their premium water-based enamels. That applies equally to metallics.
Problems do seem to arise with special effects implemented by refinishers. I shall not name the example that springs to mind, but one is where a (solid) maroon has intentionally been leached through to a (solid) black on a Concours’ restoration. When the owner tried to match its stablemate car with the same paint, it was almost impossible.
I cite an example of good work. My Turbo R is Brooklands Green, a metallic finish. I had some repairs done a few years back using Standox. The result is perfect in every light, and I defy anyone to spot the matching. Half of the car was refinished to butt lines. With the retarders and accelerators in the Standox system, a repairer has no more difficulty, and often less difficulty, when matching using water-based paints to lacquers, especially when the acrylic or ancient nitrocellulose paint has aged.
Furthermore, the two-pack clear enamels now used have eliminated the bugbear of 1960s-1980s finish crazing and UV degradation of the colour beneath.
I giggle when people seek out nitrocellulose paints. Those were obsolete as soon as the EK Holden appeared in 1962. Its claim to fame over the FB, apart from the electric wiper motor replacing the vacuum motor (!), was almost exclusively the acrylic paint. Now that acrylic is long-gone, let's forget it and move on.
Post Number: 39
|Posted on Wednesday, 17 December, 2008 - 02:09: |
I agree it can be matched. But the shine is different. I'll use my degree for once, its simular to filming a movie in digital, opposed to good old fashion film stocks. I dislike digital, will never be at a level of depth films can create by chemical reaction. Digital is fine for magazine reproduction and mass media like television. But for high quality limited media, home still picture's and movie's, I want film! Water based just do not have the depth and are over bright, look plastic. For touch up and doing single panels; from crazing, UV, some moron dinged/scratches your paint. Its near impossible to match old beside new on a decent higher quality car, not just RR/B.
Post Number: 1534
|Posted on Wednesday, 17 December, 2008 - 03:20: |
Actually, the film on Silver Shadows was rather too thin (ie the clear coat film - pardon the pun). So thin in fact, less than 1/2 clearcoat remaining ex-factory, that it wore through with a few rubs of good old Polish No. 2 Wax and Polish, and left them matt. Effectively, the cars could not tolerate even one polishing by 1972. Our '72 T was already mattish when just 10 years old. Only a proper refinish and with a final 1 1/2 remaining clearcoat made it shiny again. No wonder Crewe banned any polishing with compound completely. It only showed up their inability to finish the cars properly until about 1985.
This was an overreaction by Crewe. Early Shadows had almost four coat thicknesses of clear remaining, a mirror finish after rubbing the seven clear coats back between coats. That was when new, but they crazed very quickly before your horrified eyes. So Crewe panicked and went the other way to leave a ridiculously unserviceably thin clear finish.
The desirable finish using Acrylic is, according to ICI-Dulux and Ditzler, 4 clearcoats, rubbed in-between coats to leave an effective 1 1/2 behind, and again a mirror glass finish. Those lacquer suppliers voided warranty with any more than two remaining clearcoats by 1970.
None of that BMW/Mercedes/Fiat/Volvo orange-peel finish would do thank you. Actually, so mirror-finished were the Crewe cars that they looked like digitised versions of the Mona Lisa. For a few months that was. Modern 2-packs overcome the gross deficiencies of the earlier acrylic and nitrocellulose clearcoats. Use it. Crewe eventually did.
I used to park next to a then-new 1980 Cotswold Beige Silver Shadow II in 1980 in our North Sydney undeground office carpark. It was matt after one year to complement its awful colour. Boy, did it look terrible ! It was polished weekly by the valet. So thin was the clearcoat left behind by Crewe that the clear soon rubbed away and left the aluminium in the metallis at the surface to leave that shabby and disgraceful matt finish.
Now, some may think it authentic as they have never seen one less than a few months old, but really it was testimony to Crewe's failure.
Post Number: 41
|Posted on Wednesday, 17 December, 2008 - 10:37: |
The early and most of the 1970's, much like the current economic climate. The big 3 American Auto makers met with the U.S Congress in 1973, to discuss a bailout for example. The British had simular requests from their automakers, Rolls Royce amongst them (L1011 woes). It's fairly hard to think of anything quality built in the 1970's, last of the L1011's went out of service just a few short years ago, so maybe aircraft are the exception.