MSeriesRebuild wrote:
I find that you purchased your paint , an industrial enamel for your M37 at Sherwin Williams interesting. For MVs, I've always used Gillespie coatings. I have a ferret that I'm trying to color match the original British "No.381 light stone" shade of tan on. I used a local auto parts place that mixes automotive grade paint and they did an excelent job in matching the paint even adding a "flatening agent" to the mix so it wouldn't be glossy. The quality of their paint though, leaves a good bit to be desired. It's thin, scratches easy and is difficult to apply when compared with the Gillespie products. it is also $70.00 a gallon compared to Gillespie's $32.50. Think I'll take a paint sample with me down to the Sherwin Williams store tomorrow and see what they can do. Thank you for giving me that idea.
Matt
You will find that color variations come with many other variations. Some colors simply by nature do not cover as well as others. In automotive paints, quality varies greatly. What I mean here is for a lesser cost, you can buy a product that has a lesser solids content, thus it takes more coats to get the desired coverage. That sounds like what you got. It's nothing but a price gimmick, they say you are getting a good product at a lesser cost. What you really get is a $70 a gallon paint, rather than the better quality paint at $135 per gallon. The issue is this, it takes 4 coats of the cheaper priced paint to get the job you could easily do with 2 - 3 coats of the higher cost paint. Savings, none at all, it takes more product to complete the job, likely ends up costing more, for certain if time is included. Also more chance of an error. NAPA did this a few years back with the Cross Fire line from Martin-Senour Paints.
Charles the problem is the poorer quality paint (IMHO) is the more expensive one. Gillespie is $32.50 a gal and gets the job done where as the stuff from the auto parts place is $70.00 a gal and doesn't do as well.
Matt[/quote]
I agree with your point on the Gillespie, that is what we use here when that type of paint is called for. We also use their reducer and hardner in their paint.
The point I was stressing in the $70 and $135 price variation was a comparison between Martin-Senour products, nothing to do with Gillespie. Automotive paints are much more expensive than industrial enamels. Most of the stuff we use these days goes for $135 per gallon and up from there. High solids colors such as red and yellow are off the charts in price. If we get it, we pay, that's that.
I always advise following the supplier's guidelines with paint or anything chemical.
Very good advice and applies equally to petroleum products (oils, greases, hydraulic fluids etc), brake fluids, and sealants/adhesives. Most folks can offer personal testimony on their use (not professional advice) but very, very few are qualified technically with an engineering degree to assure anyone that one is truly better or safer or more appropriate than another.
I find that one normally needs a reasonable education and reading level to get a driver's license therefore they should be able to wade through the technical specs and Material Safety Data Sheets and make their own choices.
Ah, flattening agent. I see. I do not know if they offer one.
I ordered the SW hardener yesderday. I am going to shoot some paint this weekend on the rear fenders using the hardener. I'll keep you posted.
David
HingsingM37
1958 M37B1
1968 M101A1 Trailer
MVPA# 33078
"Do Not Take Counsel of Your Fears"
General George S. Patton Jr.
"Those who pound their guns into plows, will plow for those who do not".
I like the hardener, the gloss doesn't bother me. Once the od goddess is out in the sun more often, she'll flatten out anyway.
All of the politicking is to much, I like Bill, he's a good guy & like everyone else here more than welcome!
Let me say another word about following guidelines. I had said follow the supplier's guidelines, that should be changed to the manufacturer's guidelines. Of course the supplier being a representative of the manufacturer should be passing on the recommened guidelines from the source and hopefully that would be the information that would be passed on to the end user.
A word concerning Bill, I have nothing personal against him and have told him that a number of times. I myself have not acted in a perfect way in every situation that has come up where he and I were on opposite ends of the spectrum. I have considered those instances as learning experiences in various ways of dealing with people. I have apologized to him any number of times although I do not recall ever receiving an apology from him. That's fine, I know how I feel and where I stand, and in the end I'm only responsible for me. I could sit down right now and enjoy having lunch with him. I'm sure we would have plenty in common to talk about. Of course that would hinge on his willingness to do so, I wouldn't have a problem.
I have "sorta" cleaned the post up a bit, I know you are all great guys on here and you all have excellent advice, things just happen from time to time though so yes, we can all move on and enjoy the forum for what it is...
Home 
