CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 26, 2015, 07:30:11 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
110288 Posts in 12742 Topics by 4884 Members
Latest Member: makemine69
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 59
736  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: interior headliner chrome trim on: January 28, 2009, 08:38:28 AM
Stainless trim for what? Door panels, year, deluxe, standard? If deluxe 8 & 9 let me know please. Scott
737  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Stripes - to feel them or not to feel them on: January 23, 2009, 04:22:47 PM
69Z28-RS,
              Lacquer was primarily what I shot 25 years ago, everyday vehicles aside. I'm aware of the differences. It's common knowledge that lacquer and urethane possess diffent properties resulting in different appearances. It will be interesting to see what occurs in 30 years or less as paint technology changes yet again. As it does even now. Thankfully, someone else will have to figure out how to properly prepare a car for zero point deductions.
738  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Stripes - to feel them or not to feel them on: January 23, 2009, 07:23:36 AM
it's very interesting to me that you guys are talking *restoration* AND *clear coat* in the same sentences....   the original cars did NOT get clear coat.   If you want to get as close as you can to the original lacquer in *look*, you should shoot single stage for color AND stripes..  without clear.   OR do it MORE originally and use lacquer all the way .. NO clear...

This debate has risen before. BC/CC urethane has become acceptable while maintaining parameters of correct striping techniqes. As in not burying the stripes. Single stage metallics cannot be buffed without distrupting the metallic.    Refraction and reflection is then altered and it will be evident. So BC/CC systems are used. Lacquer was reflowed, leveling the surface finish without physically distrupting the metallic flakes. Acceptable for that era. The dynamics of painting and properties are too great to be brief. Fellow painters will understand the variables and procedures.
 Do a search "Lacquer or BC" for more debates.
739  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Stripes - to feel them or not to feel them on: January 22, 2009, 06:21:31 PM
Naturally to each his own. I think either bury the stripe and make it perfectly smooth or shoot single stage over the clear for the stripes. Why do it in between? Clearing the stripe is more akin to a custom paint job. I do it when I airbrush graphics or pictorials. Many will disagree and have said clearing over better than the factory did it. But we are talking about restoration here, not a custom paint job. I did not even clear the stripe on my jane. If it were custom, or pro touring it would not matter.
 Quoting Jerry M. from a previous thread on painting debates:

     " The BC systems and single stage stripes over top has worked well at the Camaro Nationals in the Legends Class.  And very much looks like the original cars when they were new.  What boggles my mind is why so many people still choose to clear coat over everything.  It's not correct, does not make the car look any better and does not add anything to the value of the car."

You can tell if it's been cleared without even touching it.






740  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Stripes - to feel them or not to feel them on: January 22, 2009, 09:33:25 AM
Correct is stripes over the clear (or single stage solid color, if that's the system you are using). Never under the clear. A lot of guys clear over them. if you want it correct...don't do it.
741  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Looking for rear spoiler studs on: January 21, 2009, 09:09:14 PM
Your welcome. Spoiler studs are self tapping. You'll have to tap the hole to do it correctly w/ the H. bolts.
Scott
742  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Quarter Glass Chrome on: January 21, 2009, 03:26:11 PM
Ah yes, assumptions about correctly manufactured aftermarket parts. Let's say the glass is right and Rick's won't take it back your molding ( they should, but probably not if you tell them it won't fit aftermarkrt glass). Make a jig to support either end firmly and put it in a press and press the center (using a protective wrapping block) to achieve the proper arch. Or have your old ones rechromed. Or ask me to look in my stock. I may have an extra very nice pair. 
743  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Looking for rear spoiler studs on: January 21, 2009, 03:07:02 PM
They have different threads on each end with an intergral flat washer (part of the stud itself) in the middle.  They are about 1 1/2" long overall, and the lower threads (into the trunk) are 1/4-20.  The upper (into the spoiler) are more like a wood or self threading type of screw thread.

That's what hanger bolt are, But no integral washer. I left out the thread specs. Sorry about that.
744  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Looking for rear spoiler studs on: January 21, 2009, 07:19:12 AM
I'm sure you tried the vendors. You can use hanger bolts if neccessary. They are in the hardware bins in the hardware stores. Many sizes and lengths from which to choose. Also available in stainless.
745  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 67 rear seat on: January 21, 2009, 07:13:36 AM
O.S -

I think what Ron is trying to say is you should list the items on Ebay for 99 cents each with no reserve and you will get your answer.     Smiley

Paul


That does not always work. I sold a pair of filler panels on e-bay. I eventually got what I wanted and what they were worth at a fair price. The first time I listed them the bidding never went higher than $20. If I used a "no reserve" I would have taken a hit. E-bay can be a tricky place. Better for the buyers--not so much for the sellers. Akin to a casino.
746  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Quarter Glass Chrome on: January 20, 2009, 10:42:41 PM
Repo glass and trim curvature different than OEM is an ongoing dilemma. Does the trim have more or less of an arch than the glass? Check your old trim and see if it's more the glass or the trim causing the problem. Hard to tell without seeing it.
747  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Subframe-welding?!? on: January 18, 2009, 12:51:43 PM
I've seen them good and bad. Inconsistent beads, holes, excessive spatter. One horn perfect, the other atrocious. Novas too obviously.
748  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Restoration / Re: Dipstick finish on: January 08, 2009, 01:29:41 PM
I use electrolysis for many parts instead of relying on my cabinet or sandblaster blaster all the time. Set it up and walk away. Aside from finding a dipstick ( I might have one left), this is your best alternative. If someone knows a better method, please update.  You guys out there can do this to many parts if you don't have a shop set up. Just punch in "ELECTROLYSIS FOR RUST REMOVAL" and you will get a plethera of sites with info.
749  Camaro Research Group Discussion / Originality / Re: Correct Air Cleaner and Valve Covers, L48?? on: January 04, 2009, 11:06:52 AM
Then what is this for? The h. riser in my pic has a different orientation and size. Although the decal reads 427 that means nothing to me.
750  Camaro Research Group Discussion / General Discussion / Re: 69,new project on: December 26, 2008, 12:48:57 PM
Welcome,
 Begin by clicking on the red CRG rectangle in top corner of homepage and navigate through to familiarize yourself with data. Return w/ any questions you may have and answers will be cordially provided.  Scott
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 59
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.463 seconds with 18 queries.