Author Topic: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting  (Read 10271 times)

69 Zee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 596
    • View Profile
Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« on: February 07, 2016, 08:05:50 PM »
Ok,  I'm finally getting some breathing room here and I'm about to start on the Z this summer.  Many of you already know this Z but I'll post a few pics pertaining to my question so you'll have an ideal of it's condition and what my goals are.

I have all body panels (not shown) and they're in excellent condition.  The hull is my main concern.  I plan to keep with ZERO intentions to ever selling.  So I want to do this once and once only.

So...should I have chemically dipped (Not an acid bath) or media blasted ?

I know blasting will not get all the hidden areas AND possibly warp the metal if not done correctly.  Thus also leading to it rusting from the inside areas such as the frame rail, shoulders and rockers.

I know a chemical bath will basically bring it to bare metal and a clean palette to start with.

The cost is minimal between the two and there's actually a place a few hours above me that's been dipping since the 70's.
 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwib9fjqtebKAhWGKh4KHdgIDcYQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fautorestorationdepot.com%2F&usg=AFQjCNEyf580JxlTVa-twyd_rJ7J6vQRpg&bvm=bv.113370389,d.dmo

I'm leaning 99.5% towards dipping.  Is there any reason not to dip ?  Is there any hidden sealer that was put in during the process of welding the body together at the factory and would require metal removal to replace the sealer?

Dipping also requires the removal of all aluminum parts.  This would mean removing the VIN and cowl tag which I'm not a proponent of. 

I fill like I'm in between a rock and a hard spot if I dip. Seems like the best method for total care of the metal yet would I be hurting it's value if I remove the tags only to reinstall afterwards ?  Of course I'd fully document and have numerous pics of the tag removal process.

Suggestions please

Thanks all in advance

Darrell
'69 Camaro Z/28: 03B NOR X77 Dusk Blue, white top, all orig, Under construction
'69 Firebird all original 350 all power w/ac
'70 Plymouth Superbird: One owner, Limelight green, 45K miles, all original U code

william

  • CRG Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3184
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2016, 09:13:18 PM »
There are pros and cons for each process.

As stated media blasting can warp sheet metal. It does not remove rust. It gets everywhere and can continue to show up even after a through cleaning. You can leave the tags but definitely mask them. Some media can leave residue on the body that will interfere with paint adhesion.

Dipping will get the rust & paint. Biggest problems: It may continue to 'seep' out of panel hems long after the car is painted and will remove the new paint. It may slightly erode the metal, also causing paint adhesion problems. Don't worry about R & R on the tags. Document the removal. Body tags often come off intact with rivets in place by just pushing on them from behind.

The car appears to have been left outside disassembled for an extended period. Doesn't leave you much choice.

Many cars have been stripped successfully by either process; the problems can be overcome. I would ask the restoration shop that is going to do the bodywork what they are comfortable with. I have heard some will not guarantee paint work if either process has been performed.
Learning more and more about less and less...

maroman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2016, 11:30:49 PM »
I would dip takeoff pieces and blast the cab. I'd rather have the media come out then the chemical later. At least the media will be dry. We have a guy here that does a great job with media, actually uses black beauty and does NOT warp sheet metal.
Doug  '67 RS/SS 396 auto I know the car since new

BULLITT65

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4480
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #3 on: February 08, 2016, 12:16:28 AM »
I would dip takeoff pieces and blast the cab. I'd rather have the media come out then the chemical later. At least the media will be dry. We have a guy here that does a great job with media, actually uses black beauty and does NOT warp sheet metal.

I would agree with Doug here. I think that would be the best of both worlds. I have had the media done and yes it does get into all the cracks and crevices, and even after a rotisserie with a air gun there are small pieces that may still remain. But as Doug said it is dry and will not come into play wth adhesion of the primer and paint. Couple guys on here are very familiar with media blasting and paint prep, Larry (X33), and Sauron327. I believe they are both paint guys. Your body actually doesn't look to bad. A quick blast of media would clean it up fairly quick. Just make sure you seal the body after either process rather soon. You could get all the media out quickly, and put it in primer the same day, I am not sure of a drying time or "oven" that you could put the dipped car into to make sure the solvent is completely evaporated or drained from the body?
1969 garnet red Z/28 46k mile unrestored X77
-Looking for 3192477 (front) spiral shocks 3192851 (rear)
-Looking for an original LOF soft ray windshield
-Looking for original Delco side post negative battery cable part # 6297651AV

69z27z87

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
  • The garage - my happy place
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2016, 01:15:58 AM »
I just had my 69SS stripped of 3 coats of paint. My blaster used a new type of media to strip the car. Removed all paint and rust and bondo.... Some real surprises underneath.... The media was so gentle to the base metal, you can still see the press marks on the sheet metal from the original stamping.... The media looked like candy...lol...white with red and blue pieced.... I would totally recommend it.... Not sure what its called. The blast shop put this booth in just for classic car parts.  I would ask around before dismissing media blasting...I will post some pics tomorrow...
1969 SS396 - L35, Z87 Daytona Yellow, Yellow Houndstooth, Black Vinyl top
1992 Z28 - LB9 Purple Haze, T-5WC, grey leather interior

ban617

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2016, 01:30:59 AM »
I think if you have it dipped most places have another vat to dip & seal everything so it won't rust inside where you can't see...

maroman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2016, 02:06:44 AM »
69z27z87, would that be plastic media? I bought a box to use in my cabinet, it worked great and left the metal form patterns like you say. It is used with real low pressure and high volume. Back in the 80's or 90's when GM had so much trouble with paint pealing a friend put in a unit to do cars for dealers. He was able to control it and leave the factory primer intact.
Doug  '67 RS/SS 396 auto I know the car since new

69 Zee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 596
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2016, 02:52:52 AM »
I think if you have it dipped most places have another vat to dip & seal everything so it won't rust inside where you can't see...
I'm going to call them tomorrow and get the full run down on the process and the cure/evaporate time required.  The place I'm referring to that dips does states it's a several step process and "includes a water base rust inhibitor to prevent flash rusting and that any primer or filler will bind to the raw metal 100%".

Then my thinking was to immediately hit all those areas with a cavity wand and 360 deg spray tip.  I won't be shooting paint anytime soon, just epoxy primer.  So if there were any areas that faulted from this process I'd have plenty of time to address and resolve.

Also has anyone totally tore one of these a part from the factory welds ?  Was there any hidden sealer between any panels that would be put in jeopardy if dipped?  I've torn one a part from the upper dash panel to the font floor pan (including cowl, firewall and shoulders) and never ran across such.  Was just wondering about the rest of the car to the tail panel.
Darrell
'69 Camaro Z/28: 03B NOR X77 Dusk Blue, white top, all orig, Under construction
'69 Firebird all original 350 all power w/ac
'70 Plymouth Superbird: One owner, Limelight green, 45K miles, all original U code

KurtS

  • CRG Coordinator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5955
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #8 on: February 08, 2016, 03:26:11 AM »
An inhibitor is not a primer. You could still get it rusting from the inside out.
And I also have heard issues with the seams weeping.
I wouldn't dip, I'd blast.
Kurt S
CRG

68camaroz28

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2251
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #9 on: February 08, 2016, 03:56:25 AM »
An inhibitor is not a primer. You could still get it rusting from the inside out.
And I also have heard issues with the seams weeping.
I wouldn't dip, I'd blast.
Another issue with dipping is usually you have to add drain holes. I know a person who did his 69 via dipping and no issues. On our 68 restoration we media blasted the car.


Chick
68 Z/28 NOR 01B Orig motor/trans/rear
69 Z/28 NOR 07A Orig Block & GM Cross-ram/carbs
69 L34 Rest. Nova Father/Son Car
69 L78 Surv Nova Purch 4/69 31K miles
67 L89 Corv Tribute
68 Corv 427/400 Orig motor
07 Corv Z06
R 68Z build- http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=182584

69z27z87

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
  • The garage - my happy place
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #10 on: February 08, 2016, 05:42:42 PM »
I believe it was plastic media blasting...you can see some primer remains here and there... but the metal surface cannot be beat. In the pic of the fender... "Look what we found!"..a new surprise... and old repair!.. brazed in too... those grinding marks are not new, those are from the when the repair was originally done. That's how good this is. These pics were taken hours after blasting was completed while the car was still in the booth.
1969 SS396 - L35, Z87 Daytona Yellow, Yellow Houndstooth, Black Vinyl top
1992 Z28 - LB9 Purple Haze, T-5WC, grey leather interior

X33RS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #11 on: February 08, 2016, 07:51:53 PM »
I'm late to the party.

I'll weigh in that I prefer media blasting over dipping for many reasons.  One of which is because the guy I use has a portable service, comes right to my house and blasts the entire car.  The car never has to leave my sight, I watch while it's done. The service is about $750, it's a bargain. He uses a soda blast method with a water mixture to keep the metal cool.  This also leaves a film behind that will protect the metal for a week or two if you find you can't get it primed immediately.  It washes off easily when ready.    Looks just like what is posted above when finished.  Nice part is the material is biodegradable and safe for the environment, so you don't have the EPA knocking on your door.

  I don't have to load anything in a trailer and drive 200 miles round trip to the dipping service and pay out the nose for it to boot.  Most of those places are drying up anyway, EPA has all but run them off with fees and permits.  The ones still left jack up the price to compensate, kinda sad.


Sauron327

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1412
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #12 on: February 08, 2016, 08:05:13 PM »
  The term "media", and there are many types in the industry, is often misused. Depending on type, media will remove rust, which is one of its purposes. To be more specific, sand can warp panels when done by the incompetent. It wastes a great deal of material to strip body panels with sand; that is why other media is chosen.
 
   Warping from media has nothing to do heat, yet the uneducated perpetuate this myth. Even some blasters think heat causes warpage until the basics of kinetic forces are explained. Stripping body skeletons and structures using more aggressive media will not cause damage.
 
    Unless completely and thoroughly neutralized, soda will leave a residue that can cause paint failure. Which is why most have replaced it with other types of safe media like plastic, walnut and glass which do not warp panels or cause adhesion issues.
    Every cavity, seam and  pinchweld will have to be coated internally whether media blasted or dipped. Since that company in the link does not offer e-coat or any other coating service, the owner will have to take it from where the stripper left off. The decklid and hood can lose their NVH (Noise, Vibration, Harshness) when chemically stripped and dipped. Unless they are de-skinned, the NVH cannot be replaced on all parts of the hood, and none on the decklid.
   
    The dipping company mentioned does good job of misleading people that media blasting is bad. I never had a problem or failure from blasting in 30 years. Their secret process is electrolysis. Any person can do small parts at home or the entire car if a tank big enough is available. The company also states they are not using acid, so there should be no weeping issues.
     Media is a pain to get out, but so is the 40 years of sand, crud and debris in the rockers even before blasting. Whatever method chosen, there are areas that become thin from corrosion. Bottoms of fenders may look solid after stripping, but the area behind the brace is notorious for rot even on western cars. I just cut out the lower fender braces on a virtually rot and rust free LOS car because I knew what was behind them. Rear bottoms of quarters can do the same and unless you inspect below the trunk pan extension, you may not see it. Any reinforcement in an area prone to rot should be removed, addressed and reinstalled. Rear wheelwell lips have sealant that makes them rot. If you can epoxy the car on a rotisserie it is better. Epoxy can be reduced and the car spun so it flows into seams.
 
   The photos don’t give the appearance of severe corrosion. Blasting would be suitable. Doubtful you will be driving this car like some do. Done correctly, the car will outlive you and no rot should appear, especially if a non-driving, trailer queen. My car that is actually driven in the rain, left outside sometimes and sees a hose is not failing after a restoration done 30K miles and 10 years ago. 


dale_z28

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 251
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #13 on: February 08, 2016, 11:18:51 PM »
I had several parts (pretty much everything that would unbolt from the car) blasted with good results - except for my hood, which was warped. It was NOT sand, it was either plastic or soda. I'd get something in writing about warpage.
'69 X33 02D   Since 11-29-'77

Details are trifles, but trifles make perfection. And perfection is no trifle.
~Ben Franklin

69 Zee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 596
    • View Profile
Re: Chemical Dipping vs Blasting
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2016, 08:48:59 PM »
Ok,  so it seems all would blast and not worry about the hidden rust.   I must be looking to much into it then as I keep thinking that the untouched areas after blasting will haunt me later. 

What type of blasting should I be looking for from a company and what about this dustless I'm seeing also?
Darrell
'69 Camaro Z/28: 03B NOR X77 Dusk Blue, white top, all orig, Under construction
'69 Firebird all original 350 all power w/ac
'70 Plymouth Superbird: One owner, Limelight green, 45K miles, all original U code

 

anything