CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 01, 2014, 01:29:11 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.
104995 Posts in 12266 Topics by 4728 Members
Latest Member: MartySS
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Restoration
| | |-+  black on tailpan on ss cars
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11  All Print
Author Topic: black on tailpan on ss cars  (Read 40142 times)
Buddy
Member
***
Posts: 154


hurcousa
View Profile
« Reply #105 on: December 25, 2009, 10:37:37 AM »

As Bill Clinton would say, It depends on what your definition of Glossy is....hehe

My definition is it is either Glossy or it is not. Lacquer is SEMI (to some degree) until worked out or reflowed.

Why is there no poll on this thread?? Are polls allowed on this Forum??

 Cool

By the way...Merry Christmas everybody...... Cheesy
Logged
NickeyChicago
Newbie
*
Posts: 18


View Profile Email
« Reply #106 on: December 25, 2009, 02:44:08 PM »

I have been around Camaros for a while and can say that I learn something new about them all the time.

I have inspected more than a few original paint Camaros and what I can say it that I personally have never seen an original paint first generation tail panel which was painted Flat Black or Satin Black, while I have seen original paint first gens, painted with Gloss Black lacquer.  Not saying that it won't happen but thus far never has. The fact regarding the degree of gloss is subjective and can be visually affected by several factors, including the base color of the actual car.

Some of the original cars had very little Black paint on them, maybe two coats and you could even see the base color poking through in some areas. This provided for a less shiny black  in some cases but it was still Gloss Black lacquer.

Once again these have been unfattened Gloss Black Lacquer. Wether or not is was buffed to a mirror finish afterwards, (which I do not believe it was) doesn't change that they were Gloss Black Lacquer paint.

While wet sanded, buffed and polished Gloss Black will look different than non detailed Gloss Black lacquer, it is still gloss black lacquer and not the same as "satin" or "flat"

Chevelles, Mopars ect may or may not follow this patern and should not be used as a reference as to what may or may not have been done with Camaros.

« Last Edit: December 25, 2009, 02:58:41 PM by NickeyChicago » Logged
Buddy
Member
***
Posts: 154


hurcousa
View Profile
« Reply #107 on: December 26, 2009, 05:05:05 PM »


Back to the point that no lacquer is gloss when applied. Even if it is called gloss lacquer. You have to finish it to get the glossy look. Believe me, GM did not do this.

Post some pics of these cars you inspected. THX

 Cool
Logged
Jerry@CHP
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 1445



View Profile Email
« Reply #108 on: December 27, 2009, 12:06:32 PM »

The best thing to do is this:  go to your local paint supplier and get a spray out card done in black lacquer.  Then get a custom match mixed up in the new B/C C/C paint.  Many are doing it this way and it's the best way to go as you have someone educated in this paint and what you are looking for.

Jerry
Logged
Buddy
Member
***
Posts: 154


hurcousa
View Profile
« Reply #109 on: December 27, 2009, 07:14:21 PM »


I think that is a good idea for people with no paint experience. I myself have been painting for 25 years and used lacquer exclusively in the early 80's. I hope people will follow your advice and see for themselves that lacquer is not glossy. (Shiny is not Glossy).

Buddy
Logged
Charley
Member
***
Posts: 413


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #110 on: December 27, 2009, 07:24:45 PM »

 "Shiny is not Glossy"   huh ?
Logged

ChrisM
Member
***
Posts: 43



View Profile
« Reply #111 on: February 24, 2010, 07:45:42 PM »

Drop the bumper or remove the tail lights. If it still has the  factory finish there will be untouched paint. My O5C LA car was glossy since i purchased it in 1980, This year i stripped the car and had it repainted and am now sure it was semi-gloss.
  Victor
Re: black on tailpan on ss cars
Reply #26 on: June 16, 2009, 07:53:36 PM  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't want to start this up again, but i thought this might be another good referance point.  Here is a pic to a tail pan with factory paint with the tail light removed.  I had waxed the left side to get rid of the fading.  The paint around the light matches.  The right side of the pic is untouched, dirt and all.  It's semi and looks very close to the tail pan on Post #20. Definately not full gloss.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/2816camaro/
Logged
jtsfrstgen
Newbie
*
Posts: 2


View Profile
« Reply #112 on: October 26, 2013, 08:47:51 PM »

Just came upon this site and decided to add my 2 cents (well 2 cents in '68....probably a quarter today) Anyway, read a lot of posts about the gloss and semi-gloss debate and from what I can tell almost all, if not all, are opinions. Hope this will set the record straight as I actually ordered a new 1968 RS/SS 396 Camaro from Southeast Chevrolet (it no longer exists) on Broadway Ave in Cleveland, Ohio in February of 1968 and it arrived in May. Bottom line................The tailpan was painted a Satin Black when it arrived at the dealership. It was a real striking contrast to the LeMans Blue color on the car. So, unless someone else "Actually ordered" and picked up a new 1968 396 Camaro please consider it an opinion as my statement is fact. Thanks for the opportunity to clear up the debate on this subject.
'
Logged
Charley
Member
***
Posts: 413


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #113 on: October 26, 2013, 09:09:58 PM »

LOL...No matter what side of the discussion you are on your opinion is still just a opinion unless you provide nice color pics to back it up taken back then. You can't really believe that you can come tell us you bought one new, it was Satin and have us just blindly believe you. My Son could join this site and make the same statement but in reality he was born in 81. Welcome to the site and I don't see why you would not state anything other than what you remember but we really are looking for pics etc that really prove. I remember a guy telling us he was there back in the day and watched all the ZL1's being built in a shop in L.A.
Logged

69Z28-RS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2417


owner since '76


View Profile Email
« Reply #114 on: October 26, 2013, 11:12:36 PM »

Just came upon this site and decided to add my 2 cents (well 2 cents in '68....probably a quarter today) Anyway, read a lot of posts about the gloss and semi-gloss debate and from what I can tell almost all, if not all, are opinions. Hope this will set the record straight as I actually ordered a new 1968 RS/SS 396 Camaro from Southeast Chevrolet (it no longer exists) on Broadway Ave in Cleveland, Ohio in February of 1968 and it arrived in May. Bottom line................The tailpan was painted a Satin Black when it arrived at the dealership. It was a real striking contrast to the LeMans Blue color on the car. So, unless someone else "Actually ordered" and picked up a new 1968 396 Camaro please consider it an opinion as my statement is fact. Thanks for the opportunity to clear up the debate on this subject.

I think you are right; I totally agree with you as that is what I recall from new ones at that time..  'glossy' black on the tailpan would have really stood out too much, and my mind remembers 'satin'.      Don't you have a pix or two from the first day you bought it? S*
Logged

Gary W.  /  69Z28-RS, 72 B 720 cowl console rosewood all tint
69 Corvette convertible, silver/black 350 hp,
60 Corvette white/red, 72 Corvette coupe (2), 
90 ZR1 red/red #246, 90 ZR1 white/gray #2466
72 El Camino, '55 Nomad, '57 Nomad, '57 B/A Sedan
festival
Member
***
Posts: 125


View Profile Email
« Reply #115 on: October 27, 2013, 07:09:14 AM »

Wow....this is an old topic.  The difference today is with a little gum shoe detective work I can likely find one of the Norwood guys who:

Supervised this operation, mixed the paint or actually sprayed the panel.   

Why not assist in the ongoing research?  You can Join us and create your own network of connections for a variety of factory topics.

Info here:   http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/543679/GM_Retiree_Day#Post543679



Logged

Mark
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 943



View Profile Email
« Reply #116 on: October 27, 2013, 08:26:22 AM »

Cool, we will be waiting to see what you can find out.
Logged

Mark C.
1969 Indy Pace Car
350/300HP RPO Z11
festival
Member
***
Posts: 125


View Profile Email
« Reply #117 on: October 27, 2013, 10:18:34 AM »

Cool, we will be waiting to see what you can find out.

Thanks Mark!

For the rest of you who may be interested in exploring research first hand -this is a great opportunity to share in the rediscovery of the details of historic Manufacturing and Assembly practices associated with GM and its products.
Logged

Mike S
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1112



View Profile
« Reply #118 on: October 27, 2013, 12:11:34 PM »

   I'll bet the results of any findings will circle back to being the same paint that was applied to the firewall and R/S rocker blackouts was the same used for the 396 SS tail blackouts. That is the only thing that makes any logical and economic sense for mass production. The 396 BB cars were a small percentage of total production and it would not seem likely Fisher would have a separate gloss percentage mixture just for the BB SS treatment.
 I loosened my 67 BB survivors tail light assembly and looked at the original black paint under the gasket and it looks like semi black. It is definitely not gloss.

Mike
Logged

67 LOS SS/RS L35 Hardtop - Original w/UOIT
67 NOR SS/RS L35 Convertible - Restored
jims69
Member
***
Posts: 84


View Profile
« Reply #119 on: October 27, 2013, 12:32:51 PM »

My cousin came back from the war and bought his new 69 Camaro; orange with white interior.   Dad and I drove over to see the  car; and it was really impressive,  it did not even have license plates on it yet.   We walked around the car from front to back and the smile on dad's face turned to a frown.
"why did you paint that ugly black paint on the back of a new car?"  Dad didn't like it.   "It came that way"   was the answer.   My recollection is that it was neither a bright gloss or a dull flat black.  Something in between; we always wondered why they selected that kind of paint for the tail panel.  I saw the car up
close a lot; the deal was.......
"wash and detail my car and I'll let you ride around in it with me."  So my younger cousin and I spent many  hours detailing that car out.  Good
memories.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11  All Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.08 seconds with 18 queries.