UV Smooth Prime

".Blueskies." wrote in message
et...

"Morgans" wrote in message
...
:
:
: I suspect the problem was that of the primer, not of the topcoats.
:
: Ever notice(d) what the 1987 and 88 (and perhaps 89) automobiles with
light blue
: and gray paint did? Most, if not all had the paint peeling off in
sheets or
: fading all of the way off, without starting to strip them.
...

That problem seems to come and go. I first saw it in the 60's with light
blue metallics. I've seen it on several brands of vehicles. Light blue and
grey metallics seem to have been the worst over the years.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote

That problem seems to come and go. I first saw it in the 60's with light blue
metallics. I've seen it on several brands of vehicles. Light blue and grey
metallics seem to have been the worst over the years.

I had no idea that the problem had been present in such a wide span of years. I
especially am surprised to hear the 85 vehicles were part of the mid 80's
problem.

I think I'll stay away from gray and light blue, from now on! g
--
Jim in NC

"Jim Stewart" wrote

I had a Ford Taurus that did the exact
same thing. Along with the garbage auto
transmission, I haven't forgiven Ford
either.

I have a feeling that all of the big three transmissions are little more than
junk.

I grew up with automatic transmissions, and never remember them breaking, even
with high mileage vehicles.

It seems like they design them to go 90 to 110 thousand miles, then they are
prone to require rebuilding, at any time.

IMHO, they ought to go at least 200 thousand without a glitch. They could build
them that way, for a few dollars more, but that does not seem to be the
priority.

I was told that the reason it happened is
that Ford purposely omitted the primer and
put the color coat directly on the sheetmetal.

That was not the case with my GM van. There was definitely gray primer under
the light blue paint. I know, because I sanded it down, to bare metal. I was
afraid that the primer was part of the problem, and if any was left, it would
cause the problem, again. Let me tell you, there is a lot of surface area on a
full sized van!

I primed it, and painted it with a NAPA one step white fleet color paint (no
clear coat) and it has not had a problem since.

I learned a lot with that job. One, I hate body work, and sanding. g Spray
technique learned in painting and clear coating cabinetry carries through, to an
extent, but there are big differences that would likely carry through to
painting an airplane.

The biggest problem, I thought, was dealing with keeping that big of a wet line.
By the time you get all around the vehicle, how do you deal with the point where
you have already painted, and the overspray? I did it by putting on a quick
masking at the seam of the hood, so it did not get overspray from the last paint
getting on the first paint. I don't know if that is right, but it worked for
me.

It seems to me that an airplane would be harder, since there are less seams, and
it has to be painted on the bottom, also. How do people deal with blending the
top to the bottom, or do they rotate them, and paint from the front to the back,
all the way around, rotating as they go?
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:


"Richard Riley" wrote

My Long
EZ had acrylic enamel over an unknown dark grey primer (circa 1989, it
wasn't lacquer based but I'm not sure what it was) - when I went to
strip the paint the topcoat peeled off in large sheets, it hadn't
bonded to the primer at all. I don't know what the failure was, it
might have been either the primer or the topcoat. So I'm strictly a
Linear Polyurethane guy now, from primer through clearcoat.


I suspect the problem was that of the primer, not of the topcoats.

Ever notice(d) what the 1987 and 88 (and perhaps 89) automobiles with
light blue and gray paint did? Most, if not all had the paint peeling
off in sheets or fading all of the way off, without starting to strip
them. You may have not noticed that, but I did. I had one of the
automobiles that had said light blue paint. I would stand there
(usually at the gas pump while I was doing nothing else) and peel off
silver dollar sized sheets of topcoat with my fingernail. There was a
recall that I did not take advantage of, (because I was a contractor,
with 7 people depending on my van being there with the tools everyday)
until it was too late, and had expired. Expired? Ridiculous. That
sort of thing should never expire. I still have not forgiven GM for
that one.

I had a Ford Taurus that did the exact
same thing. Along with the garbage auto
transmission, I haven't forgiven Ford
either.

I was told that the problem started while the paint companies were
trying to meet new regulations for the amount of volatiles in the paint,
and the new formulas did not have adequate UV resistance, which would
cause the bond between topcoat and primer to break down. The light gray
and blue topcoats were the worst at letting UV through, I guess. I don't
know for sure if that was the real answer, but there was a real
problem. Perhaps that was a common link with your problem.

I was told that the reason it happened is
that Ford purposely omitted the primer and
put the color coat directly on the sheetmetal.

I would be curious to research when the folks who have had problems with the
UVSP bought their primer, as well as where it was purchased. What I'm
getting at is I wonder if Polyfiber put out a "bad batch" or two and these
peeling, oozing cases are of the same lot. Of those of you out there who
have had issues could you give an estimate of when the product was
purchased, and Who the vendor was. Just a thought...
Doug

Doug Palmer wrote:

..... Of those of you out there who
have had issues could you give an estimate of when the product was
purchased, and Who the vendor was. Just a thought...

2001/2002 from Aircraft Spruce.

Let me ask you a question. Since there are a bazillion different
primers out there, and the ONLY one that anyone has ever complained
about in public with respect to painting composite aircraft is Smooth
Prime, even if the failure rate is relatively low (let's say 5% as a
talking point, although I personally know 5-7 COZY builders who've had
problems with it, so in the COZY community the %age is probably closer
to 10%-20%), why would you want to use a product where the failure
rate is 5% rather than one where the failure rate is 0.01%?

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2006

It isn't so much an issue of wanting to use so much as I have been using it
to prime surfaces over the last 5 years, the whole fuselage is primed, now
painted with the stuff, and I have two more (expensive) cans of the it and
am deciding whether or not to use them
"Marc J. Zeitlin" wrote in message
...
2001/2002 from Aircraft Spruce.

Let me ask you a question. Since there are a bazillion different primers
out there, and the ONLY one that anyone has ever complained about in
public with respect to painting composite aircraft is Smooth Prime, even
if the failure rate is relatively low (let's say 5% as a talking point,
although I personally know 5-7 COZY builders who've had problems with it,
so in the COZY community the %age is probably closer to 10%-20%), why
would you want to use a product where the failure rate is 5% rather than
one where the failure rate is 0.01%?

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2006

"Marc J. Zeitlin" wrote in message
...
Doug Palmer wrote:

..... Of those of you out there who
have had issues could you give an estimate of when the product was
purchased, and Who the vendor was. Just a thought...

2001/2002 from Aircraft Spruce.

Let me ask you a question. Since there are a bazillion different primers
out there, and the ONLY one that anyone has ever complained about in
public with respect to painting composite aircraft is Smooth Prime, even
if the failure rate is relatively low (let's say 5% as a talking point,
although I personally know 5-7 COZY builders who've had problems with it,
so in the COZY community the %age is probably closer to 10%-20%), why
would you want to use a product where the failure rate is 5% rather than
one where the failure rate is 0.01%?

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2006

I agree wholeheartedly about using a reliable system, which would push me
away from SmoothPrime on future projects. I wish there was another system
that filled pinholes as effectively as SmoothPrime. Also, being waterborne
and roller applicable sure is nice.

We've seen failures in the RV community too. I wonder if some people are not
properly mixing the material, or are applying it during periods when the
temperature or humidity levels are having a negative impact on the
polymerization. (It does claim to polymerize, doesn't it?)

KB

If I were doing it again, I would go with a high end brand, either Dupont or
PPG, and stick with the same product line across the board: filling primer,
primer/sealer, basecoat, Colors, clears, surface cleaner, tack rags,
reducers. It would save a lot of heartache and worry and it would not cost
that much more. The true cost of painting is all of the time spent
prepping, It will suck if I need to repair bad paint in the future.

Doug