Febuary 2012 The Paint Spot Newsletter

Well, last months newsletter went over pretty good. We got response from several customers regarding the color matching segment of January s newsletter. So many of you didn't really understand the blending issue and specifically the problems with OEM paint not being consistent. I realize how difficult it sounds to hear that one color can vary so much just because the factory will go from one color to another and then back, without thoroughly cleaning all the lines. Lots of you were worried about how you would know which variance you had if you didn't have a variance system. I told several of you during this month and will say it now in this edition .Matrix has a great variance system, and I will work with you on obtaining one, but if you can't or don't want to go there, all you have to do is

I actually think we lost a customer because of my explanation (one of the pitfalls of honesty, but also one I can live with). The customer in question was convinced that our paint matched better than their previous supplier. As it turns out, we just happened to get them prime formulas that matched, and they found that when it didn't match, as long as they blended it didn't matter whose paint they used .it matched! Update on the Matrix MP-1000 project at Slix: As I mentioned last month, the MP-1000 primer is being used exclusively on a project at Slix. This project is being monitored by us as well as Matrix (Brian Lynch). Here s where we're at as of yet.

The entire body is coated inside and out. We had to go back and do some welding on a quarter panel that didn't fit quite right (after market). When we ground into the MP-1000, we found that where it had contacted the bare metal, the color changed, it actually looked like self etch primer (yellowish). We then scratched up the surface and began the body work. Adhesion was the same as if we were doing body work over the traditional epoxy primer. When the filler was sanded out, we again coated the area with MP-1000. The next step was dry blocking with 150 grit. At this stage we noticed that the MP-1000 was a little bit harder to sand than what we would normally use (MP3-HS , MP2K, or RSP 160). The build was also not as high as the MP3-HS, so we primed and dry blocked again. Now let me explain what we are doing with this project. We want to use the new primer (MP-1000) all the way through this process to prove that it can be done. We do recognize that we wouldn't ordinarily want to do a job of this magnitude like this though. The MP3-HS (Matrix) or the Polyester Primer (Transtar) would be the primers of choice after the body filler had been blocked out because of their specific build characteristics. After we primed and blocked a second time, the next panel was dealt with. Our objective is to get the whole car to its last coat of primer, from there we will wet sand and paint. During this project we have also used the MP-1000 on every job we could, both as a primer and as a sealer. I personally painted a 2005 Chevrolet Silverado (dark green met) that we had put an aftermarket bedside on, replaced a cab side, and done body work to, that was sealed with the MP-1000. It was a wet on wet (30 min. flash) with no die back, or application problems what so ever. We also have a racing bike that we're doing a custom paint job on that's made of Titanium with a carbon fiber fork. After blasting the frame lightly, we wiped it down with MXW-9001 cleaner / degreaser, and coated it with MP-1000 mixed as a sealer, then based. Then there s the CJ6 Jeep, a bare metal project with extensive fabrication, welding and the POR15 products all over it, that we coated with MP-1000, seam sealed, and painted My opinion on this product thus far is

EXCELLENT! The only thing that I can think of that's at all negative is the hard sanding as a primer / surfacer, but it's unlikely that you would want to use it that way. In mentioning the MXW-9001 I need to say that this product is a waterborne grease and wax remover that I really like. It is also the preferred one to use with plastics and aluminum substrates, that works equally well with steel. We are going to it exclusively at Slix. Speaking of waterborne

After much thought and 63 paint jobs, I have decided that we will NOT be going to Waterborne at SLIX. I will say that I do like the Gen2o waterborne paint the best, as it performs better than all that I've used. I especially like the fact that it covers in one coat on most colors, and that I use real water to reduce it and not an aqueous reducer. Here s what I don't like: Fisheye .when you have them, you have to wipe the whole car off and start from scratch. Culture shock everything changes when you use water based paint. I have a down draft and where it was the bomb for solvent based paint, it sucks for water. Believe it or not, a cross draft is actually better (more air movement, that has to be made up for with fans in other booths). Spray guns are also eating themselves alive with water. Devilbiss has got one of the best answers to that problem on the market (teckna prolite) but they're not cheap! Expense not only the paint, but when you factor in all the tool and equipment changes, it's just too expensive! Smoke and Mirrors at the end of the day, the only thing you did for the environment was change the base coat. The primer and the clear coat is same old, same old! Now last but not least ..There is none! Water borne was never mandated anywhere to begin with. It was V.O.C. levels that were set. It doesn't matter what technology you use, as long as it complies with V.O.C. limits. We live and work in Texas. These restrictions do not apply to us yet, and possibly never will! Does this mean that we Texans shouldn t be conscience of our environment and shouldn t do all we can to protect ourselves and our world ..Absolutely not! It also doesn't mean that we should blindly change directions just because we think (or have been told) that unless we do the shit will hit the fan . Because this is an area of concern for many of you, and because I myself was so pumped up about this water borne paint, and have since totally had a change of heart, I thought it best to get a professional take on the subject. What you are about to read is not my words, they are the words of someone much higher up the food chain than me, and also from California

I am sure there is an ancient Chinese proverb that says don't buy a cure from the doctor who gave you the disease. Maybe not, but it still is good advise.

www.aqmd.gov/rules/reg/reg11/r1151.pdf ).First, and this is a big one, it does not require the use of waterborne basecoat. If you read the not so fine print you will see that there is no requirement for waterborne basecoat. It might seem a little tricky but there is a limit set for color coat at 3.5 lb. per gallon (page 2 appendix A), and if you read the definition of color coat you will find the following:

COLOR COATING means any pigmented coating, excluding adhesion promoters, primers, and multi-color coatings, that requires a subsequent clear coating and which is applied over a primer or adhesion promoter. Color coatings include metallic/iridescent color coatings.

So, in reality, the famous rule does not require shops to use waterborne basecoats. Add this to the fact that this rule only applies to the area served by the SCAQMD, not the entire state of California. There are actually 35 different districts in California, and they administer a boat load of rules. As an example, in the South Coast area alone it takes three rules to do the job. A rule for the products, 1151, that describes certain physical properties and specifies certain practices. Another rule 109 that describes the record keeping methods and periods. And yet another rule 1171 just for solvent cleaning operations, like wipe down and adhesive removal. The point here is anybody that claims to have a product, or tool, that complies with California may be misleading you. Certainly no salesman, or company, would mislead you for their own good...or would they? I prefer to think they are just ignorant. As it appears in the dictionary (

Here is where the ignorant among us can hurt you. They can tell you that there is a wolf at your door (metaphor for pending regulations) and that they have the only weapon known to slay wolves (the products they sell). To my knowledge, and I do have experience in this field, there are no laws, in the United States that actually require the use of waterborne basecoats. Generally speaking we, that is the United States, makes rules that set emission limits rather than prohibit a particular technology. In Europe the European Union (EU) and also in the United Kingdom (UK) they did limit the technology to just waterborne. The change over was required by any shop refinishing cars and the manufacturers were required to stop the sale of solvent borne basecoats. It was not as big a deal as one might think. Where needed many shops improved equipment and trained their painters, but, maybe because everybody had to comply, it went off with much less drama than one might expect. In the US the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has outlined a whole group of newer, lower emission, solvents that have allowed some manufacturers to comply with lower limits while still maintaining the solvent borne feel and cost of conventional products. This method of compliance may fit you better. In summary I would like to leave you with the following thoughts. Be aware of the rules that govern the refinishing activity in your area. They may be less restrictive than you think. If you currently use paint ask your rep what they know about your rules, what their companies answer is, and what your time table is for compliance. If they don't know, try to force you into their product of the week, or quote some rule that does not apply to you, get a new supplier. Be ready to change. Chances are only small changes will keep you compliant for years to come. Do the simple stuff, not only because you have to, but because most rules make sense for your community and your shop.

So if you are being told you must change, you must update, or you must buy what someone is selling, be careful. Research can make a huge difference. If you are not comfortable with the internet, web sites, or the government, get a ten year old with a smart phone to help you. If you can't do that then don't worry, maybe you can work for the ten year old someday. Ok, Rick is back and I need to repeat .Water borne is not mandated! I will now offer up a solution ..Leave things as they are If it ain t broke, don't fix it ! For those of you who do want to get the jump on what may come our way in the future you may want to do what we (Slix) are doing. I personally still have an interest in moving forward with environmentally correct materials as long as it makes sense! Spending more money, which equates to less profit just doesn't make sense to me. To do it because of playing follow the leader really doesn't make sense. What does make sense is going to MSB or MPB LV! This is revolutionary technology in that it basically means I can use what I and all my colleagues are already used to and be TOTALLY COMPLIANT if and when the rules actually did apply to us! Matrix has perfected a whole line of LV toners that will replace the existing ones. Get this

Many of them are drop in to the existing system! They have also come up with creative ways to incentivize this transformation (ask us at The Paint Spot if you're interested in making the change). You will notice absolutely no difference to what you're spraying right now, and no one will have to worry about training, or equipment expenses.

I apologize for the late mailing of this issue, but expert opinions sometimes take time! There was more to say, so we'll be sure and put it in March edition.