How much paint should you be removing as a pro?

[Audios S6]

As a professional, people are coming to you to fix their paint. But should you be removing so much paint so as to leave little or no room for future correction?

I'll liken it to this current fad of having extreme camber. Shops will do it. Knowing full well that handling is crap and you will burn through tires and eat suspension components. It's obvious to a potential buyer of these cars that this is the situation.

It's not so obvious that someone has removed all but a fraction of the clearcoat. As a detailer, you can't predict the future of the car. There is the potential that damage may occur if it's polished or not protected regularly by a future owner

For the sake of argument, let's narrow the criteria a bit:
Ignore custom paint work. Ignore show cars. Ignore end-of-life cars. When you are dealing with a daily driver or even a garage queen that is likely to have many years and miles left and potentially a few new owners, what is reasonable to remove or how do you handle a situation where an owner wants you to remove, say 1mil+ of paint?

If I ever have to do wetsanding or major correction, I make it clear to the owner that this is a one time deal. If I do spot sanding, I make it clear they need to point out those areas to anyone else who ever puts a polisher on the car. I try to promote living with certain defects. I think that's a fair compromise of having the current and future owner's best interests in mind, as well as any other detailer that might touch the car.

How do others approach this?

 

[Eldorado2k]

D151 or Megs Black Wax.

 

[asianisafish]

First tell them the limitations. You can only compound so much and wetsand so much. Tell them how it all works. And if they ask you to get 95% correction, then get 95% correction (assuming this is compounding polishing and not wetsanding). You told then the limitations and the possible results, and they asked you to get said results.

I don't worry about it at all if I've explained to them the limitations and possibilities

 

[Joe@NextLevelDetail]

Mike Phillips said it best.

"Us as detailers we know how to remove scratches, but sometimes there's just not enough clear coat to get them out"

And he couldn't be more right, explain to your customer that you know how to remove the scratch, however the risks involved and the higher percentage for clear coat failure its just not worth it.

When mike said that it changed my outlook , I don't think I'm a bad detailer anymore because I can't get a certain scratch out, I know how to remove scratches , Its not our fault that there isn't enough paint!

Do what you can, chasing a scratch will get you more into trouble then help you.

I set my limits, and tell the customer what may and may not come out.

 

[FUNX650]

•It's not just about being prudent (when
polishing-off an X-amount of CC paint) in
order to avoid burn-throughs/etc...
-but it's also about preserving the CC's UV
protectors/absorbers/etc.—the majority of
which is usually found in the CC's topmost
strata.

-"Thinning out" the CC will dramatically
reduce its ability to protect the remainder of
the BC/CC paint system from incurring UV
damages, often resulting in premature CC-failure.

...what is reasonable to remove or how do you handle a situation where an owner wants you to remove, say 1mil+ of paint?

•With many OEM paint systems only having CC
with ~1.5-2 mils thickness (and getting thinner
all the time)...
-removing 1 mil of CC via whatever means
(RE: abrasives/abrasive processes) would be
considered, by the "paint engineers" to be
way too much!

-Their recommendations is to remove no more
than 25% of the CC over the service life of the
vehicle. (Paint Warranties have shorter time periods)

-So...Going with the:
~1.5-2.0 mils thicknesses (~38.1-50.8 µm)...
Suggests that no more than:
~0.3-0.5 mils (~9.5-12.7 µm) of the CC should
be removed over the vehicle's service-life.



Bob

 

[GSKR]

•It's not just about being prudent (when
polishing-off an X-amount of CC paint) in
order to avoid burn-throughs/etc...
-but it's also about preserving the CC's UV
protectors/absorbers/etc.—the majority of
which is usually found in the CC's topmost
strata.

-"Thinning out" the CC will dramatically
reduce its ability to protect the remainder of
the BC/CC paint system from incurring UV
damages, often resulting in premature CC-failure.


•With many OEM paint systems only having CC
with ~1.5-2 mils thickness (and getting thinner
all the time)...
-removing 1 mil of CC via whatever means
(RE: abrasives/abrasive processes) would be
considered, by the "paint engineers" to be
way too much!

-Their recommendations is to remove no more
than 25% of the CC over the service life of the
vehicle. (Paint Warranties have shorter time periods)

-So...Going with the:
~1.5-2.0 mils thicknesses (~38.1-50.8 µm)...
Suggests that no more than:
~0.3-0.5 mils (~9.5-12.7 µm) of the CC should
be removed over the vehicle's service-life.



Bob

:iagree:especially in hot climates where the hot sun is blazing everyday.sanding accelerates deteriorating of clear coat.

 

[AGOatemywallet]

:iagree:especially in hot climates where the hot sun is blazing everyday.sanding accelerates deteriorating of clear coat.

Does heat accelerate the deterioration of CC?

I think there is no direct correlation between the two.


I believe the higher heat and UV in areas like South Florida, will degrade the LSP more rapidly and therefore the CC spends more time exposed directly to UV.


I have not seen a correlation between sanding and CC failure studied...just anecdotal evidence.

Single Stage vehicles have Zero CC. If the vehicle is kept clean and he LSP is maintained...that paint does not fail.

 

[Jaretr1]

Does heat accelerate the deterioration of CC?

I think there is no direct correlation between the two.


I believe the higher heat and UV in areas like South Florida, will degrade the LSP more rapidly and therefore the CC spends more time exposed directly to UV.


I have not seen a correlation between sanding and CC failure studied...just anecdotal evidence.

Single Stage vehicles have Zero CC. If the vehicle is kept clean and he LSP is maintained...that paint does not fail.

I do not think its the heat, but the UV damage from the sun. Given that hotter climates, closer to the equator (like South Florida) tend to have more intense sunshine, explains the relationship of hot and high intensity sun.

 

[Eldorado2k]

I do not think its the heat, but the UV damage from the sun. Given that hotter climates, closer to the equator (like South Florida) tend to have more intense sunshine, explains the relationship of hot and high intensity sun.

Same would go for Southern California, Arizona, and Texas.

 

[GSKR]

Yes I meant uv rays.

 

[Mike lambert]

.5 mils at most, you have to think most people don't remember or care about the next guy. And if you are the next guy as in a regular client you need to remember what you did last time.

 

[Paul A.]

My answer to the original post is "the least amount to give the customer what they are paying for". The tricky part is determining, then advising the customer what you can do safely if you have thin paint layers and the customer wants 85-95% correction.

My approach has always been to retain as much life in the factory applied paint as possible. My allegiance is to the life of that paint and not as much to the customer's ownership duration...or simply put...i want to leave as much paint available for the longest time on that vehicle. It may go 2, 3, heck maybe 4 owners over its life but if i get aggressive and give customer #1 near total paint correction on a hacked up, tunnel washed, neglected vehicle, there may be clearcoat failure for customer #2 and certainly by #3 and #4.

Again, the tricky part is determining how much paint you have to work with THEN talking to the customer about any limitations you may have in working it. I don't like to just hack it down because the customer wants it perfect.

The key for me in the original post's question was "as a pro"!

 

[Setec Astronomy]

it's also about preserving the CC's UV
protectors/absorbers/etc.—the majority of
which is usually found in the CC's topmost
strata.

I wish people wouldn't keep promoting this wives tail...unless you have some specific data in this regard, I will continue to consider this a layman's (not you) interpretation of what you posted about the recommendation being not to remove more than .5 mil. I interpret that to mean that you need 1.5 mil of clear to absorb UV radiation...while someone looking at it differently would think that hey, it's still got 3/4 of the original clear, but if taking that top 1/4 off will make it fail, that must mean that most of the UV absorbers are in the top 1/4!

It's kind of thinking hey, I have this 2" piece of wood that I can stand on without it breaking. Then I cut half an inch off, and have 3/4 of it left, and then I stand on it and it breaks. Some people must think I cut off the strong part of the wood, and that's why it broke, while I would conclude I need more than 3/4 of the thickness to have the required load-bearing capability.

That's all being said with Dr. G's discussions of UV-absorber migration not withstanding.

 

[Paul A.]

Ok, added to my list of much needed inventions to the detailing industry...

1. LSP Thickness Meter

2. UV Absorbency Potentiometer
:dblthumb2:

 

[FUNX650]

I will continue to consider this a layman's (not you) interpretation of what you posted about the recommendation being not to remove more than .5 mil.

I interpret that to mean that you need 1.5 mil of clear to absorb UV radiation...

^^^ Understood. ^^^

But...I often interpret it as, (among other factors):
•the CC-paint doesn't absorb UV;
-rather it's the UV-inhibitors/absorbers/etc.
that are contained within the CC-paint.

•Subsequently...the "paint engineers"
recommendation of the removal of no more
than 0.3-0.5 mils of CC, is, in effect, a kind
of a "surety agreement" that, if for nothing else:

-acts to affirm that, by following that CC
removal recommended range, there will be less
chances of the Consumer voiding the OEM paint
warranties—via the removal of an inordinate
amount of the BC-paints' "Protective Substances"(PS):

-whether those "PS" are defined as the CC-paint
film layer, in and of itself; whether it's provided
solely by the UV-inhibitors/absorbers/etc. that are
contained within the CC-paint film layer; or both.


Ultimately:
•"Correct" the paint once;
-Maintain it "correctly" from then on.



Bob

 

[jrs1418]

Does heat accelerate the deterioration of CC?

I think there is no direct correlation between the two.


I believe the higher heat and UV in areas like South Florida, will degrade the LSP more rapidly and therefore the CC spends more time exposed directly to UV.


I have not seen a correlation between sanding and CC failure studied...just anecdotal evidence.

Single Stage vehicles have Zero CC. If the vehicle is kept clean and he LSP is maintained...that paint does not fail.

Of course heat plays a factor! Ever see a hood with more CC damage than the roof?

 

[AGOatemywallet]

Of course heat plays a factor! Ever see a hood with more CC damage than the roof?

Do you consider that Proof?

I consider it anecdotal evidence.


How much hotter does the hood get than the roof?


For what percentage of the paints life is it at this elevated temperature?

What do you believe the heat is doing to the CC?

Or is it contributing to more rapid degradation of the LSP?


.

 

[Audios S6]

My answer to the original post is "the least amount to give the customer what they are paying for". The tricky part is determining, then advising the customer what you can do safely if you have thin paint layers and the customer wants 85-95% correction.

My approach has always been to retain as much life in the factory applied paint as possible. My allegiance is to the life of that paint and not as much to the customer's ownership duration...or simply put...i want to leave as much paint available for the longest time on that vehicle. It may go 2, 3, heck maybe 4 owners over its life but if i get aggressive and give customer #1 near total paint correction on a hacked up, tunnel washed, neglected vehicle, there may be clearcoat failure for customer #2 and certainly by #3 and #4.

Again, the tricky part is determining how much paint you have to work with THEN talking to the customer about any limitations you may have in working it. I don't like to just hack it down because the customer wants it perfect.

The key for me in the original post's question was "as a pro"!

This is exactly what I'm getting at. And you nailed it with 'pro', being a third party is a key piece of the equation. I've seen several write-ups recently of guys doing heavy sanding and orange peel removal on brand new factory clearcoat, touting removal of 25-30 microns. Looks great, but what happens when it passes on to owners 2, 3 or 4. Maybe that mindset doesn't exist here, but I was very curious if I was in the minority.

I eluded to the fact when I mentioned 'not protected', but I should have been more clear in the first post, that considering UV failure is just as important as burn-throughs. And, IMO, sealant, wax, coating is no substitute for an engineered paint system.

 

[jrs1418]

Do you consider that Proof?

I consider it anecdotal evidence.


How much hotter does the hood get than the roof?


For what percentage of the paints life is it at this elevated temperature?

What do you believe the heat is doing to the CC?

Or is it contributing to more rapid degradation of the LSP?


.

Well I consider it proof when I see CC damage resembling the shape of the underlying hood structure or lack of heat protection.

 

[larry33]

Bob...correct once and then maintain. Are you mostly talking about compounding? I hear people talk of their annual spring polish. Does that violate your recommendation?