majors' waterborne faq

J

jeremyb

thought this was kinda cool.

http://bodyshopbusiness.com/Article/86060/waterborne_paint_faqs.aspx

question 4 is funny. i've seen first hand experience where the waterborne just wasn't cutting the mustard in a HIGH HIGH production facility. It was sikkens, and the akzo rep says "That a water-based material will slow down production" in the faq. I guess those 20-30 year old vet painters dont know what the hell they talking about huh?

system was in use for over a year a believe. now its gone from their shop.

would be nice to see spi's answer to some of those......that would definately rough some feathers!! lol.

*edit* this is no doubt a pr move with these guys.
 
Lots of BS for sure!

Bottom line, looking into the future, I predict Metal lux will kick most of these guys butt into right field or / and most likely to happen, as that starts to happen one of the majors will buy them and shut them down.
 
i dunno....I havent heard much good from them.....guy in town stocks it and the only shop that has a machine with them is ready to kick it out because of the awful color match, much like matrix....thats just what i hear. and I used the stuff when the matrix store was carrying it when we tried matrix......having to redo both cars (one in matrix, one in metalux) wasn't a good taste in my mouth....BUT that was 3-4 years ago....havent messed with the stuff since. the silver in metalux had poor coverage..extremely hard to get on even and had a slew of problems with the clear dying back......now that bein said not all of that was the product...we had little to no support from the guys selling it. We were told "our stuff is so good, it sells itself." Somethin that good should just jump on the car huh? I have no experience in the colormatching department with it. I suppose they've made improvments over the years.
 
4. What, in your opinion, is the biggest myth about waterborne?


AkzoNobel: That a water-based material will slow down production.


sikkens is the highend in the paint world.. they dont put there system in just any shop. the shops that have the right setups will benefit from them and will push out alot more cars. the fastest ive ever painted something was with water and it was sikkens. its no secret that with the right setup it is alot faster.
 
Pro-Spray: Yes. It is possible to comply with Rule 1151 amendments using exempt solvents, but not without sacrificing performance. There’s a limited selection of exempt solvents approved for use in our industry. These solvents are blended with conventional resins to create a 3.5 binder system that works with existing toners. When you use these exempt solvents to achieve lower VOC requirements, you sacrifice sprayability, especially over large areas and in warmer temperatures. And metallic control may be more difficult with 3.5 exempt basecoats. The optimal way to meet compliance is by spraying waterborne. Waterborne basecoats are easier to apply and offer better color match and coverage.


look what pro spray said about 3.5 voc legal basecoats... what ive been saying this whole time about these products.


i havent even heard of the metul lux legal line... either way.. none of the legal solvent has good color match.. none.. they all have to be tinted.. (not that i care i do 95% custom)
 
I have heard the same about low voc base coats. bad color match.

question i have is why not re-formulate the colors? That has to be done to create water colors, what's the difference?
 
Chad, because it makes no difference on the colors at all, if the colors matched at 10 voc, they matched at 4 voc and they will match at 3.5 or 2.1 voc pure BS that changing solvent makes a difference. NONE at all.
If the system matched before, it will match now.

We have been fixing wreck cars with waterborne base on them with solvent for years and now they don't match?

Pure BS that metallics are harder to spray. They are easier.

Pure BS that they dry to fast. There is room for solvent, so fill it with eep, the base might dry by next week.

Pure BS water is faster, Sik, you are always sporting off the stuff you read from advertising, Now you tell me how in your statement this is true:

Waterborne is slow enough to do a big job in the heat, solvent is not, yet waterborne is faster?????????????? say what?

Slik, this is pure bull chit as a matter of fact, in the coating mag I just got, there is an extensive study done about the low voc solvent base and the demand is so great from the majors, one pigment company is expanding to go after this business.

More on the article will be printed here, it give straight facts and not opinionated BS formed from listening to some paint rep that has never painted a car in his life.
 
how many times have they tried to make water fly ? each time it was a miserable failure and damn near put people out of business . the low voc solvent base will replace that shit sooner or later.
 
shine;7304 said:
how many times have they tried to make water fly ? each time it was a miserable failure and damn near put people out of business . the low voc solvent base will replace that shit sooner or later.
Click to expand...


I thought you were supposed to go to Home Depot to get water based, apply with a sponge roller and "tip off" with a foam brush for a professional finish......
 
Regardless of water's suitability, there can be no doubt that using water as a solvent creates an excellent opportunity for paint manufacturers to increase their profits
 
u dont think they get solvent for cheap??

the voc lowered... to a top manufacture.. pushing solvent which the technology has peaked is pointless... all the aqmd has to do is take solvents excemption out by making acetone and oxsol count to voc and then that will be the end of solvent base out of the equation and then what r u left with? u guessed it water... what technology has room to grow? u guessed it.. water... one day all primers and clears will be waterbased and barry will be making waterbased epoxies.. chew on that for a bit.


if the 3.5 voc solvent was hot shit.. y wouldnt the tops like akzo, ppg, dupont/spies, rm/glasurit.. be pushing that.. and what u are left with is mostly cheap cheap acrylic enamel bases that they just added acetone to the binder to make it legal.. and change the reducer... u have maybe two that are actually urethane/poly based.. and those brands have shitty color match.. riddle me that?

im at ground zero when it comes to this... u guys can jump in the deep end and get right out and be back with ur traditional solvent.. but then what if one day u couldnt it? u guna retire like shine when it happens?
 
There are more solvents then what you posted that are VOC exempt and more coming out daily.
 
I'll stick to my solvent as long as I can, when the day comes we are forced to water.. So be it. Hopefully if that ever happens, they will have it figured out better by then.
Most of the shops by me that switched to water are switching back. nobody likes it, why would I want to go to something like that, when I have a better choice?
 
chad, those first hand experiences are enough proof for me that water doesn't increase production. i'd rather listen to the big shops that implement it, that ARENT under some sort of contract, than someone reading articles posted up by the paint companies.

if one of the biggest, highest volume shops in my upper state used it for a year, and used one of the best systems, decided it was actually lest productive than solvent......thats enough for me. if they walk in tomorrow and tell me i have to use it.....then fine....but till then, if it aint broke..dont fix it.
 
the one thing that gets me is they say color match is crap on the low voc solvent but the problem is they are reformulating the solvents in the econo line that had crappy matches to begin with. of course they are going to be crappy. why are these companies not taking their premium lines which have great matches already and switching the solvents around in those? best guess..........try and force the people to use water because there is more profit in it. its gotta be. if they made more money from selling solvent bases i'm sure they would be pushing that. that is what business runs on, money. if its better for profits then thats the way it goes plain and simple. thing is though, that leaves alot of open room for one of htese guys to start pushing a premium low voc solvent line.
 
my favorite is a shop that just signed a contract with a jobber for ppg waterbourne, he HATES it. But they just pulled the solvent system out, so doesn't want to try to talk to them about switching back, so now i mix him pro-spray and send it to him. He's mad at them because they told him how great it was and talked them into a contract.
 
sik_kreations;7335 said:
if the 3.5 voc solvent was hot shit.. y wouldnt the tops like akzo, ppg, dupont/spies, rm/glasurit.. be pushing that..
Click to expand...
Because no matter how cheap they can get/make solvent, in comparison, WATER IS ALMOST FREE. All they need to do is install a filtration/deionizing system, child's play for a chemical company.
 
I've talked to a lot of techs that have made the switch to waterborne in my area. The three systems in use are PPG, DuPont, and Sikkens. The shop my Son works in just switched to PPG Envirobase. There's a lot of quirks from what I've been told, blending room needs to be larger, coverage over minor rock chips-never (some techs were accustomed to dabbing minor chips prior to base application and flowing the clear over it-now they say the waterborne is just too thin to get away with quick tricks like that), repairability on fresh paint can be very touchy. Metalic control is awesome from what I've heard. There's been positives and negatives but all the techs I've talked to say they wouldn't switch back to solvent based-that's the truth. I can definately see some major disadvantages for custom work and special effects. If the solvent basecoat goes away I would think single stage urethanes may hold on for quite awhile. I wonder when all aresols will be banned, maybe if hairspray is banned they'll let us keep the singlestage urethanes for awhile-LOL. There's lots of things about the way our evironmental agencies look at things that totally puzzle me, paint in solid form for one-some say it's hazardous waste even in cured form now and also as sanding dust but I wonder how many junk cars hit the recycling melting pots each day with the fumes of this burned paint hitting the atmosphere... Why can heavy equipment and industrial painters shoot outside all day legally without filtering the affected air? On a brighter note while I'm rambling, Obama showed his Birth Certificate today-took three years and the cost of keeping it private was huge, lots of frustration for many Americans, but now we all know-right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top