Since the CC comment section has (almost) always been a model of civil discourse, I thought it would the perfect forum for a question that’s been bothering me. When and why did carmakers start using clear-coat, thus robbing old-car enthusiasts of genuine patina? Clearly it’s a dumb question, but doesn’t chalky old paint look better than peeling clear-coat?
My beloved Volvo wagon had been parked out in the rain for almost 20 years when I got it in 2005. The guy lived on Chuckanut Drive, with no room for a garage or even a carport. He did, however, wax the thing religiously, leaving a great paint job in his midst. This was an ’87, and my guess is that clear-coat started around then or shortly thereafter. But this is where you come in, dear reader.
Here’s a shot of my older Volvo wagon, with a nice patina. This one was in sable brown, which weathered nicely.
Here is a relative’s Grand Wagoneer, with its DI NOC woodgrain and faded peeling clear-coat. Guess it still looks like patina, which is OK by me.
Finally, I shot this hot rod on De La Vina in Santa Barbara in 2005. I’m guessing it has MULTIPLE layers of clear-coat. What do you think?
Depends on the manufacturer and color, but generally during the 1980s. My white 1980 Scirocco is single stage, my old 84 silver Rabbit GTI was with clear coat, and the 84 Brown Scirocco my friend has is cleared as well.
Also, another friend’s red 84 Rabbit GTI is single stage. So it was not evenly switched by color even for the same model
Can confirm this. Clear coat was hyped as something really special when it came along. It seemed to be applied to metallics first, and the solid colours later – but strangely not across the board.
My son had a used ’95 Mitsubishi Lancer he was continually having to polish and wax. Looked great when freshly done, but needed frequent applications in the harsh sun here. According to the dealer, it was the only colour they didn’t clear coat.
Actually, I dont think its a dumb question. I think it was kind of phased in around the early ’80s, and it took awhile before the manufacturers figured out how to do it. Here in BC’s harsh climate failed paint on 3-4 year old vehicles was not uncommon. Ford and GM pickups seemed to be the worst, and not surprisingly dealers were very hard nosed about warranty claims.
Interestingly, some colours seemed to hold up better than others with metallic blues and greens being the worst from my observation. I believe all this came about due to health and environmental concerns about the older paint formulations, some of which really were nasty stuff.
I think the VWs and Porsches through early 80’s that were solid, non-metallic colors were single stage. My ’84 Euro 928 is single stage black. I love the look of single stage.
Toyota trucks up thru the 2010s used single stage white paint. They turn chalky real bad if you dont wax them. Same thing with bright red, they turned pink
When metallic s started appearing in the color pallet. They realized if you polished the paint of a single stage metallic paint, the color is what you remove resulting in a very silvery end result. So the clear prevents the removal of the color from the paint. Earl the pearl Scheib used to say the color was added to the paint so you didn’t need the 2 stage(base coat, clear coat). The water based paints that came along in the early 80’s to comply with the new EPA regulations to reduce the VOC’s , had a steep learning curve for the manufacturers to finally figure out how to prep , spray and keep the paint from peeling, took along time and they still screw it up. Typically the amount of time between spraying the base cote, letting it tack up before laying down the clear is usually about less than an hour. In the production environment, they don’t have that luxury . Bring back the lacquer.
It is my understanding that the first car, at least here, was the Lincoln Versailles. That would have been 1977.
I am trying to like the patina look, especially after it has had a gloss clear finish put over it. But I’m struggling with my OCD! Watching Green Acres does this to me as well. Look at how off center the front windows to the right of the door are off!
Merry Christmas
I believe that’s true about the Versailles – and I think clearcoat became optional on the Capri in 1978 or so as well.
I think my first car – a 1981 Audi that I bought (very) used – had clearcoat paint. My recollection is that the paint on a few parts of the car was cracked and yellowish, and my father said it was the clearcoat. But I may be off-base with that.
I think it was the Lincoln Versailles. Don’t remember source, could have been from that print ad shot in Windows of the World.
Sorry ya’ll double answered with the Versailles.
I got excited remebering that Twin Towers ad. Now I’,m pretty sure it mentioned the Lincoln being the first clearcoated car, along with being super special for also having rear discs. Likely the same ad agency that did the ad where the old lady is happy because the meter maid confused ver Granada for a Benx.
Not commonly seen in Central Canada. Autos typically don’t share the long multiple decade lives of cars, in more temperate climates. As often highlighted at this site. Where issues like this, present themselves.
Whereas paint peeling in the 1990’s on relatively new cars, due to new / unproven paint technology (water-based?), was very common. Paint fade, not typical here either.
The custom car probably has several layers of clear. With graphics like the layers each leave an edge. That means lots of coats and wet sanding to smooth over those edges.
I know my ’79 BMW 528i came with clearcoat, I think a ’78 320i came with it, both with metallic paint. But on BMWs at least I don’t think it started using it on solid colors until the very late 80s and I think early 90s.
The good and bad. I hate the stuff, I describe it like Neil Young and Rust, it never sleeps, it’s always getting ready to fail if it hasn’t already. I do live in California where rust is only a rumor, but Northern Calif where the summer sun isn’t as intense as further south and there’s often lots of cloudy weather and rain in the winter so it’s not like the equator with all sun all the time year round. But it still fails. Starting at 10 years or so on cheap cars, 15-20 on good/premium cars. But no brand is immune that I can tell.
Much as I hate it, which is a lot, I can see it’s use at times. I had a ’75 Toyota Celica with metallic silver paint. I bought it in ’83 IIRC. Paint was dull. I thought no big deal, I’ll just use some polishing compound and buff it out. I did a small sample area and I hit primer before I buffed it out. Paint job was trashed anyway, so no big deal, but that was an eye opener.
Not a paint expert, but I know a bit, but I suspect as much as VOCs and smog regs it was simply a cost factor. Even here in California where we have many environmental regs, I could get single stage, mediocre to decent, metallic paint into this century. That didn’t disintegrate in half a dozen years. I’ve heard/read, that the infamous GM peeling paint, mostly white, was just a cost issue. They knew the primer and color were not happy partners but decided it was cheaper to deal with warranty claims than use better paints. I had 2 work trucks at the county governmental agency I worked at that did that, both under 10 years old.
As has been said above, clearcoat started to appear from multiple manufacturers in the 1980s. but it wasn’t universally applied. The 1990 Mercury Sable I bought new had a single-stage Currant Red paint job. The same color was available with clearcoat; IIRC, it retailed for an extra $200 or so.
It’s not something I’d ever thought about, but the comments above explain a lot.
My NZ-assembled ’84 Ford Sierra was single-stage red; by the time I bought it in 1994, it had faded to multiple different shades of red and pink.
The NZ-assembled ’86 Sierra I replaced it with in 1996 was single-stage champagne, I always wondered why it needed continual polishing/waxing to shine – the lack of clearcoat explains that.
Not that the addition of clearcoat always helps though, as my current German-built ’89 Sierra (featured on CC about a decade ago) is still wearing its factory metallic magenta with clearcoat, but the clear coat is now looking pretty dire – it’s long since left the roof, and is peeling badly on the tailgate and rear sides where it didn’t quite fit in the carport.
So this QOTD is not a dumb question at all, but very thought-provoking!
My father thought he’d polish his new 1974 Hillman Hunter in metallic blue and promptly flatted the roof as described heretofore.
But I seem to remember metallics thereafter often being clear/base, but single-coats did continue.
I think by the late-1980s, the new cyano-acrylic ‘two-pack’ paints had taken over. The mica blue on my second X1/9 was like that (single coat gold previously). The bonus of extreme hardness was also vastly superior rust protection!
Of course, that went backwards for a while with VOC-free water-colours…
My MX-5s were solid single – Mazda wanted their retro colours to come off on the cloth when one polished the cars! Probably why the NAs were bloody rust-buckets. Mind you, they wanted twin carbs too, but it proved impossible to implement.
Oddly, my NSX does leave paint on the cloth. It’s two-pack solid red (New Formula Red), but they put a darker red tint into the clear coat so that it flips from Heinz tomato soup to home-made tomato soup in the sunlight/shade.
I’d love to know how Nissan Midnight Purple III works…triple-coat?
Personally I like Single Stage paint and have sprayed three cars with it. Now supposedly BC/CC is more durable than SS so they say. While SS may fade it can be maintained back to it’s original shine. Yet we all know those early clear coats didn’t hold up that well. My guess is partly chemistry at the time and that it was no more than 1.7 mils thick layer of clear. Another reason was that BC/CC was easier to spray for manufacturers and get a good finish. The good shiny finish was the clear coat while the base coat meant the use of less pigment overall. Then, of course metallic and pearl paints. However, it is my belief that an experienced painter can spray SS metallic and get an excellent finish.
Another reason I know is the type of gun used. A siphon feed gun is best for shooting single stage paint. Put a few marbles in the can and you will get a very even coat of pigment on the panel. Gravity feed not so good as the pigment could create a bottleneck at the bottom. However, gravity feed guns are great for BC/CC. Gravity feed cut down on the cost of materials they say. I question that since now a manufacturer or shop needed to buy two paints for a car instead of one. In the end the main impetus was convenience rather than quality.
I first painted my 68 Mustang in 1987 and it was my first paint job and a learning experience. It needs a redo due to some booboos created by me over the years but the finish is fine. The F100 and Polara both got three medium wet coats on SS paint. After correcting I am somewhere around 5 mils thick with most of it color. Unopened cans await the 67 Parklane. The paint is top of the line PPG and it will outlast any BC/CC out there today. The paint also has a richer look to it than clear. The white SS on the 72 Ambassador shined up very nice on the hood with minimal effort so I’ll leave it. Meanwhile the upper exposed clear surfaces of my 91 Mazda 626 are gone and needs a complete respray. The 2004 Focus seems to be doing fine but then it gets waxed and protected twice a year since new.
PS: Dead Swede I love your Volvo wagons. I assume they are current? I am always tempted when I see one for sale.
Appliances R Us clear coat issues here: https://www.drive.com.au/news/class-action-proposed-against-toyota-for-alleged-paint-peeling/
There was similar action taken against Holden in the late 80s/early 90s here in New Zealand, as the clear coat basically fell off VL Commodores when they were 1-5 years old. It was quite big news at the time, featuring on TV and in the newspapers, and damaged Holden’s reputation for a few years.