| len47merc | -- 03-16-2016 @ 7:41 PM |
|
Gents - have a 'hypothetical' problem for you. Let's say you have your car insured with a reputable classic/vintage company for an amount at the top of the sales value of the car - say $20K. The car has the original paint from the 40's or beyond that has faded over time to a homogeneous color, shine and patina. Overall the paint and body are in very good to excellent condition for the age, adequate to win awards, and the car is solid mechanically. Some damage occurs to a very small portion of the paint that is repairable only via repainting and is covered by your insurance (for example a trunk cover and deck inside the rear bumper). First problem: Inability of even the most high end paint shops to effectively match the the shine, DEPTH of color and patina. Painting the affected section requires complete removal of the 65+ year old paint and re-priming, re-painting and clear-coating so as to guarantee no reaction occurs between the old and the new paint. Your insurance company agrees and further states '...you'll never match that paint...' to the adjoining body sections and the only way to ensure you do not have a patchwork-looking paint job is to disassemble the entire car, strip the paint and paint the whole car. Second problem: The cost to do this complete job exceeds the amount you have the car insured for (i.e., greater that the projected sales value of the car) and if this is the only option the car will be totaled for the obvious but small damage to one or two sections of the car's paint. Insurance company states the 'minimum' amount of work they will agree to below the total insurance coverage includes painting the top of the car to the hood, the trunk lid and the rear deck inside the rear bumper. Third problem: Removing the rear deck inside the rear bumper to strip/prep/re-paint daisy-chains to the rear quarter panels and they will have to be painted as well as the sections above them around the rear windows. Lastly - Fourth problem: Who knows what 'gotchas' will spring up during either a full disassembly/full repaint or this limited section painting that will get possibly deep into your pocketbook if the insurance limit has to be exceeded. Ultimately you may have more personal money in the car than you can sell it for which was not your original intent and objective in investing in the car. Soooo, in the interests of both staying as whole as possible on your investment and preserving the value of your car as much as possible, do you: 1) Paint only the affected couple of sections and call it a day, leaving an obvious major section of the car with a much different look than the rest of the car 2) Paint as much of the car as your insurance company and limit will allow, leaving a patchwork appearance of deeper color/shine versus original patina on large sections of the car 3) Roll the dice and accept just under the limit of your coverage, assuming the insurance company agrees, disassemble/strip/paint the entire car and risk whatever additional 'gotchas'/body fixes above say $19,999 will be paid for out of your pocket. As most of you know a full paint job like this could easily run north or beyond of $30K, potentially placing you deep or deeper underwater on your investment 4) Accept a check for the full amount of your coverage, let the insurance company 'total' and take the car and watch your treasure you put all your blood, sweat and tears into fade into the sunset 5) Spit fire and bark at the moon for beer money Appreciate your thoughts on this hypothetical and long-winded scenario. Steve This message was edited by len47merc on 3-16-16 @ 8:33 PM
|
|
| TomO | -- 03-17-2016 @ 7:00 AM |
|
If you accept the insurance adjuster's appraisal and amount, you must have the car repainted. No other insurance company will insure your car for the stated value until you do. My option would be to look for a top tier restoration company and have them repaint the affected area. It will be less than the total value of the car. A good restoration shop can come pretty close to matching the paint so that the difference is not noticeable on adjacent panels. They would use a single stage acrylic or urethane paint on the panel to be repainted and then use paint cleaners and polishes to bring up the gloss on the old paint. Tom
|
|
| trjford8 | -- 03-17-2016 @ 8:04 AM |
|
I agree with TomO. In some states you can still use lacquer which may be another option to do patch work painting.
|
|
| len47merc | -- 03-17-2016 @ 9:15 AM |
|
Thanks TomO and trjford8. Unfortunately this is not a lacquer state, and the original paint on the car in this 'hypothetical' scenario is Ford baked enamel from say '46/'47. The reducers in single stage acrylics are urethane-based now and react with enamels of this era causing the original paint to lift as was displayed to me, thus complete stripping and repainting is required. Feathering in to adjacent panels cannot happen for the same reason. Additionally, in this hypothetical scenario the material that dripped on the roof, trunk and rear deck for our 'study' had to be acidic in nature and even the best paint shops have said there is no telling how long something like this will continue to react before being completely neutralized, thus again complete stripping and repainting of major areas of a car, say like a '47 79M for example. Man-o-man-o-man... Thanks again to you both for your replies. Steve
|
|
| ford38v8 | -- 03-17-2016 @ 9:20 AM |
|
I also agree with Tom, and as you have stated that the original paint was "adequate to win awards", I'll remind you that under the V8 Club's Rouge Award Judging Standards, a repaint of 10% or less would not disqualify for that award. Your "Clear Coat" example, however, would not be acceptable under that same rule, as it would obviously not be of the same type and finish as the original. Alan
|
|
| trjford8 | -- 03-17-2016 @ 1:24 PM |
|
Any chance of taking the car to an adjoining state where lacquer can be used?
|
|
| len47merc | -- 03-17-2016 @ 2:23 PM |
|
Thanks Alan. The chance of a Rouge Award for the body on this car was lost long ago when it was painted another color by the dealership on the date of purchase in March of '47. Weird situation I know but that's what the woman wanted so they gave it to her in her preferred color. While the EFV8 judges appreciated the 'top coat' is the same age as the 'original' bottom, the rules are rules so I've given up forevermore on that element. The interior and running gear still earn the EFV8 Rouge Awards and the overall car earns awards at local, non-EFV8 events. I wasn't clear about this in the hypothetical example. Just left B-Mac's here in Raleigh - 4th restoration site I've visited and obtained the same story line (without pre-bias dialogue). Owner is a personal friend of my classic car insurance agent. While their focus is strictly frame-off, comprehensive, turn-key 60's muscle car restorations their (now 4th) input may be what is necessary to satisfy the insurance company on resolve. Very impressive business btw. In the end am still not sure what direction will be taken or may have to be taken - I just cannot see totaling the car for what has happened. Greatly appreciate all your thoughts on this - your input has helped me focus immensely. Best - Steve This message was edited by len47merc on 3-17-16 @ 2:26 PM
|
|
| 1934 Ford | -- 03-17-2016 @ 6:42 PM |
|
The dilemma you face is not unlike the problem of millions of people who drive used cars whose pain had faded, we call it patina. Insurance is responsible to repair the damaged area to like new condition. The rest of the car is aged and un-damaged. You dilemma is called the "Risk of the Road". Because I like original car, I would tell you to get it repaired and move on. The car remains original with a slight paint difference where the accident occurred. Kind of like the old lady with a blemish from a early life accident, she is still a survivor. 1934 Ford's since 1972
|
|
| TomO | -- 03-18-2016 @ 8:45 AM |
|
Steve, I would never try to spot paint a panel that has been painted with 1940's synthetic enamel with any lacquer and try to blend it in. It just doesn't work, you will be able to see the repaint area. My suggestion is to use an acrylic or urethane single stage paint to paint the complete panel. The water based paints will not even come close to the enamel nw on the car. Your shop is probably correct in saying that the panels must be stripped for the best effect, but once stripped can be color match I would look for a shop that does older cars and classics. The ones that concentrate on the 60's and later do not have the experience to do a color match on synthetic enamel. Check with other V-8 Club and AACA club members to see if they know of a local shop that has an old time painter. Tom
|
|
| len47merc | -- 03-18-2016 @ 9:32 AM |
|
Will do Tom - thanks! Steve
|
|
| mrtexas | -- 03-18-2016 @ 4:26 PM |
|
I thought old paint could be sealed with epoxy primer. Then can be repainted with urethane.
|
|
| jretter | -- 03-18-2016 @ 10:37 PM |
|
I wonder if the "dilemma" situation really is more a question of whether the car really has investment potential - at least significant potential - when its top retail sales value now is only around 20K. If you believe it does have investment potential, I would leave it alone and wait for it to appreciate. Ah, but will it appreciate quickly enough (or at all) in a reasonable period of time. My gut tells me interest in "old" cars in the 10-40K price range is dying off as quickly as us "old" guys who remember and love them. My advice is don't fall in love with an investment. View it as a hobby and enjoy the old ride while you can, paint "patina" and all. The money out of pocket is the price of the hobby, plus, you won't view it as a dilemma anymore.
|
|
| trjford8 | -- 03-19-2016 @ 8:28 AM |
|
You bring up a good point. Currently there is a nice 40 Ford coupe for sale in my area. Man passed away and family is selling it. It's a street rod, but a nicely done "resto-rod". They are asking $35,000 or offer. You could not build the car for that money. It's been advertised for the past month and so far no takers. Four or five years ago it would have been bought within a week. As the old Bob Dylan song goes "the times they are a changin"
|
|
| len47merc | -- 03-19-2016 @ 10:58 AM |
|
Just a bit more context now that this has been pretty well fleshed out and more has been learned from an insurance perspective... I never considered the potential problem that may exist with a car with original paint and how comprehensive/classic car insurance may address damage of any sort as it relates to the paint. Both my previous company - Hagerty, and current - Infinity, were consulted on this. What started as what was thought to be a marginal issue snowballed into a much bigger issue as the inability to match patina and/or paint over the 70 year old paint became more apparent. For those of us with original paint this is a big, big issue (I have now learned). Basically insurance will only cover the areas of the body affected by whatever - impact, scratches, damage of any sort, and the paint associated with ONLY that area will be covered (or so I later learned maybe more that just that area). Using this specific example, the areas of the car affected for this exercise were the top, the trunk, the small strip below the trunk and the rear valence between the body and the rear bumper - so insurance will cover the complete stripping, metal prep/repair and repainting (epoxy primer, base coat, clear coat) of the car from behind the hood all the way over the top down to the rear bumper - this includes removal of the windshields and the rear window and installation of new seals (including the vent seal). Anything more than this would be on the owner's nickel, except maybe... When removing the rear valence as per insurance observation and direction to clean, prep and paint it the seal/welting between it and each rear quarter panel will be broken, thus, those components will necessarily need to be removed and stripped, prepped and painted as well. If those are removed, then the same seals between the quarter panels and the body panels on each side around the rear vent windows will be broken and those panels will need to be painted as well. The appraiser, adjuster and painting company will likely end up battling on this point. Now it gets even deeper I have learned. When a body panel of a car is painted, insurance provides that you are also 'owed' a blending or feathering of the new paint into the adjacent, non-affected body panels. In this hypothetical example that means the rear doors would receive this blending moving toward the front of the car; however, recall the old paint cannot be painted over as the modern reducers will cause the old paint to lift, soooo, the appraiser will be battling with the adjuster and both with the painting company that unfortunately the entire car will have to be painted. And now for the coup-de-gras, of now four classic car (pre-1960 focused) restoration companies contacted (6 total companies), none - make that NONE, will agree to paint the car unless they can paint the entire car as they do not want their name associated with a patchwork job with sections of high gloss, deep color versus the original, almost 70 year old paint. Bottom line - original paint owners know you have a potential significant 'gotcha' out there. I'd stay out of the way of the appraiser (a subcontractor of the insurance company) and the adjuster to see where the chips fall. What I would choose to do in the end remains to be seen and depends on the outcome of the back-and-forth that may go on. Steve This message was edited by len47merc on 3-19-16 @ 11:44 AM
|
|
| EFV-8 Club Forum : | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum |
| Topic: | https://www.earlyfordv8.org/forum/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=18&Topic=9487 |