PDA

View Full Version : Body color under top paint?



dnevin
07-16-2012, 10:41 PM
This is a curiosity more than anything else--I tried a search and wasn't successful, so here goes...

I took a razor blade scraper to the top of the 53 C yesterday and noticed there were 3 distinct colors of paint on it: the wrong color of maui blue (actually a sky blue,) a layer or two of the correct tint of maui blue, then, right above the primer, a layer of ivory mist, which is the body color.

So my question is, did the factory paint the two tone cars body color first, over the entire body, then shoot the top color over that? Seems like a waste of paint if they did, but then again, it might be cheap enough to do. Or am I looking at different paint jobs over the years by previous owners, with someone having decided to paint it a solid color (ivory mist) at some point in time?

No build sheet was available for the car, so I have no idea what it was originally; it did have a paint code card behind the glove box indicating ivory mist/maui blue but that could have been placed there at a later time.

Thanks in advance. Again, this doesn't really matter--I'm just curious.

ddub
07-16-2012, 10:53 PM
Could it be that all cars were painted the main body color, then some were two toned?

Jeff_H
07-17-2012, 08:04 AM
My '53 K had original paint when I restored it. There were some ripples/dents in the roof (after popping out a big one) requiring me to strip it down to the bare steel. Under the lombard (dark) green was a layer of the chippewa (light) green and then the grey primer. I dunno if the thickness of the primary color matched the rest of the car or it was more a "overspray" since it was going to get painted over or not.

swvalcon
07-17-2012, 10:06 AM
It would make sence for the factory to do that only have to mask the car one time that way.

StudeRich
07-17-2012, 12:29 PM
Yes that is right, I have seen quite a few two tones that the roof faded, wore through, to the lower body color.

dnevin
07-17-2012, 02:20 PM
Thanks all--that makes sense.

studegary
07-17-2012, 07:55 PM
I agree with the above statements, but also, many cars of that era were built/shipped in monotone and two-toned at the dealership.

I am not sure about what you refer to as "a paint code card behind the glove box". The factory color label for that model would have been paper, not card stock, and glued to the bottom of the glove box. It sounds like something that was put there after initial build.

dnevin
07-17-2012, 09:00 PM
Gary,

Here's what I found taped to the bottom/back of the glovebox.

16376

The tape was old. Without the build sheet (which wasn't available) I'll never know for sure if it is the correct one or a fake.

8E45E
07-17-2012, 09:14 PM
Gary,

Here's what I found taped to the bottom/back of the glovebox. The tape was old. Without the build sheet (which wasn't available) I'll never know for sure if it is the correct one or a fake.

That tag DOES answer your question, as it would have been applied at the factory.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3217/2945911993_2a2c960c57_b.jpg

Craig

studegary
07-18-2012, 02:07 PM
Gary,

Here's what I found taped to the bottom/back of the glovebox.

16376

The tape was old. Without the build sheet (which wasn't available) I'll never know for sure if it is the correct one or a fake.

That does look like the original paint code label that had been reattached at some point. If we assume that that label was originally on your car (probably was), then your car was a factory two-tone.

Was your car built in Vernon (LA)? They did some things different from SB during that period. If you don't know, post, at least the first few digits of, your Serial Number and we will tell you where it was built.

dnevin
07-18-2012, 02:30 PM
It was a Vernon car. G925919

Thanks Gary, Craig.

studegary
07-18-2012, 04:05 PM
It was a Vernon car. G925919

Thanks Gary, Craig.

I agree, it is a Vernon built 1953 Champion. One difference is that all 1953 Starliners built in Vernon had the C-pillar script (paint line), but only two-tone Starliners built in South Bend had this trim. Another difference is that Vernon cars continued to use tri-star emblems to the end of the model year, long after South Bend discontinued them.

dnevin
07-18-2012, 08:34 PM
Thanks Gary. I knew about the tri-star emblems (which my car has) but didn't know that even the solid color Starliners had the C-pillar script.

mbstude
07-18-2012, 09:44 PM
That tag DOES answer your question, as it would have been applied at the factory.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3217/2945911993_2a2c960c57_b.jpg

Craig

Craig, where was that photo taken? That '53 is one of Steve Cade's cars. I'd almost bet that the Lemon Lime Speedster is his too.

dnevin
07-18-2012, 10:49 PM
To hijack my own thread, I've seen all sort of different shades of "maui blue" on a 53. Is the photo Craig posted a good representation of the color of that year?

SN-60
07-18-2012, 10:56 PM
Jeff H's post (#3) is most likely the correct answer to this question.

StudeRich
07-18-2012, 11:10 PM
To hijack my own thread, I've seen all sort of different shades of "maui blue" on a 53. Is the photo Craig posted a good representation of the color of that year?

No, there is way too much Red Sunlight and brightness on this Car, it was darker.

Craig's Pics are some of the sharpest, clearest and largest Pics we have of the Car Shows, but many have way too much direct Sunlight to judge the trueness of Colors.

mbstude
07-18-2012, 11:47 PM
That Starliner is the right shade, but like Rich says, that car appears a bit darker in person. I've seen it up close several times.

dnevin
07-19-2012, 01:05 AM
I think this might be the same car from a pic you posted earlier Matt?

16405

If so, is that closer to the correct color (I realize that computer monitors are only so accurate.)

My car is going to the media blaster next week, then off to the body shop for paint. I probably should decide what color to paint it soon! :)

I agree with other posters here that the coupes look best in a solid color, so am planning on doing that. My initial reaction was Maui Blue (and still might go that direction.) Another thought is Nocturne Blue--a solid N.B. seems to be fairly rare in these cars.

Then I saw the pic of this 51 from the LeMay Museum. . .

http://www.lemaymuseum.org/blog/beautiful-bullet-nose-coupe/

And the last thought--I've considered doing a homage paint and interior copy of Mr. Steinkamp's Kart Hauler--which was just freakin' gorgeous (imitation is the sincerest form of flattery after all.) And I really like the greens on this car as well.

Feel free to help me decide!

studegary
07-19-2012, 12:45 PM
That Starliner is the right shade, but like Rich says, that car appears a bit darker in person. I've seen it up close several times.

I am surprised that it appears to have an incorrect bumper bolt in the end of the bumper.

studegary
07-19-2012, 12:48 PM
First choice would be to paint it the original color. If you are going to change colors, go with a darker color. The darker, the better. Bob Bourke and I both felt that the C/K bodies look best in a dark color (his own was black).

SN-60
07-19-2012, 05:50 PM
To: studegary,-----Incorrect bumper bolt? Please explain.

StudeRich
07-19-2012, 05:53 PM
It is very obvious Ed, the outboard bolts on the side are oval, should be Round.

63t-cab
07-19-2012, 08:31 PM
Gee I was gonna ask the same thing Ed did,so who is it supposed to be obvious to Rich ?"other than someone who already knew"
It is very obvious Ed, the outboard bolts on the side are oval, should be Round.

mbstude
07-19-2012, 08:36 PM
Never fails. The members here can find fault with even the nicest of cars. :rolleyes:

The Cades restored that Starliner in 4 months time, start to finish. It was a full body-off resto too, including a replacement frame.

8E45E
07-20-2012, 06:39 AM
Never fails. The members here can find fault with even the nicest of cars. :rolleyes:

The Cades restored that Starliner in 4 months time, start to finish. It was a full body-off resto too, including a replacement frame.

Then go find the correct bolts for it! And shine them up while you are at it!! :D

To answer your previous question, Matt, that photo was taken at South Bend in 2002.

Craig

studegary
07-20-2012, 01:01 PM
Never fails. The members here can find fault with even the nicest of cars. :rolleyes:

The Cades restored that Starliner in 4 months time, start to finish. It was a full body-off resto too, including a replacement frame.

It IS a nice car. I was not trying to find fault. I was just very surprised to notice this knowing the resources available to them at the time of restoration.

dnevin
07-20-2012, 02:58 PM
LOL, I just dropped my bumpers off to be rechromed and noticed they had the same bolts.

Wonder if it could be a Vernon car thing?

studegary
07-21-2012, 11:50 AM
LOL, I just dropped my bumpers off to be rechromed and noticed they had the same bolts.

Wonder if it could be a Vernon car thing?

No. It should have the rectangular heads along the face. Only the two end bolts should be the round head variety. Many people did not realize this. Also, the rectangular heads were more readily available for a longer period of time (for a lower price).

SN-60
07-21-2012, 12:51 PM
To: studegary,----You could be right about this, I don't know, but I always thought the bumper bolts should be oval all the way around. By the way....I love the looks of this car, and would be proud to own it!

studegary
07-21-2012, 01:29 PM
To: studegary,----You could be right about this, I don't know, but I always thought the bumper bolts should be oval all the way around. By the way....I love the looks of this car, and would be proud to own it!

Now you have me questioning my memory.
Original 1953s that I disassembled in the 1960s, including one that I knew from new, had the round bolts at the end of the rear bumper.
It is hard to tell in most factory pictures, but they look round to me, except for when the accessory bumper ends are installed, then rectangular bolts appear to be used.
I don't have an original 1953 parts book handy. What does that specify?
At least by the time that Hawks came out, rectangular head bolts were used for all positions. Maybe the round head bolts was a short lived thing in 1953, or only used for the 1953-1954 style bumpers.
I would also be proud to own this car as it is.

bezhawk
07-21-2012, 01:37 PM
I was of the mind that the bumper bolts on 53-54 were oval all the way around, and when 55s came out the ends had the round?

SN-60
07-21-2012, 01:47 PM
To: bezhawk,----------I remember this question being kicked around over the last 40 years with no one really ever sure. By the way, I have 'round' head bumper bolts on the four corners of my '55 Speedster, and I've
always thought they were 'incorrect' but just LOOK better! (To Me)

dnevin
07-21-2012, 03:42 PM
According to the May 1, 1954 Chassis Parts Catalog, the rear bumper calls for 4 bolts, number 524972.

So they should all be the same (whatever 524972 is. . .)

studegary
07-21-2012, 04:24 PM
According to the May 1, 1954 Chassis Parts Catalog, the rear bumper calls for 4 bolts, number 524972.

So they should all be the same (whatever 524972 is. . .)

That sounds pretty definitive for late-1954 models. I still wonder what is in an early-1953 model year (1952) parts book.

dnevin
07-21-2012, 08:44 PM
That sounds pretty definitive for late-1954 models. I still wonder what is in an early-1953 model year (1952) parts book.

The May 1, 1954 Chassis Parts Catalog covers years 1951 through 1954. The bolt with the part number 524972 covers models 10G to 15G,H, 4H to 5H. Same bolt is called for on the front.

Could it be that the bolt changed and was supplemented by this one? I'd think there'd be a note if that were the case.