PDA

View Full Version : DACP on 87 Corvette



Details3
Sep 1st, 2004, 01:03 PM
I ran into a problem today using DACP #83 on a 87 Corvette. The Vet was in the shade and cool to the touch. Customer had just purchased this vehicle and wanted it detailed before he drove it. I applied the #83 by hand in a small section. When removing it with a terry cloth towel, it was a nightmare. It acted like the Vet was hot and dried to quick. I never had a problem with #83 before so it confused me. I pulled out my trusty porter cable and applied on a setting of 4. When it was almost dry I started to remove it and the same thing happened. Some areas I could not remove the #83 so I had to use some #3 to clean up the area.

I have seen this on boats and RVs when they are really oxidized. This Vet was not oxidized, but had a lot of water spots from prev. owner who did not take real good care of the Vet. This is why I used #83 to remove the water spots. So has anyone had this problem before?

Thanks for the information.

Details3

Rick
Sep 1st, 2004, 07:42 PM
Well... I sort of had this problem today. I was buffing with 83 and the rotary and it was at least 105 degrees in the shade, probably a few degrees warmer. It seemed that it would go to a dry buff, which it sounds like you were experiencing, almost immediately. So I went and got an empty spray bottle and put some distilled water in it (I recommend finding a bottle that specifically says sodium free). Each time I layed down a line to pick up I would spritz the pad lightly with the water. This seemed to work really well. Basically made it act like it normally would in cooler conditions.

There was also one time when I tried using 83 on the gel coat on my golf cart and it wouldn't come off. I ended up spraying it with some final detail (I guess last touch now) and it helped some, but it still took a lot of rubbing to remove.

Back to todays detail I also had some dried on splatter that I ended up spraying with the water to loosen up that seemed to work pretty well also.

Lt1Corvette
Sep 1st, 2004, 08:24 PM
Well,
Being the owner of a Corvette I can speak from personal experience on this one. When we did my Vette for the extreme makeover, we used 80 speed glaze on it and when it came time for removal it was much more difficult them on other cars I have used it on. Not sure on the reason, however Chevrolet paint never seems to give me anything but grief.

Details3
Sep 2nd, 2004, 04:19 AM
Right on Rick with the final detail for removing. I detail a lot of vets for other customers and never had a problem. But as my wife said - the car was 17 years old and most of the vets I do are newer.

LT1Corvette, when you use 80 speed glaze that is only a polish with a small amount of cut, what was your setting on the pc?

Thanks guys

Mike Phillips
Sep 2nd, 2004, 05:19 AM
Hi Details3,

I think we had the PC set at 4.0 or 4.5 for the #80 application.

As to your problem without he #83, to me it sounds like it was the warm weather, probably low humidity causing the problem. It could be paint type too.

Sometimes #83 can be hard to work with, if it ever becomes difficult to buff, or wipe off, you can always mist on some Quik Detailer, or some #34 Final Inspection. Rick recommended distilled water which will work also, but the quick detailers will add a little extra lubricity.

Mike

Details3
Sep 2nd, 2004, 01:15 PM
Thanks Mike,
I never had this problem before unless the car was too hot which this car was not. Living in Texas one must deal with heat and humity in this business. I did use some QD to remove most of it. That is were I ended up using the #3.

But, I do agree that it may have been the paint. By looking at the paint it was very clear that someone had buffed it a lot to get a shine back on the car. The water spots were the worst I have ever seen. You would think the car was in the water with that many water spots. I think they may have buffed off the clearcoat and that is why I had to deal with just the paint. I am going to get me a paint gauge one of these days. Thanks for the information and the end results of the car were not bad, but I am used to getting a lot better shine than I did.

Aurora40
Sep 2nd, 2004, 02:13 PM
The car looks nice in that picture. Are you sure it's an '87? That front wheel looks like an '86 wheel, but then it could just be washed out by the camera. :)

Details3
Sep 2nd, 2004, 02:50 PM
I would not know one year difference on a Vet as I am not a Vet guy. But I love a good truck!!

Mike Phillips
Sep 2nd, 2004, 04:17 PM
Hi Details3,

I've uploaded your picture to your gallery here,


Details3's Gallery (http://www.meguiarsonline.com/gallery/showgallery.php?ppuser=204&cat=500&password=)

http://archive.meguiarsonline.com/gallery/data/500/204Vette1.jpg

A couple of notes,

If this is factory paint, and the clear has been buffed off, it would be fairly noticeable because usually, the basecoat does not polish to a high gloss.

Chances are good, you would be able to tell fairly easily because you would see areas with clear, and areas without clear, it would be almost impossible to evenly remove all of the clear over the entire finish with a buffing process. Usually you will see the clear missing from all of the upper, easy to polish horizontal surfaces. (Imagine a detailer over-polishing the tops of the fenders, deck lid, hood, etc.)

I haven't seen to many paint jobs that have not responded well to a thorough polishing with #83 followed with either a secondary polishing, followed by a quality wax, or followed by a quality wax.

I'm not sure what to say? :confused: :confused: :confused:

Mike

SpoiledMan
Sep 2nd, 2004, 04:25 PM
I haven't seen to many paint jobs that have not responded well to a thorough polishing with #83 followed with either a secondary polishing, followed by a quality wax, or followed by a quality wax.

I'm not sure what to say? :confused: :confused: :confused:

Mike


OK Mike, which is it? A quality wax or a quality wax?;):D