Same paint samples alongside 04-C lid with flash used.

quote:

Originally posted by 1967 RS SS:
It would be great to see what all 21 of these reports state as the color, but then how do you interpret it? Try and average out how many say "ermine" opposed to only stating 1001AA special paint? No, that doesn't work.

I did question the "ermine" white on 238642, and the answer I recieved was the top part of these sheets are/were typed in for each report, and the ermine may have just been typed in by mistake, or just typed in for the sake of putting something there. Not exactly what you want to hear.

IMO...Good Point. Looks like Official GM Documentation to me and can be confirmed through GM of Canada. If GM was sloppy in what they did or did not do - there are multiple examples of such sloppyness. One example is the absence or precence of the "fleet code" on some of the Trim tags while others do not have the code. I would trust the documentation from GM, to the point where a color is specified - in addition to and supplemental to the other information provided, and treat it the same way we treat the absence or presence of a "fleet Code on the trim tag.

Notice the format on the top part of the report is different on 238642 which was issued in 2008, compared to the report on 237512, which was issued in 2005. The bottom section that lists the options appears to be some type of database downloaded information, and is the very same point size and style print, while the upper portions of the 2 reports do differ.

So now do we believe these reports, or discard the best GM historical documents we have that include the festival cars?

Here is what I would do, simply Re-order the same reports. If they come from GM of Canada then it was a simple document format change by Chevrolet that happened to be concurrent with the document creation. I do not believe the Canadians are faking documents yet... I say re order them and see if they are the same

Steve and others,

I believe this may be the actual "Buff and Polish" instruction later published in the month of May as a Service Bulletin. Here it is:

Because Myths usually have some basis in fact I even researched the "coating of any type" angle to seek to prove or disprove the Clear Coat Myth. This is as close as I came, and may be the real source of the special Sealant myth which later morphed into the clear Lacquer coating myth.... see Predelivery Wax Removal (SN-C-7)

The question of the Trim Tag data origin has been asked a couple times. That data evolved from a database of several hundred Trim Tags with associated vehicle info. The data derived from that study pertained to the codes on the bottom two lines and identified the Fisher Body options on the tag. Most of the other info on the tag is described in various GM literature including the paint codes.

It would be interesting to know if there is any GM documentation defining the "O" paint code as special or non-standard or if this is general knowledge circulated through the industry. I know if you go to buy paint for an "O" code, the paint jobber will tell you they can't match the paint because that code is not in their books.

On the idea of special treatment (buffing) of the paint, it would seem it would have to be done prior to completion of the vehicle. The logic for this pertains to the blue stripes, particularly the pinstripes along the upper boy line. These would not stand up well to this type of treatment after being applied. Based on the assembly manual, these would be applied after the doghouse is joined to the body. To avoid damage to the stripes, buffing would need to occur prior to stripe application. The idea of special treatment of the two assemblies prior to final assembly would require Fisher Body to pull the body aside after paint to perform that process and then reinsert the body on the line. That could account for the "O" paint code. Doing the buffing after final assembly and prior to stripe application opens up the possibility of component damage during that step.

Keith C.

quote:

Originally posted by His 67PC:
The question of the Trim Tag data origin has been asked a couple times. That data evolved from a database of several hundred Trim Tags with associated vehicle info. The data derived from that study pertained to the codes on the bottom two lines and identified the Fisher Body options on the tag. Most of the other info on the tag is described in various GM literature including the paint codes.

It would be interesting to know if there is any GM documentation defining the "O" paint code as special or non-standard or if this is general knowledge circulated through the industry. I know if you go to buy paint for an "O" code, the paint jobber will tell you they can't match the paint because that code is not in their books.

On the idea of special treatment (buffing) of the paint, it would seem it would have to be done prior to completion of the vehicle. The logic for this pertains to the blue stripes, particularly the pinstripes along the upper boy line. These would not stand up well to this type of treatment after being applied. Based on the assembly manual, these would be applied after the doghouse is joined to the body. To avoid damage to the stripes, buffing would need to occur prior to stripe application. The idea of special treatment of the two assemblies prior to final assembly would require Fisher Body to pull the body aside after paint to perform that process and then reinsert the body on the line. That could account for the "O" paint code. Doing the buffing after final assembly and prior to stripe application opens up the possibility of component damage during that step.

Keith C.

Keith,

See the service Bullitin on page 5 of this thread pertaining to buff and polish. You are probably right, about the factory connection and it looks like the lessions learned were soon translated into the field for dealership service on completed vehicles.

quote:

I think Phil is refering to this. The Canadian car reference is that some of the VVS reports (GM Vintage Vehicle Services from Canada) for the Canadian Festival cars state ermine as the color of paint. For instance, this is the case on 238642. The GM report shows "1001AA-Special Order Ermine white" as the color of paint.

I have to say...This document is the most compelling of everything posted on this subject.
Some how, I missed this whole topic when it came to what came over from GM of Canada....
I see it was sent to David...the only document that I have seen is the one that Steve sent me on what I believe is a Display car for the Canadian program.

I'll be honest.... that's very compelling!

Phil........ I'm afraid I may not have given you a whole lot of hope in ever finding anything else out on this topic after you were leaning toward that International Chip...I thought you had lost your marbles by putting too much work into this one!

I have to say..... I do disagree about checking the C-1 survivor cars..... Those we know are a fact Ermine.( even if they weren't treated ) That should go along way in supporting the modern day GM OF CANADA document...
Shouldn't it?

Nope. I have already mixed the paint in the actual 1967 formula. The Ermine white is an "0" paint IR Match on the camera.

If anyone else wants to evaluate C-1 paint and what color it is (or fades to) you are welcome to do that but I do not see the point.

quote:

If anyone else wants to evaluate C-1 paint and what color it is (or fades to) you are welcome to do that but I do not see the point.

I don't think th ermine fades at all, it darkens and yellows. Tom M's car is proof of that. He has stated the sealed post is bright, and matches the paint sample of ermine. This is on the C-1 car.

I have an equally well preserve 05A C-1 car I have seen the same color differences in. Hidden & sealed sections very white, cowl shows yellowing, but paint is very nice. This car is not a pacer I am mentioning here.

The same can be said for the 521 truck white, it darkens (gets dirty, turns gray) and yellows. Where does the blue go, I have no idea, but it just disappears. Breaks down and is not visible, at least to the naked eye. I would love to find a good sample of original 521 to sample. The sample Tony used was not acceptable. The color change of 521 white is a fact known by many/all oldtimers that worked with this paint.

Steve,

A grade, B grade or C grade paint will greatly influence how fast and to what extent the discoloring happens. Also there is the added variable of Lacquer vs Enamel. Clearly the enamel holds up better.

On the blue leaving Fleet . If there was any sample that you could point to that would lack the proper tint content in an IR scan it would be a "damaged sample": Right?

So lets examine the Sample Tony scanned and what the Dupont IR camera found:

HS White
Ochre (Yellow)
Carbon Black
LS Green
Perminant Blue

Now the PPG Modern Jobber specification Mix for 8080 Fleet White

White
Yellow
Blue
Wk Black

Looks like the Dupont camera accuratly found the White, yellow, Blue, and the Black. The Carbon Black in Dupont is Wk Black in PPG.

The LS Green is the likely age in growth into the paint. I refer to it as DMD 1602 G.S. Yellow

I have noted in the control group that the PPG IR camera found what it calls 1602 GS yellow in each of the "0" cars sampled. Upon examination it would appear that GS Yellow is an age byproduct that is consistant in its appearence but is not consistant in content by % in the sample group as it varies wildly.

Based upon a simple comparison of the colors found in Tony's print out from page 31 post 10 of the 0-1 paint thread and the PPG tint specification that I have on hand for Fleet White - I would conclude that the IR Camera Tony employed, found each and every one of the tints required for Fleet White dispite the damaged condition of the sample.

Note to readers: Edited to reflect the transfer and new reformat location of the referance to the paint formula that tony did on the Fleet white truck. The 0-1 Paint thread was moved from Indy 500 discussion to the 1967 Tech and Restoration section on June 7, 2008.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: festival,

quote:

On the blue leaving Fleet . If there was any sample that you could point to that would lack the proper tint content in an IR scan it would be a "damaged sample": Right?

Actually, no, it would have to be a better sample than Tony's. Why I think Tony had a bad sample is didn't it have a chip in the white indicating blue dash paint under it? So the undercoat for the white was actually the blue dash paint. I would call this a flawed sample, and will not accept it as true.

This is why in the beginning, and every once in a while throughout the threads I kept asking about undercoats. The color of the primer could easily influence the color scans. If you had a paint that was too blue, you would add orange to kill some of the blue. Red oxide primer is also kind of an orange. I don't remember what color primer Chevy used under there 521 white truck enamels, but if it was red oxide, it could easily have been a culprit in killing the blue in the paint. I really don't remember what primer was used by Chevy for trucks in 67.

Do any of the 0-1 enamel cars have red primer as an undercoat. Tom tells me his doesn't, so I gave up chasing that idea.

Phil,
Your work here is very convincing, the only thing left to seal the deal is to test the era correct 521 fleet white in a good controlled test. Then it's done, finished. The way the 521 white was still having the blue color disappear to the naked eye, still in the early 70's would make me think a test on a 72/73 truck would be a good place to start. If the blue is no longer present in the white, then the 521 comes back to life as a possiblity. But if a well weathered and exposed portion of the paint still retains remnants of blue, that would prove it wasn't the 521 that was painted on the 67 pacers. If you are convinced, thats really all that matters. But if Donna had conducted these tests, and never tested a good sample of the 521 truck white, would you have accepted her results as fact?

I am really glad my car is a C-1, and it has one hell of a blue tint to it...

Steve,

GO back to the O-1 Paint thread. The area that Tony's guy sampled was a different area. No blue chip- that was one of the first photos--look at the last photo where the sample was actually taken (9th post page 19). White paint there and nothin but...

This is the photo I am looking at. tonys test area, I am guessing the area Tony tested was to the left of the drilled hole. Doesn't it look like there is blue under the paint, in that scratch? The blue undercoating could be pulling through the white in the test area. Very common for the primer to show through on paint, and even change the color of the topcoat completely.

It sure would be nice to test a fender or a bedside, and have a definitive answer. Even a 72 or 73 would be a great start, and maybe an ending. Would also be highly desireable if the same chromavision or prophet was used for all the testing.

Looking at this again, that photo looks about as yellow as ermine, but photos on the net just don't convey true coloring, not all the time. The lighting makes all the difference.

My guy will not even put the IR camera on a surface unless he has a good base surface. That is part of the training required to operate it. My guess is that the sample was more to the left because to catch the blue the guy would also have had to caught the hole and that would have screwed everything up.

With the tint result as printed that tells me the result was good, unless the reader (someone here) has a built in bias for another color at which point I can tell the opposing view that the sky is blue and I will be told wrong-o.

You asked above: "If you are convinced, thats really all that matters. But if Donna had conducted these tests, and never tested a good sample of the 521 truck white, would you have accepted her results as fact?"

No I would expect a through vetting of the issue. Kind of like what is going on right here as I get tested over and over.

In the end I am not asking anyone to accept anything. The results speak for themselves.

There is a faith based belief in Fleet for some people that is rooted in years of "0" means special therefore "it must be".

You know it may even be the new myth right here on this board.

I will never change those minds nor do I want to. But if you are willing to take hard facts about the science of the research - and the conclusions, paint and formula's, Chevrolet documentation and what it says -then we can chat it up all day, but from here on it seems pretty much about this or that or the other and speculation.

I have and will continue to remove speculation where I can as it has no credable factual basis, is generally a time waster but sometimes quite entertaining too.

We need to talk about it to get it where it needs to be.