Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Gen5DIY
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Camaro Photos | Spyshots | Video | Media Gallery

Camaro Photos | Spyshots | Video | Media Gallery All Camaro related pictures, videos and other assorted media.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-20-2010, 02:45 PM   #26
MuttGrunt
 
MuttGrunt's Avatar
 
Drives: Not Enough
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by OSearcy4 View Post
I understand your reasoning, however the rock thing is a little off. If a car in front of you runs over a rock, it doesn't sling the rock back it only picks the rock up into the air. The rock would be traveling with the motion of the car, say the car passes at 70 mph and runs over the rock throwing it into the air. The rock is going to travel in the direction of the car at a much slower rate possibly 15 mph, it doesn't sling the rock backwards that's not possible the cars tires would have to be spinning faster than the rate the car was traveling forward, ie spinning tires. So traveling behind this car at the same speed would mean the rock hits your car at the speed you are traveling 70 mph minus the speed the rock is also traveling in the same direction 15 mph = 65 mph, now given that's still enough to do damage, here's the big question:

Why is this happening to new cars especially camaros and not to older cars? I have a 97 Camaro with 130,000 miles on it and not one chip in the paint on the front end. And the front end is made of the same plastic but its black and my car is white so if it did chip they would be very noticeable.

What are they doing different now that they weren't doing then. In a years time my 97 camaro's paint job is gonna look better than my 2010.
Potentially - maybe.
This would be to say that a rock isn't ever sticking to the rear tires of the car in front of you for ANY amount of time, but if so - the rotational inertia of the tire would/could in fact sling the rock at some speed.
If I was a betting man, I'd bet a kicked up rock is moving at a velocity greater than 0 m/s. Surely I don't think this is ALWAYS the case, but I'd find it hard to believe it's not the norm. Sure, maybe not 10-40 mph, but will a 5mph difference change things? possibly. It'd be interesting to find out some real information
Someone send this question into MythBusters

Why it's not happening on your older Camaro? Great question. I'd be interested to find out as well. How has paint technology, rules/regulations, standards, and application methods changed over time? There are so many factors that I believe it is simply unfair to cry foul at one specific area and believe that is the culprit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by htp autoworks View Post
Like I stated above, it is what can be used in paints and clear coats these days... which is governed by the EPA. Do some research on the net. There is a ton of information out there... and it is across the board. Dont beleive me... go into any other car forum and do a search for rock chips. I go through about 12 different ones a day and its a hot topic in every single one.
Well there. I see you're not a fan of the EPA. I hope you and other's realized one of the biggest things the EPA has done over the years is change the law and regulations on VOC's. Lowering the amount of VOC's that a place is allowed to use is, IMHO, the reason so many modern cars have such UGLY paint jobs (anyone else notice the amount of orange peel on most new cars?), but it surely isn't the most likely reason for rock chips.
VOC's (Volatile Organic Compounds) are the portions of the paint that DO NOT stay behind when the paint in a 2k (Two Komponent / Two Component) paint job is done AKA it's the stuff that floats away into the atmosphere. Forcing shops to use less VOC's results in a thicker paint which doesn't atomize as well, which leads to more orange peel in anything being sprayed - especially nasty thick clear-coat. What it doesn't do is make paint "softer" somehow. That's just not how things work. I don't care what GM's reps or anyone else says that has no experience working with paint. I actually encourage people here to go and speak to the best paint shop in your area - ask people about VOC laws and how it affects things, etc. Don't just trust me b/c I'm some guy on the internet - go talk to real people and get real answers (which is how I've learned my information btw).


I challenge you guys this: the age old question I still can't find an answer to no matter who I talk with:

Why do some manufactures use softer clear coats than others?
I'm not talking about Super hard clear's like Lambo and Mercedes Benz are using - I'm talking normal everyday clears.
Your Camaros have what would be considered medium hardness clear-coat on them. If you think it's soft - go get a Porsche, Bentley, or Honda and you'll see what REAL soft paint is really like.
I don't know the answer to that question. I wonder if it has to do with the flexibility of the clear-coat. Maybe the durability over time? Maybe it's just plain 'ol price: maybe it's cheaper stuff. Maybe it has to do with UV ray blocking agents, or how the clear affects the gloss-look of the finish. I don't know.

Lastly...
Speaking of chips: they'll always be an issue. They've always been an issue. Guy's with F430's look at it as an issue and they have the hardest clear-coats available. Just because people talk more and more about it now doesn't mean it doesn't affect older cars. When it comes down to it: we're car enthusiasts. We take more pride of our rides than the general population. We pay more attention to our rides than the general population. Hence why you won't find a huge forum on Toyota Camry's in which people are spending big money to protect their car from rock chips, nor do they pay attention to them.
MuttGrunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2010, 02:56 PM   #27
MuttGrunt
 
MuttGrunt's Avatar
 
Drives: Not Enough
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 106
Oh and I almost forgot: because you're Camaro is made in Canada - it isn't governed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Addtionally, I believe Canada has standards that are more strict on VOC laws and wouldn't be surprised if they forced all factory paint base-coat jobs to be water based. Regardless, clear-coat is still solvent borne/ solvent based
MuttGrunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2010, 03:14 PM   #28
tangorover
 
tangorover's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Chevy Camaro 2LT Summit White
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 469
Almost all new cars are like this. Ironically the only way to get a car that wont chip easily is to get a car made in Korea :-) My friend's New BMW 3 series also has a ton of chips and says the reason is the same as us. Its the new environmental regulations taht keep making the paint layers thinner.
tangorover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2010, 03:21 PM   #29
MuttGrunt
 
MuttGrunt's Avatar
 
Drives: Not Enough
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 106
^ if only that was true.
Oddly enough new Jag's have total paint thicknesses around 300-400 microns. The regulations aren't the reason they're applying thinner paint: money is the reason behind that one.
Automotive paint is some amazing and expensive stuff. If a company can spray 1/3 less paint on a car, they save 33% on paint cost = multi millions of dollars.
MuttGrunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2010, 03:57 PM   #30
Spooker_Doodles
Z28, Berlin Blue, BLK Int
 
Drives: 2003 Chevy S10
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 109
I am no painter but to me it seems that brittle paint systems would lead to the chips where a soft paint system wouldn't chip as easily but more apt to get scratches.
Spooker_Doodles is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Tags
chipping, chips, paint, warranty

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GM bulletin on Perceived Paint Mismatch on Door and Quarter Panel Paint Appearance Tran 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 114 04-16-2012 03:04 PM
Junkman, Camaro5fest & Paint Chips Stex Cosmetic Maintenance: Washing, Waxing, Detailing, Bodywork, Protection 34 04-21-2010 09:00 AM
Paint chips WVCamaro10 Cosmetic Maintenance: Washing, Waxing, Detailing, Bodywork, Protection 13 03-20-2010 07:35 AM
Paint chips near your gills. SummoneR 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 60 03-19-2010 06:40 AM
door handles camarokidz28 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 32 06-08-2008 09:15 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.