SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!

News:

  • Home
  • Help
  • Chat
  • Login
  • Register

    • « previous next »
    Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 38

    Author Topic: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!  (Read 189847 times)

    Offline hemiken

    • Sr. Resident
    • ******
    • Posts: 8785
    • Hemi-fied Mopar in Australia
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #450 on: November 10, 2013 - 07:20:28 PM »
    Quote from: ChallengerHK on November 10, 2013 - 07:22:40 AM
    Old cameras do have the shutter speed to freeze that action, but old film was frequently not fast enough to let the camera use those shutter speeds, especially if the image was meant for print.  :bigsmile:
    So even if the negatives were available, would todays technology be able to freeze frame better quality or is it the negatives that is the problem :2thumbs:
    Logged
    1970 Barracuda   (O^--^===|===^--^O)
    1971 Barracuda   (O O {]{]{]|[}[}[} O O)
    1970 Challenger  (O O [======R/T=] O O)
    1971 Challenger  (O O ===== ===== O O)
    I pay homage to the best Mopars ever built.


    Offline ChallengerHK

    • Moderator
    • Sr. Resident
    • *****
    • Posts: 7338
    • I'm working on it - No, really
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #451 on: November 10, 2013 - 10:59:37 PM »
    Don't want to steal the ECS thread, but the negatives (technically the originals, because most print-bound items were shot on positive film) would have captured what they captured. You can use digital technology to pull out a little more detail, and then you hit a wall.
    Logged


    "She'll make point five past light speed. She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, and I've made a lot of special modifications myself."

    - Han Solo, Star Wars

    Advice Thread - Taking Pictures Of Cars

    Offline Topcat

    • C-C.com Expert
    • ********
    • Posts: 15376
    • Member since 9/16/04
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #452 on: November 10, 2013 - 11:06:20 PM »
    Quote from: ECS on October 31, 2013 - 03:56:54 PM
    Here are a few detail comparisons between an Original Chrysler Battery versus a Reproduction Unit.





    Weren't the original battery casings made out of bakelite?
    That would be a different durometer and porosity which would be the differences between the two.
    Logged
    Mike, Fremont, CA.

    Offline resq302

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 1114
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #453 on: November 11, 2013 - 07:38:47 AM »
    I thought the original casings were made of a hard rubberized type of material which would have given it that exact finish as it more than likely was a rubber/plastic pebble that was heated up and melted/formed into place.  That would also explain the rough texture if all of the rubber/plastic did not totally melt.
    Logged

    Offline hemiken

    • Sr. Resident
    • ******
    • Posts: 8785
    • Hemi-fied Mopar in Australia
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #454 on: November 11, 2013 - 07:45:17 AM »
    Quote from: ChallengerHK on November 10, 2013 - 10:59:37 PM
    Don't want to steal the ECS thread, but the negatives (technically the originals, because most print-bound items were shot on positive film) would have captured what they captured. You can use digital technology to pull out a little more detail, and then you hit a wall.
    Thanks HK, i am sure Dave would not mind, you have enlightened us all :wave: Thank you. :bigsmile:
    Logged
    1970 Barracuda   (O^--^===|===^--^O)
    1971 Barracuda   (O O {]{]{]|[}[}[} O O)
    1970 Challenger  (O O [======R/T=] O O)
    1971 Challenger  (O O ===== ===== O O)
    I pay homage to the best Mopars ever built.

    Offline resq302

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 1114
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #455 on: November 18, 2013 - 02:11:20 AM »
    Ah, thanks for the correction Dave!   :2thumbs:
    Logged

    Offline hemiken

    • Sr. Resident
    • ******
    • Posts: 8785
    • Hemi-fied Mopar in Australia
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #456 on: November 18, 2013 - 02:33:05 AM »
    Quote from: ECS on November 18, 2013 - 02:06:19 AM
    The Factory units were a very hard (brittle) composite. They were constructed of a variant form of plastic that would chip or crack rather easily.
    Hey Dave :wave: was it anything like bakerlite :dunno: or not that hard, as bakerlite is very brittle and sounds a lot like what your explaining :2thumbs:
    Logged
    1970 Barracuda   (O^--^===|===^--^O)
    1971 Barracuda   (O O {]{]{]|[}[}[} O O)
    1970 Challenger  (O O [======R/T=] O O)
    1971 Challenger  (O O ===== ===== O O)
    I pay homage to the best Mopars ever built.

    Offline hemiken

    • Sr. Resident
    • ******
    • Posts: 8785
    • Hemi-fied Mopar in Australia
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #457 on: November 18, 2013 - 02:55:19 AM »
    Quote from: ECS on November 18, 2013 - 02:49:21 AM
    Bakelite is a synthetic plastic that is very hard.  The Battery cases were a polypropylene composite that is similar to the body of a ported vacuum switch.

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-1968-74-PONTIAC-OEM-INTAKE-PORTED-VACUUM-SWITCH-6-PORTS-GM-3016754-/350595169968?pt=Vintage_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&fits=Make%3APontiac&hash=item51a119beb0&vxp=mtr

     

    Yeah i know what your saying now, so it is just a HDPE item, i got you exactly now :2thumbs:
    Logged
    1970 Barracuda   (O^--^===|===^--^O)
    1971 Barracuda   (O O {]{]{]|[}[}[} O O)
    1970 Challenger  (O O [======R/T=] O O)
    1971 Challenger  (O O ===== ===== O O)
    I pay homage to the best Mopars ever built.

    Offline hemiken

    • Sr. Resident
    • ******
    • Posts: 8785
    • Hemi-fied Mopar in Australia
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #458 on: November 19, 2013 - 07:02:35 AM »
    Quote from: ECS on November 18, 2013 - 11:23:27 AM
    HDPE refers to polyethylene; not polypropylene.  I'm pretty sure the Battery cases were made from a polypropylene composite.  :thumbsup:

    • Polyethylene has a lower melting point compared to the higher melting point of polypropylene.
    • Polypropylene is stiffer and resistant to chemicals and organic solvents compared to polyethylene.
    • Polypropylene is pure, non-stretching and generally more rigid than polyethylene.
    Yes yes yes, the old properties differences of Polyethylene as compared to Polypropylene :grinyes: thanks  :2thumbs:
    Logged
    1970 Barracuda   (O^--^===|===^--^O)
    1971 Barracuda   (O O {]{]{]|[}[}[} O O)
    1970 Challenger  (O O [======R/T=] O O)
    1971 Challenger  (O O ===== ===== O O)
    I pay homage to the best Mopars ever built.

    Offline anlauto

    • Permanent Resident
    • *******
    • Posts: 12328
    • I'm Alan G...I'm a Mopar Addict
      • Alan Gallant Automotive Restoration
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #459 on: November 21, 2013 - 05:16:58 PM »
    Does coating bare steel items with your product RPM classify as changing an aspect of how the car came from the factory ? :dunno:
    Your product preserves the natural steel items which would not have been protected from the factory.

    Your restorations duplicate obiviously the time of day the car rolled off the assembly line, but assembly line cars wouldn't have stayed that way very long.

    By doing so, have your cars been "modified" in such a way to preserve the "fresh restoration" look ?

    Just think of what classic cars would be if your product was added to all steel parts 40+ years ago.... :worshippy
    Logged
    I've taught you everything you know.....but I haven't taught you everything I know !
    www.alangallantautomotiverestoration.com

    Offline resq302

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 1114
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #460 on: November 21, 2013 - 07:34:00 PM »
    Honestly, I would rather apply RPM over a part than paint it as painting would cover up the natural tones / varying colors of what a natural cast or stamped metal part would have.
    Logged

    Offline anlauto

    • Permanent Resident
    • *******
    • Posts: 12328
    • I'm Alan G...I'm a Mopar Addict
      • Alan Gallant Automotive Restoration
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #461 on: November 21, 2013 - 07:41:00 PM »
    I have never laid eyes on a part that has been treated with RPM.  I can, however, understand how it can be 100% undetectable.

    Having never tried it, I have to wonder if painting a bare cast part like a spindle with a properly shaded (flat/satin/gloss) clear coat can achieve the same "invisible" effect ?

    I don't travel with the "OE" crowd, so a lot of this is pure curiousity.
    Logged
    I've taught you everything you know.....but I haven't taught you everything I know !
    www.alangallantautomotiverestoration.com

    Offline resq302

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 1114
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #462 on: November 21, 2013 - 07:45:17 PM »
    Alan,

    I have tried to copy the color of the metal color with paint and due to the texture, casting, machining, etc, you will never match it.  I have found with using the RPM, you can get almost the same sheen and color with using the RPM.  Im sure if I had polished or buffed the RPM a little more, I could have achieved the same sheen as what the part would have had originally.  Personally, I love the RPM product!  I have also put it to my own test with clamping treated and non treated parts on the front of my truck during the harsh salt ridden winters we have here in NJ and it has held up just like the independent tests have shown.
    Logged

    Offline anlauto

    • Permanent Resident
    • *******
    • Posts: 12328
    • I'm Alan G...I'm a Mopar Addict
      • Alan Gallant Automotive Restoration
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #463 on: November 21, 2013 - 07:47:59 PM »
    I was actually asking about clear coat over bare steel, not paint to look like steel.
    Logged
    I've taught you everything you know.....but I haven't taught you everything I know !
    www.alangallantautomotiverestoration.com

    Offline resq302

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 1114
    Re: SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!
    « Reply #464 on: November 21, 2013 - 07:52:49 PM »
    Alan,

    I have tried clear coat over bare, untreated steel and it eventually will start to rust under the clear coat.  I tried that with the drive shaft on my charger and other parts inside the engine compartment on my Dad's old el camino and no matter what we tried, the rust always tended to start under the  clear coat and then ( I assume) eventually break through the clear coat.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 38
    « previous next »