After using good old fashioned high pressure paint pots for years, I have been advised to convert to a High Volume Low Pressure type gun. I can't see much difference in automotive paints and finishes insofar as their viscosity and covering characteristics over the past 3 or 4 years, so I wonder:<p>Why should I switch?<br>Are the new HVLP guns superior?<br>Have paints changed and I am just oblivious again? <p>Welcome any comments from those who are using the new technology.<p>Dave<br>



lathro19@idt.net

HVLP sprayers use less paint, have less overspray and are thus friendlier to the enviroment. This is the major force driving the trend toward HVLP. <br>

And absolutely the paint formulations have changed. The dryers and solvents have been reduced or removed to make the oil based paints more environmentally friendly. Down side is that now it takes days for the paint to dry instead of overnight. Also now that the drying has been retarded the weather/humidity can affect the sheen.<br>

What would the approximated cost be using this "new fangled" technology on a typical car--let's say a 50' boxcar to help clarify things?<p>Thanks,<br>Gerry<br>



geraldwalterk@aol.com

Well, at Portola, we bought a system that ran around $700. We think it saved us about half in paint quantities when applied to large flat objects. That means that 15 gallons of paint to do a locomotive (including primer) as opposed to 30. At $100 a gallon, the outfit paid for itself on the first paint job, and it was used for at least 5 paint jobs, and is still servicable. <br> One great advantage is the lack of overspray, we paint trucks without having to mask the carbody above (although I hold a piece of cardboard as a portable mask for close areas. It is harder to gat a 'dead level' finish, but then the 'orange peel' helps hide flaws in the metal, and believe me, there's lots of them on these puppies! <br> Also, this system heats the spray air, so the paint dries a bit faster.<br>S'<br>David Dewey<br>

Please tell me more about the system you use and your paint preferences.<p>Dave<br>



lathro19@idt.net

For 20 years I used a DeVilbiss MBC 510 gun, both with a cup and a pressure pot. Then I changed to a DeVilbiss HVLP equivqalent (JGHV-520), and like the other posters above said, it uses about 1/2 the amount of paint with virtually no overspray. The 510 and cup cost about $200 at the time of purchase (1960s), and the 520 with cup cost $400 (1990)--which I consider to be an equivalent price when inflation is taken into account. The pot was given to me, but these can be had for about $150-200. For apinting railroad equipment, a pot is a must, and I recomend one no smaller nor larger than 2 1/2 - 3 gallons (smaller won't hold enough paint--add in the volume for the reducer--and larger is too heavy to manhandle easily as you move around the car). Unfortunatley the 520 has been discontinued for a newer (and more expensive) model. The 520 worked just fine with the same pressure pot I used with the 510.<p>When using a pressure pot, the trick is to reduce ("thin") the paint sufficiently so it will flow through the hose readily (follow the manufacturer's isntruction, you can reduce it too much), which is not much more than for use in a cup. I also recomment a fluid hose with a minimum ID of 5/16", and get hose that is teflon lined.<p>The fluid tip and needle also have to be matched to the type of paint you are going to spray. Most auto paint jobbers have the right supplies, although they primarily cater to cup gun users.<p>Binks makes equivalent guns. There are other "off brands", but I've never been impressed with them.<p>I've mostly used Dulux, but it's dissappearing off the market. Centari "in the yellow can" is very good, provided you use the hardener and apply three coats. I've also used Imron and DeSoto Desothane (also used on AF1 and the space shuttles), but I'm not impressed. Centari "in the green can" is a cheap knock-off of Imron.<br>