Folks,

I hope you all can comment on an idea I have been thinking about. What do you think about an esterior restoration of a streetcar or Interurban? There is a car that would look fairly good if it was painted and lettered, but now has faded paint on the outside.

Some day far in the future, the owning museum wants to restore it for operation, buut there are several projects worth of time and money between now and full restoration.

Should it just sit or would a little paint go a long way? Show the visitors a famous electric railway instead of a meaningless rust bucket.

Ted


AMILES1060@aol.com

Well, a little paint can go a long way to making a piece of equipment and a museum presentable. Consider the effort and the results.

Sell the idea to the management (powers that be). I wouldn't just don't start throwing paint on the car unless you've got support for your efforts.

If you paint the car, figure out the extent of the project before you begin.

BN

bnorden@gateway.net

A lot can be accomplished with a couple cans of bondo, some screen, duct tape, great stuff and paint. Results appear more impressive for the short haul than costs.

Credibility issues? From the publics POV, anything that appears well cared for makes the museum seem more responsible. They are more likely to support a restoration project for a car that seems close to running than one that looks hopeless. For nontechnical people, appearance is everything.

I tell my staff here that we need to make something change color and get shiny every now and again to keep the people in the city building across the street on our side.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

Ted:

I would say that you should DEFINITELY repaint this car. I heartily agree with Dave's comments about public perception: people are always going to be more impressed with something that looks nice, and are generally going to be more open to the idea of financially supporting it.

There are several different "levels" of cosmetic restoration, any one of which could be a consideration. How much work you want to put into the cosmetic restoration is up to you; remember, if you ever do a full restoration on a car like this, you'll likely compromise the cosmetic job and have to repaint it anyway.

-The absolute lowest form of repainting is to simply wash the car off, run a putty knife over it to scrape off the loose paint, and slap some new paint on it. If the car is inside then it will look fine for years; if it's outside, then it will probably recede back to looking like junk in a year or two.

-You could do a nice cosmetic job, consisting of: scraping all the old paint off (or, if it's in good shape, at least sanding it smooth); patching up holes in the siding with Bondo or some such substitute; and putting a nice paint job on it. If the car's inside then this will last indefinitely; if it's outside, a good paint job like this should look good for at least 10 years.

-A full cosmetic restoration would entail rebuilding rotten window frames, welding in new sections of steel (or replacing wood) where necessary, restoring and replacing hardware, and mounting any underbody equipment that would be obvious. I consider this to be a sort-of Smithsonian-style restoration: do a really high-quality restoration, but only on the parts that people are going to see (not the control systems, motors, interior, etc).

BTW, what car in particular do you have in mind? I have to admit I'm very curious!

> -The absolute lowest form of repainting is

The "Broom Job" which consists of

> to simply wash the car off, run a putty
> knife over it to scrape off the loose paint,
> and slap some new paint on it. If the car is
> inside then it will look fine for years; if
> it's outside, then it will probably recede
> back to looking like junk in a year or two.

> -You could do a nice cosmetic job,

Which in reality isn't really much above a Broom Job.

> -A full cosmetic restoration would entail
> rebuilding rotten window frames, welding in
> new sections of steel (or replacing wood)
> where necessary, restoring and replacing
> hardware, and mounting any underbody
> equipment that would be obvious. I consider
> this to be a sort-of Smithsonian-style
> restoration:

This is an execrise in oxymoronism.

The problems with "cheap and dirty" jobs is that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This means that if you use "inexpensive" (i.e. "cheap") paint at any stage of your equipment's life, it will always haunt you UNLESS YOU REMOVE IT COMPELELY before you do your serious restoration. The other side of the [same] coin is that you will in all likelihood have only one chance to accomplish this "paint job" in your lifetime, and if you use cheap materials, it will go bad prematurely, taking away valuable time needed for presevation efforts to other decaying artifacts.

Another thing to keep in mind is that our artifacts were "showroom new" ONLY ONCE in their lifetimes. This means that a "paint job" can be: clean off all the old flaking paint, rust prime the bare metal (use rust converter first if you want), clean the surface to be painted with BOTH a good industrial type of soap [and water] and a good grade of lacquer thinner right before painting, and paint with industrial grade products. Besides, you won't be doing anything really different than the operating companies used to do.

Thanks for your comments guys. Definately, will have the official go ahead before I do anything beyond sweeping out the cob webs.

TM


ted_miles@NPS.gov

> The problems with "cheap and
> dirty" jobs is that a chain is only as
> strong as its weakest link. This means that
> if you use "inexpensive" (i.e.
> "cheap") paint at any stage of
> your equipment's life, it will always haunt
> you UNLESS YOU REMOVE IT COMPELELY before
> you do your serious restoration. The other
> side of the [same] coin is that you will in
> all likelihood have only one chance to
> accomplish this "paint job" in
> your lifetime, and if you use cheap
> materials, it will go bad prematurely,
> taking away valuable time needed for
> presevation efforts to other decaying
> artifacts.

I agree with your arguments in principle, but keep in mind that I consider cosmetic restorations to be separate from full restorations. You're right in saying that any "cheap" paint you use will have to be removed during a full restoration, but I would say that 1) this is not usually going to be any more work than removing the paint that's already there, and/or the rust, and 2) I think any really nice restoration job would entail stripping the paint off of the car anyway. Even if you simply spot-prime the rust areas before painting, fully restoring the car would probably entail stripping the paint and repairing the rusted sections.

As for only being able to paint something once, I would agree that putting on a paint job that will only last a couple of years is generally not worth it. I think that cosmetic restorations are almost always useless for equipment that is stored outside, and that only equipment stored out of the weather will benefit from such a repainting job for very long. However, if the car is stored inside and is not in a position where its condition will degrade, even a non-professional paint job should work fine. No paint job can be expected to last forever; even professional jobs (on cars that are outside) only last 20-30 years at the absolute most. On something that's stored inside, however, you should get a quarter century out of even a cheap job.

> I agree with your arguments in principle,
> but keep in mind that I consider cosmetic
> restorations to be separate from full
> restorations. You're right in saying that
> any "cheap" paint you use will
> have to be removed during a full
> restoration, but I would say that 1) this is
> not usually going to be any more work than
> removing the paint that's already there,
> and/or the rust,

Actually prep work, painting, and then removing it all is quite a lot more work, unless you plant to sandblast. But sandblasting itself is a lot more diffucult than spot prep work.

If you use cheap paint which doesn't adhere well, then whatever paint you apply later will adhere only as well as this cheap paint underneath.

>and 2) I think any really
>nice restoration job would entail stripping
> the paint off of the car anyway.

Doing this destroys once and for all time the history contained in the layers of paint: the actual tint and hue of previous colors and shape, locations, and colors of all lettering and emblems.

>Even if you
> simply spot-prime the rust areas before
> painting, fully restoring the car would
> probably entail stripping the paint and
> repairing the rusted sections.

Doing a good job spot priming, using industrial grade materials, and making one's best attempt at using the best application methods are without a doubt the most beneficial. My point is that you have to do all this prep work anyway, so why not use the best materials? Besides spot prep work has the least harmful effects on the painting history of the equipment.

> On something that's
> stored inside, however, you should get a
> quarter century out of even a cheap job.

This isn't necessarily true because dust collects on the surfaces of everything. If the building is large enough (most carbarns are) it will generate its own weather inside, and the dust collected on the surface tends to attract and hold more moisture longer than is desirable. The biggest benefit that buildings have is to keep the sun's ultraviolet light from breakng down paint's polymer structure.

> Doing this destroys once and for all time
> the history contained in the layers of
> paint: the actual tint and hue of previous
> colors and shape, locations, and colors of
> all lettering and emblems.

I agree most heartedly with this. Once this information is gone it cannot be reproduced. Careful documentation is needed when preparing to do any major painting. This then brings you to the work of a restoration project.

Put another coat of paint on to help stabalize and protet the existing paint so that it can be reseached when the time comes.

Brian Norden

bnorden@gateway.net