Okay...now that I have everyones green light on replacment of my 67 SS frame....how about restoring the new frame, which isin't too bad. Should I Sandblast or Chemically Strip? Then Powdercoat or Paint w/Special Paint ??

PS: Special Thanks to all who contributed to my frame replacement question!!!

I had my bare frame sandblasted, then treated with Eastwood Rust encapsulater, brush, or spray, then topcoated with chassis black, Eastwood sells this as a frame resto kit. I am very happy with results. http://www.chevelles.com/forum/smile.gif

Frank
66 SS396

As long as the frame is not pitted, I have found the most economical way is to sand blast the frame and powdercoat. I would never chemically strip a frame as it is too easy to get the chemical between the frames welded sections. If that happens, you will be plaqued with problems in the future. Powdercoating is also much more forgiving than paint when it comes to scratching and waterspotting.

------------------
ACES #5032
TC #1074

galvanise it! see my post below. http://www.chevelles.com/forum/Forum3/HTML/005437.html if that is out of the question, get it dipped or you will never get totaly inside it. then use por-15. but do al your welding first. check out my some of my frame repairs and mods http://members.aol.com/smartasreality/page5.html

------------------
I couldn't repair my brakes, so I made my horn louder.
4-SALE? I'm considering selling my yellow '70 chevelle if someone is interested $11k.
www.EINSTYN.com (http://www.EINSTYN.com) updated 6-7-02 TC#1460, VCEA#2
. . _________ . . . . . .. _________
.../___---___\ . . ____/|__|__\___\
(OO[=====]OO) {_______________|
.{}.............{}.....O...............O....
1970 Chevelle 454 Wagons

[This message has been edited by FO_FDYFO (edited 06-28-2002).]

I agree with Rick. This is by far the most efficient and durable way of restoring frames. I assure you, if you galvanize, you will have adhesion problems down the road.
Gordon VM
Restoration Motorsports

I spent probably about 40 manhours with a grinder/sander cleaning off the sharp edges, drip welds,filling creases with weld and then re-sanding. After I approved of the final cleanup, I then sent it to sand blast and powdercoat. Turned out nice.

I sandblasted and sprayed on Zerorust. Nice product to work with.

------------------
http://webpages.charter.net/65chevelle/

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GVMLS6:
I assure you, if you galvanize, you will have adhesion problems down the road.
Gordon VM
Restoration Motorsports<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

what evedence do you have that there will be adhesion problems? what kinda problems are you thinking of? i bought industrial specially formulated and tested waterborn zinc primer. the best tested. the reason people have had no success at painting galvinized is because they use oil based paints. well that reacts with the zinc. waterborn paints do not. then it was top coated. i have tried scratching my test pieces and under harsh treatment i was able to scratch though the paint but not the primer. besides that is simply for astetics. the zinc coating is covering every square ince of steel. it is sacrificial. which means as the battery affect occurs to the car frame in humid conditions, the electrons from the zinc are givin up more freely. the are sacrificed befor the steel can rust. the steel can physical not rust as long as there is zinc to sacrifice. do you know how long it would take for the zinc to disapear? especially if it is top coated. another words after my grand kids are dead this frame will not be rusted. as far as finish. my frame looks absolutly beutiful. the only rough spots are where the frame was pitted pretty badly. you would never know by looking at it. i did all my grinding and welding first. as far as effort, it was easy, i took the frame straight to the galvanizing place. i did not strip it first or sand it or wire brush it, then when i got it, i put vinigar in my spray gun, squirted it doun, rinsed it with a hose, air blew it off, the primered and painted. not much effort. so if you have any knowledge of this process i would like to know. so before you assure someone that they will have problems with adhesion , back it up with facts. it was just as much effort for me to do 1 frame as it was 2 so i did 2. one was for my chopped chevelle and it is a convertible frame. (boxed also) it is finnished too and sitting on pallets outside with a tarp on it. it will be there for several years till i get to it. if in several years i lift up the cover and alls i do is rince off the dirt and bugs and eveything else is good we will no for sure. some people are not open to new ideas. you will find out if you reaserched it that this is nothing new really. so please if anyone is reading this, dont be afraid to do it. i have done it, and i have been catching a lot of greef about it. but i have recieved emails from people praising the idea off line. i dont mean to jump on you gordon, just dont want this option to be dismissed so easily. piece http://www.chevelles.com/forum/smile.gif

------------------
I couldn't repair my brakes, so I made my horn louder.
4-SALE? I'm considering selling my yellow '70 chevelle if someone is interested $11k.
www.EINSTYN.com (http://www.EINSTYN.com) updated 7-3-02 TC#1460, VCEA#2
. . _________ . . . . . .. _________
.../___---___\ . . ____/|__|__\___\
(OO[=====]OO) {_______________|
.{}.............{}.....O...............O....
1970 Chevelle 454 Wagons

OK, I'll explain where I am coming from on this galvinizing discussion. First, after a frame comes back to me either blasted or gavanized, as a professional restorer of show cars, I need to to get a durable and correct finish. This means either powder coating or etch prime plus urethane sealer plus single stage urethane black. I find that powder coating is actually cheaper for my customer because painting is so labor intensive. However, both of these processes will, if you check manufacturer salt spray specs, will perform extremely well, far into the future. Hence, I don't see a need for galvinizing. In fact, i'll bet that my complete process equals or exceeds your complete process in salt spray testing.
OK, now for the second part of the problem: Adhesion. I once saw a bodyman bond together a new OEM, galvinized two piece bumber reinforcement.Down the road, the bond failed and the reinforcement came apart. Upon inspection, it was determined that the galvanized coating on the new parts let go from the steel. It is for this reason the bonding manufacturers(Fusor,Dura-Mix) recomend grinding off all galvanizing in the bond areas. The second part of the adhesion problem is getting paint to stick to the galvinizing. Have you ever seen late model Blazer painted bumbers that were not properly prepared? They chip extremely easily. This is not to say that it can't be done. I'm saying that you have to be very careful and dilligent in your preparation. If you have done you homework and were careful, you should be all right. However, the adhesion will not be as good on a galvinized part as it will be on a blasted part because the blasted part will have a much courser anchor pattern for the paint to grip to.
Belive me, I fully understand the "gavanic chain" whereby one type of metal sacrifices itself for another. And I believe that OEM munufacturers are highly sucessful at applying zinc coatings in a controled manufacturing process on NEW metal. However, I have doubts about the processed when performed on 30 year old metal. Also, I wonder what happens to the bond between the paint and the metal when the zinc sacrifices itself and crumbles or dissapears.
I have never been accused(no offense taken) of being afraid to try something new. If you read my posts, you will find that the complete opposite is true.
So, do I think you are wrong for galvanizing your frame? NO. If you are happy, that's fine. I just don't feel that it's necessary and could cause potential problems, so I don't recomend it.
Gordon VM
Restoration Motorsports

http://groups.msn.com/Restorationphotos/shoebox.msnw?Page=1

ding, ding, ding. Class dismissed! http://www.chevelles.com/forum/biggrin.gif http://www.chevelles.com/forum/biggrin.gif http://www.chevelles.com/forum/biggrin.gif

------------------
ACES #5032
TC #1074

ok Gordon, help clear me up on a few things.
What do you mean by "he bonded two bumper pieces together" how? you are not making a fair comparison on your argument about adhesion. what kind of bonding failed? are you talking about a bonding other then the bond between the zinc and the steel. where on a frame is anyone going to be bonding something that would create such a condition to try to pull the galvanizing off of the steel. and yes the preparation is important.
The bottom line for me and my preference is, I would rather have a totally protected inside and out frame over a correct appearing frame. there are applications where correctness is more important then function. I am not arguing the duplication of originality. The average Joe might not care about a correct finish. He might just want a rust free and protected frame. you can not reach in the boxed parts of a frame with methods like sand blasting and even powder coating? they do not get in there. can you disagree with that point? but if you are not concerned with originality, or appearance, or the longevity of the appearance of the paint over the galvanizing, and you want maximum frame protection inside and out with the least amount of work then how can you beat galvanizing? even if the paint were to fail and the primer, you still have the protection of the galvanizing. the primer and paint other then any added sealing and protection are merely cosmetic.
(no offense intended or taken) http://www.chevelles.com/forum/smile.gif
Pete

OK Pete, let me explain further. The bonding operation I described was this: Ford Arostar front bumper reinforcements are 2 pieces running the length of the front of the car. From the factory, they are spot welded together. On the repair end, they should also be welded. The tech bonded the two pieces together without grinding off the gavlanized coating. The bond came apart in use. It was determined that the bond failed because the adhesion between the zinc (galvanizing) and the bare steel failed and came off,probably due to improper procedures at the factory. This must happen with some regularity because Dura-Mix specifies that all galvanizing be removed in the bond areas. This is what scares me. A process that is beyond my control and COULD be sub-standard.
Now for the question of areas you can't see or reach. I learned about this from my brother, who is in the metallizing coating business. It is impossible to know if you have the unseen areas clean enough for coating. Also if the cleaning was performed by some kind of dip(not the person doing the operation, but the process), there is always the problem of that clean
ing solution "weeping out" of seams,etc. for a long time. I have seen this cause problems with the final coating or paint job.
Then to get good ahesion of paint to the galvinizing, every square inch of the part needs to be scuffed or sanded.a lot of extra work.
I know for a fact that adhesion to a sand blasted frame is much better than the adhesion between galvanizing and steel and also between paint and galvanizing. For this reason, I don't like to use a process that could cause more problems than it solves. As a restorer, I cannot afford "Even IF's" ,as in "even if the paint were to fail......". I can't have the paint pealing off of a show car. I need to have perfect confidence that this WILL NOT happen.
So,I guess I would have to conclude that galvanizing is not a bad thing if you want to do it, but I don't feel it's worth the risk for really no gain
Gordon VM
Restoration Motorsports

ok, so here is where we disagree. the bonding you are talking about was broken because the attachment of another piece of metal was done wrong. it was not prepared properly. you never weld over zinc. it has to be grinded off first. they were asking that the bond between the zinc and steel handle the stress of a bond that was expected to be as strong as a proper weld to steel. well obviously the load was unreasonable and overwhelming. if you are not asking the zinc to steel bond to perform such an unreasonable task as holding on parts then I don't see any condition on a Chevelle frame where that situation is duplicated. it seems to me that there is no wonder when you put over exert something it will fail. kind of like pulling fillings out of your teeth by chewing gummy bears. in a normal application those loads are not being applied to a Chevelle frame. the zinc to steel bond will never be exceeded. so I think that this is a good example of what not to do, however it is not a good reason to not galvanize a frame and should not be used as and deterrent for others who could greatly benefit from this procedure. http://www.chevelles.com/forum/smile.gif
now, as far as the parts you cant see, here is the logic on this, if the entire frame is rusty, and there are places that have pits, it goes to reason that if those area in which you can see( which are as bad as it gets) get totally clean upon the dipping process, it would stand to reason that the areas you can not see have a very high probability that they were too cleaned well. another words, use the worst spot as a gauge, if it got cleaned then it all got cleaned. as well as the same thing about the galvanizing, it the worst spots got galvanized well so did the rest. yes, there is a very slight possibility that it might not of, but it would be very slight. I have taken a light and stuck my eyeball in the tiny holes to get a look in those areas and they were covered very well. even still, its better then the alternative. there is no problem of cleaning solution weeping out of seems. when the frame gets dipped into the 850 degrees molten zinc it is for sure all cleaning solution will be boiled away instantly (which has already been through a rinse solution then a zinc fluxing solution) http://www.chevelles.com/forum/wink.gif
even if the bond is greater between a blasted frame and paint, FOR ME, it is more important for total coverage. I think the second best option is to have the frame chemically dipped then make spray wands to reach inside all the channels. I was going to do that with POR-15 until I came across galvanizing. http://www.chevelles.com/forum/smile.gif
I understand that as a restorer in your case you don't want to take the "ifs". because you are concerned about correct finishes and longevity of the finishes. but to most people who just want a rust free frame this is the best solution. I'm not talking about what is best for you. as far as the amount of work and money, I think I have stated it several times, the price was unmatched by any method and the process required the least amount of work. I would be happy to review those costs and processes if this is disputed. you and everyone ready this can do what you want, but until I am convinced that I am wrong I will not go away. http://www.chevelles.com/forum/smile.gif


------------------
I couldn't repair my brakes, so I made my horn louder.
4-SALE? I'm considering selling my yellow '70 chevelle if someone is interested $11k.
www.EINSTYN.com (http://www.EINSTYN.com) updated 7-3-02 TC#1460, VCEA#2
. . _________ . . . . . .. _________
.../___---___\ . . ____/|__|__\___\
(OO[=====]OO) {_______________|
.{}.............{}.....O...............O....
1970 Chevelle 454 Wagons

I have been watching this discussion with interest. There will come a day when I will want to redo the frame on my car. I have done the sandblast/paint route, and unless you have a professional do it, it's a LOT of work. If you have a pro do it, it's a LOT of money.

I think it's interesting the difference viewpoints make.

Tell me if I am correct in what I have heard so far:

1) If it's a correct restore, only sandblast and paint will do. It will provide excellent rust protection if properly done, and will give the correct look. I did a frame on a Packard this way. I used a "home" blaster. It was a hell of a lot of time, work, and mess. I would pay someone next time, but it's expensive to have a pro sandblast a frame. Doing it myself, I used $40 in "Black Beauty" sand, and about $150 in paint (including the stuff I ruined and had to strip off and redo)

2) If easy, low cost rust protection is the goal, galvaizing is the cheapest/easiest, and if you paint over it, it will even look good, but it might start chipping after a while. It sounds like you could get a frame stripped and galvanized for less than the cost of professional sandblasting. I would really like to hear how the galvanizing holds up after driving around for a couple of years.

------------------
Mike Novak
'71 Chevelle convertible
red daily driver

sounds clear as mud to me. http://www.chevelles.com/forum/biggrin.gif just kidding. you pretty much summed it up. I will report any loss of paint as it occurs. if it occurs? that's a big IF. I suspect it might after a while, but the frame will still be protected by the zinc coating. I can see the paint chipping from road stones, but I think the special primer I used will hold up way better. but as I mentioned earlier, my main drive for doing this besides less cost and effort was that the frame got coated inside all the channels of the boxed inaccessible areas like the motor cross member and the rails that curve at the front and rear suspension interfaces. and in my case I did a elky frame and a convertible frame which has the entire frame rails boxed. there was no way to get in there otherwise. if it chips down the road in a few years as I suspect it would. ( and maybe as any frame driven daily would) I can touch it up? big deal. oh and for that reason, if you did not read, I also galvanized a bunch of other parts. 2 radiator supports. they have a channel that runs down below where the radiator mount. imposable to get inside and highly susceptible to rusting due to the coolant leaks and battery corrosion on the side. I did bumper brackets, radiator support brackets, cross members. I have primed and painted all that too. I am getting ready to take another batch to be done. after I finish boxing my front lower control arms I am having them galvanized. you can buy aftermarket galvanized control arms so I am not the first to do this either.

------------------
I couldn't repair my brakes, so I made my horn louder.
4-SALE? I'm considering selling my yellow '70 chevelle if someone is interested $11k.
www.EINSTYN.com (http://www.EINSTYN.com) updated 7-3-02 TC#1460, VCEA#2
. . _________ . . . . . .. _________
.../___---___\ . . ____/|__|__\___\
(OO[=====]OO) {_______________|
.{}.............{}.....O...............O....
1970 Chevelle 454 Wagons

[This message has been edited by FO_FDYFO (edited 07-09-2002).]