Custom Decals
al...@sprynet.com
Been awhile since I've been on here, thought I'd throw a few
questions/comments out.
Talk to me about custom decals!
Who/how much/quality/etc.
I just finished one of three custom painted U28C's for my
BAD RIVER ROUTE short-line addition and cringe at the thought of
having to do the others with dry transfers also!
Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
elaborate on them.
McHenry couplers? Comments? Those three U-boats are the first
equipment of mine to get them , so I'd be interested to hear more!
stev knowles
In article <59op7r$l...@juliana.sprynet.com>, al...@sprynet.com says...
>McHenry couplers? Comments? Those three U-boats are the first
>equipment of mine to get them , so I'd be interested to hear more!
i just spent a night cleaning up the "rip track" on the layout. there were 5
couplers to replace, 1 McHenry and 4 Intermountain (which is about the correct
percentage of them on the rolling stock right now, it seems easier to find IM
at shows). all but one lost in the same way, the head seperated from the shaft.
one IM coupler seems to have had the little strap to close the coupler deform
permanently, so the coupler nuckle will not close. i replaced all of them with
the same kind of couplers that were there originally, but wont be fielding any
new IM or MH couplers for awhile, i will go back to kadee #5's, which has only
had 1 "failure" in 5 years (although i have had to replace 2 or 3 coupler head
springs that popped off somewhere, but they supply me with spares when i buy
the couplers, and i dont consider that to be a big deal . . .
i do run long trains, 60-80 cars mixed freight, 36 car roadrailers (need to
build more of those puppies) 50 car intermodal (also need to build more of
those) with 3% curved grades, so i do put my couplers thru alot of abuse . . .
stev knowles
st...@precision.guesswork.com
F. DABNEY
al...@sprynet.com wrote:
: Been awhile since I've been on here, thought I'd throw a few
: questions/comments out.
: Talk to me about custom decals!
: Who/how much/quality/etc.
There are many vendors who advertise in the mags. I've heard nothing bad
about any of them, save that some can take their own sweet time getting
the products back to you.
Write them. Nearly all have literature packs that include samples of
other custom work. Some have a gloss film, others a matte finish film.
If you order, insist on a guarantee on shipping or money back.
: Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
: stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
: here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
: about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
: different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
: elaborate on them.
I have had acceptable results using it. I have to special order anything
that doesn't come in a Floquil bottle so I haven't had a chance to
experiment with any of the other water/acrylics. Including Floquil's own
version. (Not Polly-S which I've never cared for)
: McHenry couplers? Comments? Those three U-boats are the first
: equipment of mine to get them , so I'd be interested to hear more!
Jury is still out. Drawbacks include potential of coupler getting set in
the open position, shank flexing and permitting couplers to bypass under
load, and greater fragility than Kadee, even Kadee's own Delrin shanks.
However, if the bugs get worked out, they and Intermountain offer simple
solutions to messy installations.
I look at them in that light, not as a cheap alternative. That they
really aren't.
Fred D.
Watching the action from BNSF MP 1112, El Paso sub
KRN...@prodigy.com
F. DABNEY wrote:
> : Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
> : stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
> : here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
> : about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
> : different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
> : elaborate on them.
What exactly don't you like about this stuff? I've had pretty good
results on American Flyer S-Gauge.
Steve Gruninger
krn...@prodigy.com
F. DABNEY
KRN...@prodigy.com (KRN...@prodigy.com) wrote:
: F. DABNEY wrote:
Before I get my shorts singed by someone, let me say I didn't say it was
garbage- I was responding to the person who did. In fact, within limits,
I like it.
Andy Harman
al...@sprynet.com wrote:
>Talk to me about custom decals!
>Who/how much/quality/etc.
There is a guy locally (Cincinnati) who does a lot of custom decals,
and he does excellent work. His name is Chip Coburn and his company
is called After Hours Graphics. Somewhere I have one of his cards but
I don't know where. If you are interested I can try and dig it up.
>Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
>stuff is absolute garbage?
No, you are not. Not to name names or anything, but many fairly well
known modelers have completely given up on it. A quote from one of
them: "The only thing the stuff's good for is holding down the bottom
of a trash can".
Like everything else, you will find people who swear by it, and others
who swear AT it.
Personally, I think it's the worst of the acrylic paints on the
market, certainly the most inconsistent from one bottle to the next.
I have had results from pretty good to utterly awful. My personal
recommendation: try one of the others - PollyScale, ModelFlex, etc.
>McHenry couplers? Comments? Those three U-boats are the first
>equipment of mine to get them , so I'd be interested to hear more!
Mushy, and the spring fatigue is a real problem - not just in storage
but in normal operation. I've done my experiment with them and
probably won't buy any more. Spend the extra 10 cents a pair for
Kadees.
Andy
C.L.Zeni
al...@sprynet.com wrote:
>
> Been awhile since I've been on here, thought I'd throw a few
> questions/comments out.
>
> Who/how much/quality/etc.
> BAD RIVER ROUTE short-line addition and cringe at the thought of
> having to do the others with dry transfers also!
ink is good and opaque, evenly applied to the decal film without "holes"
etc. Nice thin film - hunkered down over the rivets, "wood" car sides,
etc like a dream. Prices are reasonable enough. Mine consisted of
letters only, but curved to make heralds, etc - the prices of the Rail
Graphics was within 10% of the cost of all the Champ alphabet sets I
would have had to buy to do the same thing. Heck, I'll pay 10% premium
any day to keep from spelling out ROCK CREEK AND NORTHERN 50 times on
HOn3 cars! And I recall that his prices were good if you could provide
proper camera ready artwork for funky heralds, etc. Service? Superb -
fast. He had a question - called me one night to clarify it. Highly
recommended indeed.
> Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
> stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
> here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
> about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
> different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
> elaborate on them.
I must be a freak of nature (my wife thinks so anyway...). I liked the
stuff and never had any problems getting good results. Yes there were
appalling shelf life problems early on, which is why my local shop
dropped the line and went to PollyScale. PollyScale is OK except it
dries too flat to decal over - which really grips my *ss. What the heck
do they expect people to do with Caboose Red or B&O blue - WEATHER???
No, dummies, yer gonna decal over it. So make it glossy so you don't
gotta put a *&()^&%*#$ gloss coat over it. Jeez I must be missing
something here....nobody else whines about this.
> McHenry couplers? Comments? Those three U-boats are the first
> equipment of mine to get them , so I'd be interested to hear more!
Haven't used 'em. No intention to. Kadees ain't broke, so I don't need
to fix 'em. I am grateful to the McH and IM guys for providing real
competition to Kadee thus getting them to reduce their prices.
--
Craig Zeni - clz...@earthlink.net
-- SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILROAD - Through The Heart of The South --
R Watkins
Be sure to purchase Accuflex in the glass bottle and not the plastic ones.
Testers now bottles Accuflex in glass as intended. Badger use to distribute
it in plastic bottles which was a mistake on their part. If you tried to
use Accuflex in the plastic bottles give another shot from the Testers
bottle and see if works better for you.
tvond...@aol.com
In article <59qmto$p...@news.one.net>, aha...@one.net (Andy Harman)
writes:
>There is a guy locally (Cincinnati) who does a lot of custom decals,
>and he does excellent work. His name is Chip Coburn and his company
>is called After Hours Graphics.
Andy,
Chip has an ad on page 69 of the January 1997 Model Railroader. His
address is:
After Hours Graphics
Dept. M
A Division of Ceramic Signs & Designs
P.O. Box 62373
Sharonville, Ohio 45262-0373
(513) 321-8866, fax (513) 321-8958
e-mail: RRDe...@aol.com
Chip also has a small selection of stock decals for several cars and
cabooses of the C&O and N&W, all diesels for the Indiana & Ohio Rail
System in HO, S and O, Great Miami & Scioto disels and several small rail
operations in southern and southwestern Ohio, southeastern Indiana and
northern Kentucky. Chip's ad says send a large self-addressed stamped
envelop for a free sample and info.
Through his Ceramic Signs & Designs, he produces a line of coffee mugs
with rail company logos. I believe he has most of the lines which served
Cincinnati represented. He has a line of T-shirts. Chip usually has booths
at the NMRA show in Dayton and at the twice yearly Springfield Train Show.
Hey Chip, if you're reading this posting I'm expecting to buy one of
your I&O #65 shirts in 2X at the next Springfield Train Show.
Tom Vondruska, Yellow Springs, Ohio, on the old Little Miami RR, the
Panhandle's Springfield branch, wishing Chip would make some more of those
fantasy Cincinnati, Lebanon & Northern Ry. decals.
Joel Stensberg
KRN...@prodigy.com wrote:
>
F. DABNEY wrote:
Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
elaborate on them.
Mr. Dabney - I concur! All the acrylic paints I have used I would be
ashamed to sell to one of my customers. They don't cover for crap, when
they finally do, they are so thick they cover the detail. They run
under the masking tape no matter what technique you use. They brush even
worse for touchup. Because they are water-based you can't even spray on
decal paper touchup either. The darker colors sometimes will produce
acceptable results, but people don't plunk their hard-earned money for
'acceptable results.' I started a thread on this a month or so ago and
I got a lot of emails telling me to be patient and they acrylics will
'catch up soon.' I'll tell you what, most customers don't care if their
paint job is environmentally friendly - all they care is that it looks
good. They don't want a lousy job and me to tell them that the next one
I do (if there is a next one) will be better because the paints are
catching up soon. I have yet to see any good looking paint job with
acrylic paints - period. Or, a least one that will match the Floquil,
Scalecoat or other solvent paints.
The sad part is all the environmental extremist activists have got laws
past eventually outlawing solvent-based paints so we don't have a lot of
choice but learn how to use this urine. So buy 'em, hoard 'em and
treasure 'em while you can, because soon they will all be gone. We know
what the future is....
Joel
roger traviss
Joel Stensberg (jin...@netnet.net) wrote:
: Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
: stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
: here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
: about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
: different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
: elaborate on them.
: Mr. Dabney - I concur! All the acrylic paints I have used I would be
: ashamed to sell to one of my customers. They don't cover for crap, when
: they finally do, they are so thick they cover the detail. They run
: under the masking tape no matter what technique you use. They brush even
: worse for touchup.
Exactly as I found out yesterday. I was removing some consolidated
stencils and some of the numbers from a couple of Roundhouse CP Rail
boxcars, in order to back date them a few years and change the numbers
around. I used a new jar of Accuflex CP Rail Action Red just to
touch up the paint before applying ACI lables and new numbers. The
Accuflex wouldn't brush on worth a dam, didn't cover even the existing
origina;l paint let alone the slight black of the plastic body just
showing through where I'd erased the original markings and went on so
thick it was lumpy. I ended up having to completely strip the the cars.
Floquil next time I think.
The Accuflex jar? It's already in the garbage.
Cheers
Roger Traviss
From an unusually snowy and cold Victoria, BC
Fritz Milhaupt
roger traviss wrote:
[snip]
The
> Accuflex wouldn't brush on worth a dam, didn't cover even the existing
> origina;l paint let alone the slight black of the plastic body just
> showing through where I'd erased the original markings and went on so
> thick it was lumpy. I ended up having to completely strip the the
> cars.
Actually, I don't remember the makers of AccuFlex ever saying you
_could_ brush-paint with it. From what I remember of the original
reviews when it was introduced, nearly everybody pointed out that it was
specifically designed to be sprayed with an airbrush.
Of course, even when I _did_ try to use it in an airbrush, it sucked
rocks.
-fm
* Modeling the Pere Marquette in HO- one loco and car at a time... *
AML
Joel Stensberg <jin...@netnet.net> wrote:
[Big snip of great post]
>The sad part is all the environmental extremist activists have got laws
>past eventually outlawing solvent-based paints so we don't have a lot of
>choice but learn how to use this urine. So buy 'em, hoard 'em and
>treasure 'em while you can, because soon they will all be gone. We know
>what the future is....
Well, I have been using automotive lacquer for over 25 years and still find I
can get it and get it mixed to the exact color I want. A little pricey as a
pint costs about $20 but when you thin it 3: or 4: 1, it really isn't that
expensive. Use a top quality thinner [translation: the most expensive one]
alon with the proper additition of a retarder. I have some cans that were
originally quarts that are still good. Also I have a goodly amount of Floquil
and Scalecoat on hand.
Tried Polly-S about 20 years ago and have avoided water based or acrylic
paints ever since except for for yellows for brush painting hardrails.
Ray Hobin,
NMRA Life #1735;TCA #78-12540
Durham, NC
redm...@sprynet.com
Joel Stensberg <jin...@netnet.net> wrote:
>KRN...@prodigy.com wrote:
>>
>F. DABNEY wrote:
>Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
>stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
>here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
>about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
>different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
>elaborate on them.
>Mr. Dabney - I concur! All the acrylic paints I have used I would be
>ashamed to sell to one of my customers. They don't cover for crap, when
>they finally do, they are so thick they cover the detail. They run
--snip
>Joel
What's going on here? Admittedly I clearly prefer Scalecoat II for
familiarity and ease of use, but so far I have had no problems with
Modelflex, current Accuflex, and especially Polly-Scale -- and that
is both brushed and airbrushed. As far as covering, yellows and
oranges are tough in any paint and I didn't see big problems with the
acrylics in other colors.
I avoid acrylics mostly because it is so tough to clean up dried
paint, especially inside the airbrush, and I use a spray booth which
effectively vents the fumes.
al...@sprynet.com
Joel Stensberg <jin...@netnet.net> wrote:
>Accuflex Paint .................... Am I the only one that thinks this
>stuff is absolute garbage? I know I've heard it talked on plenty
>here, so I'd be interested in everyones comments. I use Tamiya paints
>about 90+% of the time myself. I must admit I do have some rather
>different methods for painting than most here, and would be glad to
>elaborate on them.
The above was my comment , not FD's and the point was somewhat
misunderstood!
>Mr. Dabney - I concur! All the acrylic paints I have used I would be
>ashamed to sell to one of my customers. They don't cover for crap, when
>they finally do, they are so thick they cover the detail. They run
>under the masking tape no matter what technique you use. They brush even
>worse for touchup. Because they are water-based you can't even spray on
>decal paper touchup either.
Fact is, as I tried to convey in my original post Accu-Flex *IS*
garbage in my opinion. Not that it is an acrylic but rather in the
fact that it is plain and simply a very poor product start to finish.
Acrylics on the average are great. As I stated, I use Tamiya's product
for the vast majority of my model jobs (not just RR either), and get
unbelievable results. But as I also stated I have come up with some
rather unorthodox painting methods over the years. Undec. Athearn
units (ie BLACK) get two coats, one light grey or white primer coat
and one color coat and they are covered 100%!! A final "finish" coat
and weathering and the job is complete. Plus I can spent 2 or 3
minutes max at the sink with hot soap and water to clean up. Also have
had no trouble with touch up, tape bleed, or decaling. I have
absolutely nothing against oils other than I'm lazy and hate the clean
up and am not totally satisfied with the achivable finished results
using them. I tolorate nothing more than ZERO orange peel and
seam/detail buildup.
David J. Dewey
Ray and all,
Well out here in Calif. the word is NO Lacquer soon (define
soon??). In fact, my restoration paint supplier already has customers
driving up from the Bay Area (3-1/2 hours) to buy paint as they can't buy
at home as they don't have a "refinisher's license" (which requires an
Inspected paint booth amongst other stuff). And he tells me that we're
not far behind, depending on the political scene. None of these people are
survivalist or right-wing anti-government types, so I doubt that this is a
bunch of reactionism. So paint 'em while you got 'em!
Fortunately, it doesn't take much paint to have a lifetime
"hoard" for model painting, but what about the Model A that's been in my
family since new--its been 22 years since I painted her? (yes, with
Lacquer & I have touch-up cans that are still good, but not enough to
re-do the whole car!).
S'incerely,
David Dewey
Joel Stensberg
My apologies to Mr. Dabney,
Somehow the little '>' got blipt out. However, if you have gotten good
results with any acrylics - you have my respect.
Joel
rob davis
I may be a freak of nature, but I have several Accuflexed models (even
using the old 'flex) that look as good as my Accupaint or Scalecaot
models. I am a very fussy painter and rivet counter, so I am not talking
about dip jobs here.
I have enver had Accuflex run, especially under the masking tape.
The issue with htese paints is not paint quality, it is retraining the
user. If you have Accuflex run on you, then you are shooting WAy TOO
MUCH paint at a time. Back it off and go with very thin coates. It took
me over 35 minutes to piant a B&M GP-7 blue. The result is stunning, and
I didn;t choke on the vapors.
Go with low pressue and a restricted paint flow and don't over-thin the
stuff. I love it.
Rob
rob davis
I may be a freak of nature, but I have several Accuflexed models (even
using the old 'flex) that look as good as my Accupaint or Scalecaot
models. I am a very fussy painter and rivet counter, so I am not talking
about dip jobs here.
The issue with these paints is not paint quality, it is retraining the
user. If you have Accuflex run on you, then you are shooting WAy TOO
MUCH paint at a time. Back it off and go with very thin coats. It took
me over 35 minutes to piant a B&M GP-7 blue. The result is stunning, and
I didn't choke on the vapors.
I have never had Accuflex run, especially under the masking tape. Go
andrew harmantas
Rob, while you may not have choked on the vapors, you (and anyone else
who sprays *any* kind of paint, should avoid breathing the spray mist,
as it contains microscopic particles of pigment, most of which don't do
your system any good. The big advantage with spraying these acrylics is
that the solvent, or vehicle, is far lass toxic than other model
paints.
My experience is mixed with these paints, but confirms your suggestions
that if the stuff runs, then one is spraying too much paint in one
spot. I've also found that I had to increase the pressure a bit than
what I was used to with Floquil or Scalecoat. That helped get a
smoother initial application.
@mail.noord.bart.nl
In <32c70bf5.1241579@news>, am...@acpub.duke.edu (AML) writes:
>Joel Stensberg <jin...@netnet.net> wrote:
>
>[Big snip of great post]
>
>>The sad part is all the environmental extremist activists have got laws
>>past eventually outlawing solvent-based paints so we don't have a lot of
>>choice but learn how to use this urine. So buy 'em, hoard 'em and
>>treasure 'em while you can, because soon they will all be gone. We know
>>what the future is....
>
>NMRA Life #1735;TCA #78-12540
>Durham, NC
>
I use Tamiya paints almost exclusively. They can be thinned 1:5 with rubbing
alcohol and spray very well.
Accuflex disintegrates when thinned with rubbing alcohol! So be warned.
Maarten Vis
Jonathan O'Connor
You don't think that having lungs in CSX blue, yellow, and grey wouldn't
be neato? How about N&W tuscan, dark blue, and black? One set of lungs to
cover all of N&W's paint schemes! Wow! J O'C
mark miller
This sounds fine, but the Accuflex brochure and bottle say to use higher pressure (28-28 lbs)
than non-water base paint. It also says that Accuflex is ready to airbush eihout any thinning.
Comments?
Mark Miller
Dave Nelson
rob davis wrote:
> The issue with these paints is not paint quality, it is retraining the
> user.
Which reminds me, I've been meaning to ask how one strips off
these new acrylic paints - same old way as lacquers, some other
way, or not at all?
Dave Nelson
Chris R. Toth
On Thu, 02 Jan 1997 13:46:34 -0500, rob davis <r...@injersey.com>
wrote:
>I may be a freak of nature, but I have several Accuflexed models (even
>using the old 'flex) that look as good as my Accupaint or Scalecaot
>models. I am a very fussy painter and rivet counter, so I am not talking
>about dip jobs here.
Well, you're not the only one, Rob, as I have had very good results
with the old Accu-Flex, despite its inconsistancy. I know use the new
Badger Model-Flex paints, which are everything Accu-Flex was supposed
to be and more. The results with this paint are far superior to any
of the petroleum based paints.
>I have enver had Accuflex run, especially under the masking tape.
I won't say I never have, but when I did it was do to my putting the
paint on a bit too heavy or the tape wasn't snuggly set against the
surface of the model. That same thing can and will happen just as
easily with any paint, water or petroleum based.
>The issue with htese paints is not paint quality, it is retraining the
>user. If you have Accuflex run on you, then you are shooting WAy TOO
>MUCH paint at a time. Back it off and go with very thin coates. It took
>me over 35 minutes to piant a B&M GP-7 blue. The result is stunning, and
>I didn;t choke on the vapors.
I totally agree. The main thing in getting good results with any of
these acrylics is to LEARN how to use them properly. That is not
really hard to do, it's just different from painting with the
petroleum based paints. The resulting finishes that can be obtained
by using the acrylics are worth every bit of time spent learning how
to use them properly.
>Go with low pressue and a restricted paint flow and don't over-thin the
>stuff. I love it.
I have had excellent results with Model-Flex (and the old Accu-Flex
for that matter) at both high and low pressures. The only difference
in my experiences in using different pressures is the amount of paint
flow needed and how far away from the model you need to be.
Chris R. Toth
ct...@ohio.net
The Thoroughbred Home Page
http://www.ohio.net/~ctoth/index.html
RailNews Magazine -- NS and W&LE columnist
Chris R. Toth
On Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:48:54 GMT, mil...@apollo.hp.com (mark miller)
wrote:
>This sounds fine, but the Accuflex brochure and bottle say to use higher pressure (28-28 lbs)
>than non-water base paint. It also says that Accuflex is ready to airbush eihout any thinning.
>Comments?
When I still used Accu-Flex before the release of the much better
Badger Model-Flex, I used an old compressor that had to struggle to
put out a maximum of 20psi. Despite the low pressure, I always got
excellent results.
As for thinning, I never thin the paint unless it is necessary. With
the inconsistencies that are common with Accu-Flex, many times I found
that I was forced to thin the paint in order to get it to spray. I
added a drop of water at a time to the paint bottle until the paint
was thinned enough to spray through an airbrush. I say a drop of
water at a time because this stuff thins very quickly and it is easy
to get it too thin if you're not careful.
The new Badger Model-Flex colors aren't inconsistent like the
Accu-Flex, so I use those straight from the bottle. If used properly,
this paint will far outlast a bottle of petroleum based paint that has
been thinned.
Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions about these
paints.
Rob Davis
Chris-
You made an excellent point I rarely see in this debate. Accu-flex, when
used properly, will paint far more models than a similar amount of
pet-based paint. It is VERY economical when you look at the square-inch
per jar coverage figures.
Rob
Jack Curry
Dave Nelson wrote:
>
> rob davis wrote:
>
> > user.
>
> these new acrylic paints - same old way as lacquers, some other
> way, or not at all?
>
> Dave Nelson
Use a STRONG household cleaner. ACCUFLEX recommened 409 but I used
Simple Green. Let it soak for a long time then scrub with a tooth
brush. It will come 98% clean.
Jack
ernf...@primenet.com
In <32cf5334...@news.ohio.net>, ct...@ohio.net (Chris R. Toth) writes:
>
>Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions about these
>paints.
>
I have used some Accuflex with generally favorable results as far as application.
My bad results were the result of off colors.
My real question is how do you clean up the airbrush? I resort to lacquer thinner
and even then I have to disassemble the gun. I don't have to do nearly as much
with the solvent based paints.
tvond...@aol.com
In article <32CD98...@airmail.net>, Jack Curry <jcu...@airmail.net>
writes:
>Which reminds me, I've been meaning to ask how one strips off
>> these new acrylic paints
>>
>> Dave Nelson
>
>
>Use a STRONG household cleaner. ACCUFLEX recommened 409 but I used
>Simple Green. Let it soak for a long time then scrub with a tooth
>brush. It will come 98% clean.
>Jack
I've not used the reformulated Accuflex nka Modelflex. However, when I
used the first generation of Accuflex I had to strip one model to repaint
it and had a very easy job by following what was then the manufacturer's
recommendation: Soaking in very hot water with a mild detergent (I used
dish soap) and then scrub with a tooth brush.
Everything came off. Now that was on a freshly laid coat of paint not more
than two days old.
I haven't had any problems with Accuflex but then I followed the
manfacturer's recommendations -- no thinning, low pressure and apply
numerous thin coats. My only problem was paint drying in the nozzle
because I was too cheap to buy the retarder.
Tom.
Chris R. Toth
On 3 Jan 1997 18:20:02 -0700, ernf...@primenet.com wrote:
>My real question is how do you clean up the airbrush? I resort to lacquer thinner
>and even then I have to disassemble the gun. I don't have to do nearly as much
>with the solvent based paints.
I have always used water with a drop or two of laudry or dishwashing
soap. Once in a while I will disassemble the gun to make sure it is
totally clean. The new Model-Flex is much better than the Accu-Flex
and doesn't cause as much build up.
BTW, Badger now offers an airbrush cleaner as well.
Chris R. Toth
On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 11:44:29 -0600, Joel Stensberg <jin...@netnet.net>
wrote:
>All the acrylic paints I have used I would be
>ashamed to sell to one of my customers. They don't cover for crap, when
>they finally do, they are so thick they cover the detail.
Then you need to spend a little more time learning to use the acrylics
properly. Once you do, you will find that if you apply them in
multiple LIGHT coats the resulting finish will be excellent and not
thick at all.
>They run under the masking tape no matter what technique you use.
Again, it's a matter of learning how to spray them in light coats. If
you do so and take care to make sure the tape is applied tightly to
the surface of the model you won't have any problem. Spraying away
from the taped edge is also a good tip.
>They brush even worse for touchup.
You will have to apply them in multiple coats with a brush, just like
with an airbrush. But at least they don't dry quickly and leave a
build-up on your brush that comes off on your model like petroleum
based paints.
>Because they are water-based you can't even spray on
>decal paper touchup either.
>The darker colors sometimes will produce
>acceptable results, but people don't plunk their hard-earned money for
>'acceptable results.' I started a thread on this a month or so ago and
>I got a lot of emails telling me to be patient and they acrylics will
>'catch up soon.' I'll tell you what, most customers don't care if their
>paint job is environmentally friendly - all they care is that it looks
>good. They don't want a lousy job and me to tell them that the next one
>I do (if there is a next one) will be better because the paints are
>catching up soon. I have yet to see any good looking paint job with
>acrylic paints - period. Or, a least one that will match the Floquil,
>Scalecoat or other solvent paints.
Well, I have done custom building and painting work for people for 18
years now and I swear by the acrylics. I am VERY pick when it comes
to the quality of my modeling and I use whatever techniques give me
the best results. And for me, without a doubt the acrylics blow the
petroleum based paints away. I wouldn't consider going back to the
petroleum based paints again at all.
>The sad part is all the environmental extremist activists have got laws
>past eventually outlawing solvent-based paints so we don't have a lot of
>choice but learn how to use this urine. So buy 'em, hoard 'em and
>treasure 'em while you can, because soon they will all be gone. We know
>what the future is....
Want to buy all of my old Floquil and Scalecoat?
al...@sprynet.com
mil...@apollo.hp.com (mark miller) wrote:
>This sounds fine, but the Accuflex brochure and bottle say to use higher pressure (28-28 lbs)
>than non-water base paint. It also says that Accuflex is ready to airbush eihout any thinning.
>Comments?
>Mark Miller
YEAH! That a *JOKE*!
Interesting to see a few modelers have had success with Accu-Flex. I
won't change my opinion though, that it is, as far as a member of the
acrylic model paint family, at or near the bottom of the quality list.
I spray my acrylic jobs at 40-45 psi and my "secret" top coat of
medium enamal reducer at about 30 psi.
The comments about acrylics being economical??? Strange!!
I find it very strange that modelers would spend $75 - $100 for a
diesel model, another $10 - $20 for detailing components, decaling,
kadee's, etc, etc, then gripe cause he only gets one or two paint jobs
out of a $3.00 jar of model paint!
jim...@aol.com
In article <32cf5334...@news.ohio.net>, ct...@ohio.net (Chris R.
Toth) writes:
>As for thinning, I never thin the paint unless it is necessary. With
>the inconsistencies that are common with Accu-Flex, many times I found
>that I was forced to thin the paint in order to get it to spray. I
>added a drop of water at a time to the paint bottle until the paint
>was thinned enough to spray through an airbrush. I say a drop of
>water at a time because this stuff thins very quickly and it is easy
>to get it too thin if you're not careful.
>
Chris, help me out here. I have not tried any of the water based model
paints but have used (around the house) water based house and craft paint
(latex). One of the admonitions of said paint is to "*not thin with
water*". They recomend using a latex thinner which is made for these
paints. Does not Accu-Flex and the new Badger Model-Flex market a thinner
specificly for their paints? The problem with useing water (I have been
led to believe) is it weakens the paint and it will not bind correctly.
You seem to have experience using these paints so I would appreciate your
imput.
PS: Great thread!
>
>
Good Old Jim
I used to cry 'cause I had no shoes, until I met a man who had no feet!
Chris R. Toth
On 4 Jan 1997 21:29:27 GMT, jim...@aol.com wrote:
>Chris, help me out here. I have not tried any of the water based model
>paints but have used (around the house) water based house and craft paint
>(latex). One of the admonitions of said paint is to "*not thin with
>water*". They recomend using a latex thinner which is made for these
>paints. Does not Accu-Flex and the new Badger Model-Flex market a thinner
>specificly for their paints? The problem with useing water (I have been
>led to believe) is it weakens the paint and it will not bind correctly.
>You seem to have experience using these paints so I would appreciate your
>imput.
Hi Jim,
Neither Accu-Flex or Badger Model-Flex offers a thinner, since the
paints are designed to be painted straight out of he bottle
un-thinned. With the new Badger Model-Flex that isn't a problem as
the paint is stable and sprays fine right out of the bottle. The
Accu-Flex, however, has never been as stable and some of it comes too
thick for spraying straight from the bottle and thus needs a little
thinner. I have always used the "add a drop of water until sprayable"
technique and have never had any problems with that in my results.
Keep in mind, though, use the new Model-Flex and save yourself all the
inconsistency headaches that are common with Accu-Flex.
Andy Harman
rob davis <r...@injersey.com> wrote:
>I may be a freak of nature, but I have several Accuflexed models (even
>using the old 'flex) that look as good as my Accupaint or Scalecaot
>models. I am a very fussy painter and rivet counter, so I am not talking
>about dip jobs here.
Well you should have seen the paint job on the CP Rail SD40-2 that
Accuflex creator Greg Konrad exhibited at Chicago last year! It was
nothing short of awful, with a finish about as smooth as cocoanut
shells, and he said he considered it "ok, considering where its been".
OK? When I spend 100 hours detailing a model, an "ok" that looks
worse than Bachmanns infamous dip-tank isn't going to cut it.
>The issue with htese paints is not paint quality, it is retraining the
>user. If you have Accuflex run on you, then you are shooting WAy TOO
>MUCH paint at a time.
No, the issue is QUALITY CONTROL. Accuflex has little or none, the
other acrylic brands have done much better. This "retraining"
business has been way overplayed, and even Badger and MRing editor
Randy Lee were hyping on how you needed to "learn to use it right".
I watched Konrad paint for 15 minutes and there wasn't anything
special about what he was doing. He just happened to have a good
batch of the stuff <g>. If A-F is so good, then why did Badger dump
the line, and put out a new paint that by all reports is much superior
in terms of consistency?
I simply don't buy that acrylic paints require a whole new philosophy
to airbrush. If anything, the GOOD acrylic paints are more forgiving
than laquers and enamels. I have shot PollyScale under terrible
conditions and gotten good results, and sometimes I think I could even
get an "ok" (by Konrad standards) paint job by dunking a shell in
Pollyscale. There is no magic trick to it. Go back over the past
two years on the net and you will see the whole story of Accuflex and
the silliness that was put out in defense of the stuff, and how "user
error" became the battle cry of people with an interest in the
product, at least until the main player (Badger) put it out at
curbside for the trash man to pick up.
Getting a good paint job with A-F is simply a roll of the dice. If
you haven't rolled "snake eyes" yet, well good for you.
Andy
C.L.Zeni
Welcome to Accuflexers Anonymous. Stand up and give us your name
please.
Hello, my name is Zeni, and .... I like Accuflex paints, even the old
stuff.
Very good Mr. Zeni, there's nothing to be ashamed of. We'll have you
back to blowing good ol' Floquil through that Paasche of yours in no
time, them you'll get your wife and kids back, your house, and be named
General Manager of your company. Just hang with our program....
--
Craig Zeni - clz...@earthlink.net
-- SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILROAD - Through The Heart of The South --
Chris R. Toth
On Sat, 04 Jan 1997 21:41:17 GMT, aha...@one.net (Andy Harman) wrote:
>No, the issue is QUALITY CONTROL. Accuflex has little or none, the
>other acrylic brands have done much better.
I will definately agree with that. The Accu-Flex paints were and
still are inconsistent. The maker of Accu-Flex has tried to blame
numerous things as to why they are that way, including that they
needed to be bottled in glass. When Testors took over the line they
started bottling the paint in glass jars, but it is just as
inconsistent as before. Most of it is useable, but it will take some
fiddling to get it to spray just right. That's why I gladly use the
new Badger Model-Flex paints, which don't have the inconsistency
problems.
>I simply don't buy that acrylic paints require a whole new philosophy
>to airbrush. If anything, the GOOD acrylic paints are more forgiving
>than laquers and enamels. I have shot PollyScale under terrible
>conditions and gotten good results, and sometimes I think I could even
>get an "ok" (by Konrad standards) paint job by dunking a shell in
>Pollyscale. There is no magic trick to it. Go back over the past
>two years on the net and you will see the whole story of Accuflex and
>the silliness that was put out in defense of the stuff, and how "user
>error" became the battle cry of people with an interest in the
>product, at least until the main player (Badger) put it out at
>curbside for the trash man to pick up.
Sorry Andy, but I don't agree with you on the acrylics not needing a
different painting technique. If you try to apply them in the same
way that you do with petroleum based paints you are going to have
problems. The biggest difference is that you MUST apply the acrylics
in multiple light coats, rather than one or two coats like with the
petroleum paints. This is the most common problem I have found when
talking with people who are having problems using acrylics. It takes
longer to paint a model with acrylics when done right, but the results
are definately worth the extra time and the learning to use them
right.
Andy Harman
ct...@ohio.net (Chris R. Toth) wrote:
>Sorry Andy, but I don't agree with you on the acrylics not needing a
>different painting technique. If you try to apply them in the same
>way that you do with petroleum based paints you are going to have
>problems. The biggest difference is that you MUST apply the acrylics
>in multiple light coats, rather than one or two coats like with the
>petroleum paints.
My experience with PollyScale has been that it's pretty
straightforward and forgiving, and not all that unlike Floquil. I
thinned the stuff with PollyS airbrush thinner though, not water. It
dries almost instantly (just like regular Floquil).
My point is that the Accuflex hype crew was blaming painting technique
for such things as the paint blistering off mysteriously while
applying the 3rd coat, or going on like sandpaper. Konrad told me the
sandpaper thing was caused by "not enough paint". That goes
completely against the "multiple thin coats" approach. I believe that
the early recommendation was to use a higher pressure for A-F than for
solvent-based paints... when I quoted this in the newsgroup last year
I got blasted by someone who said I was an idiot if I thought I could
spray any paint at 35-40 psi, that was obviously my problem, etc.
When you start hearing vehement, contradictory statements blaming
technique, chances are that BOTH are wrong, and it's the paint that is
the culprit. Inconsistency is about as nice a word as I can use.
Time bomb or Russian Roulette is closer to the truth.
The bottom line is regardless of technique, Accuflex is crap. If it
was such good stuff, Badger would still be selling it. MR and others
who pushed the stuff (for a while there it seemed like every modeling
article mentioned using Accuflex) have tiptoed away from the issue.
It caused a lot of grief just because no one would admit that there
were problems, and then of course they came out with "new formula" so
that all the Johnny-come-lately folks would jump in for another
go-round with the stuff.
I'm really burned about this because I watched friends - and I mean
friends who really LIKED Accuflex and tried to talk me into using it -
got burned big time on bad batches, in one case a model with 100 hours
of work in it that fell apart in the recommended stripping solution.
I certainly agree that the Accuflex problems do not spell an
indictment of acrylics as a whole. While I still prefer to use
Scalecoat II and Floquil for my more valuable projects, I continue to
experiment with Modelflex and Pollyscale. When I am comfortable
enough with it, I may start using it on the more serious stuff. I
have yet to hear of any "silly putty" experiences with the other
acrylic brands.
Andy
al...@sprynet.com
aha...@one.net (Andy Harman) wrote:
>Well you should have seen the paint job on the CP Rail SD40-2 that
>Accuflex creator Greg Konrad exhibited at Chicago last year! It was
>nothing short of awful, with a finish about as smooth as cocoanut
>shells, and he said he considered it "ok, considering where its been".
Sounds nice ! ;-}
>No, the issue is QUALITY CONTROL. Accuflex has little or none, the
>other acrylic brands have done much better. This "retraining"
>business has been way overplayed, and even Badger and MRing editor
>Randy Lee were hyping on how you needed to "learn to use it right".
>I watched Konrad paint for 15 minutes and there wasn't anything
>special about what he was doing.
>Andy
BRAVO Andy! Couldn't have expressed it better. Anybody who talks
about "special" techniques or retraining when it comes to spraying
acrylics is a wee-bit touched in the head in my opinion. Seems to me
if some of these modelers are having this much trouble getting better
than, or at the very least as good as factory jobs, maybe they should
stick to purchasing of the shelf models. Getting back to the core of
the original post, ........ Accu-Flex is a VERY poor product .....
period! Getting "good" jars of AF in a hit and miss pattern is
totally unacceptable, and I can't believe anybody would settle for
this.
GColl17261
Ive just read 19 posts on Acccuflex paint and have come to the conclusion
I know less now than before I read this.Anyhow if you paint outdoors whats
the advantages associated with any water based paint vs oil based?
GColl17261
F. DABNEY
Joel Stensberg (jin...@netnet.net) wrote:
: My apologies to Mr. Dabney,
No problem.
: Somehow the little '>' got blipt out. However, if you have gotten good
: results with any acrylics - you have my respect.
If you don't like getting attributions mixed up, don't post in the first
place! I've had my name attached to someone else's point more than one
time, as I have done to others as well. I've learned to live with it.
Anyway, my point was that I have had perfectly acceptable results using
AccuFlex, and I especially like being able to go from raw model to decals
in half an hour or so per color. No, it isn't perfect, it has bugs etc.
But I've had to throw away a lot of paint jobs done with Floquil and a
few with Scalecoat. I've gotten better with all and yet I also still
make mistakes with all of them.
Fred D.
Watching the action from BNSF MP 1112, El Paso sub
Chris R. Toth
The acrylics will give a MUCH better finish overall than petroleum
based paints, which also makes decaling much easier. The paints are
also much easier to clean up and if you make a mistake while painting
you can take the model to the sink and wash the paint off in hot
water.
Steve Cizek
C.L.Zeni wrote:
> I bought custom decals from Rail Graphics. OUTSTANDING product.
I'll second Craig's recommendation of Rail Graphics custom decals.
I have done a ton of cars with them and gotten very good results.
I did all of my own artwork using CorelDraw and just provided a floppy
with the data needed for the decals and got great results.
Steve Cizek
Marquette & Grand Marais Railroad
steve...@lucent.com
Anders Svensson
GColl17261 wrote:
>
> Ive just read 19 posts on Acccuflex paint and have come to the conclusion
> I know less now than before I read this.Anyhow if you paint outdoors whats
> the advantages associated with any water based paint vs oil based?
There will be less pollution (release of aromatic carbon hydroxids as an
example). Painting outside will not make any difference to the
athmosphere, would it ? ;-)
From a environmental point of view it may even be better to paint with
solvent based paints indoors. Fumes can be trapped before vented to the
athmosphere and reused, thats how the big boys must do in their
paintshops.
But-
Dont worry too much, guys. Try to save on using gasoline on your lawn
mowers, dont use so much lighting fluid to get barbeques going, and you
will better the global environmental equation far more than by
restraining your use of solvent based hobby paints. Paint happily on.
Eventually solvent based paint will be banned out of business - and that
will be that. Model railroaders are certainly not the big culprits
here...
BTW - wich acrylics do work good ?
--
Anders Svensson, environmental extremist...
al...@sprynet.com
am...@acpub.duke.edu (AML) wrote:
>That may be your opinion based on your personal experiences but it is far from
>a universal truth. I'll stack my Scalecoat and auto lacquer finishes against
>any acrylic based paint job you can produce. During the almost 20 years I did
>custom painting, for mail order customers, a few for importers, and my own
>collection. I guess I have painted over 700 models, 95% brass and 95%
>locomotives. Tried all sorts of stuff originally starting with 410M in the
>50s, but settled on Scalecoat and lacquer.
>If you prefer acrlylic, fine, but don't be so naive as to believe they will
>out-do solvent paints.
Does your arm get pretty sore patting yourself on the back, or after
20yrs. are you used to it?
Chris R. Toth
On Mon, 06 Jan 1997 22:18:42 GMT, am...@acpub.duke.edu (AML) wrote:
>That may be your opinion based on your personal experiences but it is far from
>a universal truth. I'll stack my Scalecoat and auto lacquer finishes against
>any acrylic based paint job you can produce. During the almost 20 years I did
>custom painting, for mail order customers, a few for importers, and my own
>collection. I guess I have painted over 700 models, 95% brass and 95%
>locomotives. Tried all sorts of stuff originally starting with 410M in the
>50s, but settled on Scalecoat and lacquer.
Yes, that is my personal opinion based on 18+ years of doing custom
building and painting work for people all over the country. I have
also tried and used the various model paints, auto acrylics and
lacquers over the years. None of those ever came close to
*consistently* matching the results I have obtained with the Badger
water based acrylics.
>If you prefer acrlylic, fine, but don't be so naive as to believe they will
>out-do solvent paints.
I'm not being naive at all, as my results for the past 4+ years of
using the Badger acrylics have long since proven they out-do the
solvent paints.
>The hard gloss finish of Scalecoat and the hard semi and gloss finmish of
>lacquer cannot be beat for a base upon which to decal.
I disagree. The semi-gloss or gloss finishes of the Badger acrylic
paints provide a better surface for decaling than ANY of the solvent
paints that I have ever used. The decals set much faster and easier,
cutting in half the time I spend decaling a model. The same couldn't
be said for the best of the hi-gloss solvent finishes I have used.
Again, these are my opinions, but they are opinions that I base on
proven results time after time. I am very picky when it comes to the
quality of my models and their paint jobs, so for me the only way to
achieve a finish that meets my standards is by using the Badger
acrylics.
Rob Davis
al...@sprynet.com wrote:
> Anybody who talks
> about "special" techniques or retraining when it comes to spraying
> acrylics is a wee-bit touched in the head in my opinion.
In my opinion, Aloco, I guess it is good to be touched. I made the
effort to learn how to use these new paints. In fact, I had Accuflex in
my brush before it was out on the market and learned how to spray way
back then.
My "touched" state has resulted in no bad Accuflex paint jobs. Not one.
Even with custom mixes. There are CP SD-40-2's, D&H GP-38's, C&C
44-Tonners, B&M Geeps ect.... that all prove that if you take the time
to learn what to do with them, you will get a superior finish.
Rob
C.L.Zeni
Those who say that the paint must match their painting technique (as
has been implied in places along this thread) are, if I may be blunt,
being a bit pig-headed. I was a committed Scalecoat and Scalecoat II
user until the Badger stuff appeared. I tried it and was superbly
pleased with the ease of painting, quality of finish and especially the
speed of the stuff. I converted to it completely for my plastic
modelling. The new acrylics are unbeatable. But they are like anything
new - you GOTTA learn to use them. Otherwise, ditch that PC and pull
out the old Underwood manual typewriter. If one decides up front it's a
bad product and won't work, then it won't.
On the other hand, I am a bit of a reactionary and continue to use
Scalecoat for brass if I can get the color I want. I prefer to be able
to bake the paint on.
And I know that there are those who complain about the Accu-sludge
effect, but I KNOW I'm not the only one that recalls that Scalecoat will
go to glop in the bottle. In _my_ experience (get out the asbestos BVDs
here) I've lost MORE Scalecoat to gloppage than Accuflex. And neither
paint in that condition sprays worth a damn.
AML
"C.L.Zeni" <clz...@NOSPAMearthlink.net> wrote:
>And I know that there are those who complain about the Accu-sludge
>effect, but I KNOW I'm not the only one that recalls that Scalecoat will
>go to glop in the bottle. In _my_ experience (get out the asbestos BVDs
>here) I've lost MORE Scalecoat to gloppage than Accuflex. And neither
>paint in that condition sprays worth a damn.
Craig:
I agree 100%. Once a bottle of Scalecoat is opened, its shelf life is suspect.
Your use of the term "glop", is quite accurate, It seems to vary with the
color. But, I have some Scalecoat aluminum and silver, and a few other colors,
that were opened over 6 - 7 years ago, are probably half empty or full,
depending on one's perspective, are are quite useable still. I have never
understoof this phenomonon. I have Floquil over 30 years old that is still
good.
Of course, I have cans and bottles of auto lacquer that are over 20 years old
too and they are still quite useable.
BTW, you ever going to be able to stop by? <G> I'm only 5 minutes off of I-85
Regards,
Ray Hobin,
Durham, NC
EnviroTaz
Personally I like Accuflex as well. I think that aml9 got his
panties in a wad when you said that acrylics were better than lacquers. I
think that Accuflex has got Scalecoat beat, and that is not an opinion
based on naivity. I have used both, and as an Environmental Scientist I
think that acrylics are better. Scalecoat can melt the plastic shells via
the toluene solvent. Toluene, by the way, is a carcinogen. I usually
paint plastic models, and the protective coat that is required, along with
the thickness of the paint, make it difficult to produce a thin paint job.
However, lacquer paints may be better for painting brass, I do not know.
So Aml9 can rant and rave about how wonderful lacquer paints are, and
we can all visit him in the Oncology ward. Not to mention the amount of
harmful, unregulated, solvents that are put into our air and water by us
hobbiests. Don't get me wrong, I am not a raging Environmentalist, but
the frivolous uses of organic solvents will eventually be curbed the EPA.
Might as well get used to it now.
Oh, and on a personal note....Aml9 no one cares about your 20 years
painting models. Like they say, if you are good, other people will blow
your horn, you won't have to. :o Hope you didn't get hurt patting
yourself on the back. ;)
Air badger
Dear sir,
Happen to see your e-mail and would like to see if your willing to try
MODELFLEX
which comes in a plastic jar. You will find it's not what jar you use to
put the paint in that counts (even though this bottle won't break if
dropped),but how good you make the paint.
Matthew J. Frahm
aha...@one.net (Andy Harman) writes:
>"R Watkins" <watk...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>Be sure to purchase Accuflex in the glass bottle and not the plastic ones.
>>Testers now bottles Accuflex in glass as intended. Badger use to distribute
>>it in plastic bottles which was a mistake on their part. If you tried to
>>use Accuflex in the plastic bottles give another shot from the Testers
>>bottle and see if works better for you.
>So now its the jars.... <yawn> Then why are users of the new Badger
>ModelFlex (in the same plastic jars) reporting almost universal
>success, while problems with Accuflex (in any jar) continue to be
>reported?
It doesn't make any sense unless:
a. the jars just weren't sealing.
b. the jars were chemically reacting with the paint forming a new
substance
c. the jars were a catalyst causing the paint to form into a new
substance.
All of these are verifiable to be either true or untrue.
>Really. Isn't it about time to admit that the quality control on the
>stuff was bad, was bad before that, and still is bad?
I haven't even used the stuff. These excuses don't seem to make sense.
--
Matthew J. Frahm____________________________mailto:mfr...@visi.com
Stillwater, Minnesota / Winona, Minnesota http://www.visi.com/~mfrahm/
Andy Harman
"R Watkins" <watk...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Be sure to purchase Accuflex in the glass bottle and not the plastic ones.
>Testers now bottles Accuflex in glass as intended. Badger use to distribute
>it in plastic bottles which was a mistake on their part. If you tried to
>use Accuflex in the plastic bottles give another shot from the Testers
>bottle and see if works better for you.
So now its the jars.... <yawn> Then why are users of the new Badger
ModelFlex (in the same plastic jars) reporting almost universal
success, while problems with Accuflex (in any jar) continue to be
reported?
Really. Isn't it about time to admit that the quality control on the
stuff was bad, was bad before that, and still is bad?
Andy
Joseph P.
On 8 Jan 1997, Matthew J. Frahm wrote:
> >So now its the jars.... <yawn> Then why are users of the new Badger
> >ModelFlex (in the same plastic jars) reporting almost universal
> >success, while problems with Accuflex (in any jar) continue to be
> >reported?
>
> It doesn't make any sense unless:
> a. the jars just weren't sealing.
> b. the jars were chemically reacting with the paint forming a new
> substance
> c. the jars were a catalyst causing the paint to form into a new
> substance.
You're missing the obvious one, there was a problem with the paint
when it first came out back when the line was sold in one type of bottle.
The problem with the paint was corrected and they now pack the stuff in
the other type of bottle so you can tell the difference. That's how I
have heard it explained, and I have no idea if it's true.
Personally I'll just stick with Floquil until the EPA comes
banging on my door with ATF back up.
- Joseph
_____,,;;;`; ;';;;,,_____
,~( ) , )~~\| Jos...@Primenet.Com |/~~( , ( )~;
' / / --`--, Picture Rocks, Arizona .--'-- \ \ `
/ \ | ' ` | / \
-=:=- "God, grant that I may go to a heaven filled with horses" -=:=-
Andy Harman
"C.L.Zeni" <clz...@NOSPAMearthlink.net> wrote:
>And I know that there are those who complain about the Accu-sludge
>effect, but I KNOW I'm not the only one that recalls that Scalecoat will
>go to glop in the bottle. In _my_ experience (get out the asbestos BVDs
>here) I've lost MORE Scalecoat to gloppage than Accuflex. And neither
>paint in that condition sprays worth a damn.
Scalecoat, Floquil, Testors, and most any paint you can probably name
will eventually glop up in the bottle, especially as the stuff is
thinned and opened up repeatedly, and there becomes more airspace in
the bottle. Accuflex is the only paint I've seen that quite often
comes "pre-glopped" from the factory.
And glopped paint is a throwaway, no matter whose paint it is. Nobody
with any sense (or at least any experience) would attempt to airbrush
with paint the consistency of silly putty. The Accuflex blowups I
described happend WITHOUT WARNING to experienced Accuflex users, in
fact guys who sounded a lot like you guys in touting the stuff until
it happened to them. With new, fresh paint that seemed to be flowing
ok, a reaction occurred on the 2nd or 3rd coat that caused the surface
to blister up and krinkle as if it had been hit with a paint stripper.
I have never seen any airbrush technique, or lack thereof, that can
produce this "effect". Without warning. Dunking the shell in a quart
of the stuff would not do this.
Once again, I have no reason to knock any other brand of acrylic
paint, although I still prefer to use Scalecoat II whenever possible.
Bernie is online now... if you see this, perhaps you would like to
describe your Accuflex experience firsthand, including the experience
with the "suggested stripping formula".
Andy
Matthew J. Frahm
"Joseph P." <jos...@primenet.com> writes:
>On 8 Jan 1997, Matthew J. Frahm wrote:
>> >So now its the jars.... <yawn> Then why are users of the new Badger
>> >ModelFlex (in the same plastic jars) reporting almost universal
>> >success, while problems with Accuflex (in any jar) continue to be
>> >reported?
>>
>> It doesn't make any sense unless:
>> a. the jars just weren't sealing.
>> b. the jars were chemically reacting with the paint forming a new
>> substance
>> c. the jars were a catalyst causing the paint to form into a new
>> substance.
> You're missing the obvious one, there was a problem with the paint
>when it first came out back when the line was sold in one type of bottle.
>The problem with the paint was corrected and they now pack the stuff in
>the other type of bottle so you can tell the difference. That's how I
>have heard it explained, and I have no idea if it's true.
Could be true. :)
(of course the bottle is still independent of the quality)
> Personally I'll just stick with Floquil until the EPA comes
>banging on my door with ATF back up.
I can see it now, a stand off with dio-sol and M16s.
F. DABNEY
The whole thing about paints is that no one will ever be convinced that
this or that brand is any good until they try it, and use it properly,
and like the results. If they don't like it, no argument will alter
that. The fact that one person has painted professionally for over 20
years does tell me that perhaps the person speaks with some basis in
experience, but on the other hand, I can't stand Floquil. I just don't
like it. It isn't that it doesn't work or they don't make the colors I
need or what not, I just don't like it. There is a fellow member of the
club who's been modeling as long as I have (since the mid 50's) and he
/does/ like Floquil and gets good results.
In recent years (long after 410m dropped out of the market) I have used
Scalecoat and Scalecoat II, SMP Accupaint and Accuflex, as well as Floquil.
For brass, I really do prefer Scalecoat. Once it's been baked on, you
aren't going to get it off again without a lot of work. The trouble I
have with it is that yellows and oranges just don't cover worth a hoot.
For one who paints a lot of Santa Fe "Yellowbonnet" engines, this is a
serious drawback. Baked Flowquil sticks pretty well and the yellows
cover better. We've already said "I don't like Floquil" so I won't
belabor that point.
None of the other finishes I've tried hold up under handling. I have had
Accuflex come off models that I cleaned with alcohol in an ultrasonic
cleaner in the most casual of handling, but other models have withstood
handling quite well.
I like Accuflex because it goes on easy, decals well, and is so quick.
But after the paint job is done, some models have shed paint so it's a
mixed bag. I have used Accupaint and like it, but again some colors just
don't cover. And so forth.
So, as I contemplate the brass engines I need to paint, they will
probably be painted with Scalecoat and baked. The plastic ones will
probably get Accuflex, unless I have a chance to try something else I
don't now have.
BTW- HOT soapy water and ammonia will remove Accuflex nicely.
One complaint I've seen and have about Accupaint is probably true of any
water-solvent paint: Masking tape which is under tension (around
compound curves, corners etc) will be loosened and lift if paint has a
chance to get the tape wet. This is not a problem wiht Floquil or
Scalecoat.
ONe last thing: All my airbrushes are external mix units- Binks "Wren"
and Paache "H". Accuflex's instructions stated at the outset that they
were best suited to internal mix brushes, and indeed I had a lot of
problems with having to keep the paint flying else the brush would gum
up. They later added a retarder to overcome this, I used it and things
have worked much better since.
Is it my favorite paint? Obviously not. But I have gotten some paint
jobs that are acceptable to me out of it. If I can get other acrylics in
the area (without having to special order them) I'll try them. Around
here, if it doesn't say "Floquil" on the bottle, I can't get it.
Marty Feldner
fda...@nmsu.edu (F. DABNEY) wrote:
>In recent years (long after 410m dropped out of the market) I have used
>Scalecoat and Scalecoat II, SMP Accupaint and Accuflex, as well as Floquil.
Thanks for the memory boost; I wonder how many readers even remember
410M paints?
That's all my father used in the fifties, when I was a kid....
Marty Feldner
Dennis and Kathy Golden
I can, Marty. Does that mean that you, Fred, and I are all getting old?
:-)
Den
F. DABNEY
: >In recent years (long after 410m dropped out of the market) I have used
: >Scalecoat and Scalecoat II, SMP Accupaint and Accuflex, as well as Floquil.
: Thanks for the memory boost; I wonder how many readers even remember
: 410M paints?
I still have a perfectly usable bottle of Box Car Green 410m. I remember
Roundhouse also made, or at least labeled the stuff as well. My first
"air brush" was one of those things you used by blowing into one end- I
don't know how many model airplanes I did with it, (if you were lucky, it
was external mix....) then a thing that plugged into the exhaust of a
vacuum cleaner.
It's a miracle I'm still alive! You have any idea what is /in/ 410m? I
learned MEK would thin it for spraying and cleaning.
Andy Harman
fel...@warwick.net (Marty Feldner) wrote:
>Thanks for the memory boost; I wonder how many readers even remember
>410M paints?
I remember my dad having some paint with the "Roundhouse" MDC label.
It must have been pure laquer, as I don't remember ever encountering a
more potent laquer smell. Gives me a headache just to think about it.
I once attempted to brush paint a plastic car with the stuff (I think
it was a Tyco tank car) and that was the end of the car.
Andy
Jim Teese
Does anyone remember the "House of Three Rs" paint from 30 or so years
ago? It was made up in northern Alabama - as I remember it was Sylacauga
- I used to fly up there when I was getting my four hours a month in at
Fort Benning. Seems to me it was the forerunner of Scalecoat. When the
guy who made it died (he was a disabled WWII vet) Bob Weaver (I think)
bought it from the estate. It was the first bake-on paint that would
pass a knife point scratch test.
Jim Teese MMR
AML
DWC...@prodigy.com (Jim Teese) wrote:
>Does anyone remember the "House of Three Rs" paint from 30 or so years
>ago? It was made up in northern Alabama - as I remember it was Sylacauga
>- I used to fly up there when I was getting my four hours a month in at
>Fort Benning. Seems to me it was the forerunner of Scalecoat.
House of Three Rs rings a bell and may have been the forrunner of Scalecoat.
But, I believe, it became Scalecoat before Weaver bought it. I do recall that
Scalecoat was first made in Alabama and the label indicated it contained lead.
>guy who made it died (he was a disabled WWII vet) Bob Weaver (I think)
>bought it from the estate. It was the first bake-on paint that would
>pass a knife point scratch test.
It sure did and probably because it originally contained lead.
Ray Hobin,
Durham, NC
F. DABNEY
Dennis and Kathy Golden (u100...@warwick.net) wrote:
: I can, Marty. Does that mean that you, Fred, and I are all getting old?
You, maybe. Me? Nahhhh...
Fred D.
rich
Andy Harman wrote:
>
>
> So now its the jars.... <yawn> Then why are users of the new Badger
> ModelFlex (in the same plastic jars) reporting almost universal
> success, while problems with Accuflex (in any jar) continue to be
> reported?
>
> stuff was bad, was bad before that, and still is bad?
>
> Andy
A big 10-4 on that Andy..for me, Accujunk..no way, no how..have tried
Modelflex, but not enough to formulate an opinion..Polly Scale, on the
other hand, has given me beautiful results on more then a few
occasions..the stuff handles like a dream, covers well, except for the
very light colors, and surprize!!! I don't have to take the airbrush
apart and clean it after every 3 triggers.. it may be the only product
that can replace good old Floquil..figures..it's made by the same
people..I did have some really good luck with Accujunk tho, I have to
admit..the stuff is spectacular when a .223 hits it at 500 yards...:)
rich
andrew harmantas
Stuart-Lundhall's 4-10-M, eh? Now *that* goes way back. It was
vinyl-acetate, and thoroughly non-user friendly, but as long as it was
fresh, it bushed on pretty well and sprayed even better. It tended to
separate pretty fast, and oxidise in the jar even faster, and the smell
reminded me of Bayonne on a hot summer day. It was difficult to
intermix colors, as they tended to congeal when mixed with another
color. Strange, huh? Later, Andrew Harmantas, watching the non-action
at C&O Milepost Zero,
Tom George
Rich wrote:
>A big 10-4 on that Andy..for me, Accujunk..no way, no how..have tried
>Modelflex, but not enough to formulate an opinion..Polly Scale, on the
>other hand, has given me beautiful results on more then a few
>occasions..the stuff handles like a dream, covers well, except for the
>very light colors, and surprize!!! I don't have to take the airbrush
>apart and clean it after every 3 triggers.. it may be the only product
>that can replace good old Floquil..figures..it's made by the same
>people..I did have some really good luck with Accujunk tho, I have to
>admit..the stuff is spectacular when a .223 hits it at 500 yards...:)
>rich
Floquil's Polyscale paint is great. I've been using it for a while now
and have had exellent results with it too. It also adhears really well
to "clean" brass. I sprayed a HOn3 D&RGW K-27 with a green boiler.
Masked it off in about 30 min with the 3M blue plastic tape, under
piping and details, then sprayed black. Not one speck of paint came off
with the mask removal, and a couple of pieces had to be yanked off with
pliers. I have found that the Testors High Flow nozzle works the best
in my Model Master. The finer nozzles still will get clogged after a
few minutes of spraying. It also dissolves with laquer thinner, which
makes cleaning the airbrush faster. My only complaint about the paint
is it that most all of the colors dry to a much different color than
when wet. Which is not a problem until you try and mix colors. Mixing
involves a lot of trial and error because you need to mix it, then paint
a sample and wait for it to dry, then compare and see if it is the color
you want. Ah....but the king of spectacular paint splats is still the
.220 swift :-)
Tom
David Ryujiro Olsen
Can you all tell me what kind of mixture you use for spraying
PollyScale? I've been told that the distilled water formula the bottle
says to use doesn't disolve the paint well enough. Someone told me to
use their Polly S airbrush thinner, which sort of defeats the purpose of
a water-based paint, but I don't mind that if that'll give me the best
results? I'd appreciate any advice you can give me. Thanks!
Dave Olsen
Steve Rosnick
On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:47:26 -0600, Tom George
<thomas....@den.mmc.com> wrote:
>
>Floquil's Polyscale paint is great. I've been using it for a while now
>and have had exellent results with it too. It also adhears really well
>to "clean" brass. I sprayed a HOn3 D&RGW K-27 with a green boiler.
>Masked it off in about 30 min with the 3M blue plastic tape, under
>piping and details, then sprayed black. Not one speck of paint came off
>with the mask removal, and a couple of pieces had to be yanked off with
>pliers. I have found that the Testors High Flow nozzle works the best
>in my Model Master. The finer nozzles still will get clogged after a
>few minutes of spraying. It also dissolves with laquer thinner, which
>makes cleaning the airbrush faster. My only complaint about the paint
>is it that most all of the colors dry to a much different color than
>when wet. Which is not a problem until you try and mix colors. Mixing
>involves a lot of trial and error because you need to mix it, then paint
>a sample and wait for it to dry, then compare and see if it is the color
>you want. Ah....but the king of spectacular paint splats is still the
>.220 swift :-)
>
lot. This is good paint. I spray the stuff straight from the bottle.
The only colrs I thin are the metalics, which I thin 50-50 with the
Polly S thinner.
I'll also thin it a bit if I'm weathering and want it to either barely
cover or run into crevices.
============================================================
Steve Rosnick - Digital Train Controls (DTC) in KC
- Home of the 1998 NMRA "Heartland Express"
dt...@mindspring.com Visit my website at: http://www.mindspring.com/~dtc1
Tom George
Dave wrote,
Dave Olsen
I have been using regualar 'ol tap water to thin Polyscale paint about
10%, and haven't had any problems at all. I have not noticed any
thinning problems or inconsistancies in the thinned paint. Sprays down
beautifully every time!
Tom
KP
Tom George <thomas....@den.mmc.com> wrote:
>Dave wrote,
> Dave Olsen
>Tom
Try Isopropyl rubbing alcohol. I've been told to only use the 99%
variety, but I only had the 70% kind on hand for a recent job and it
worked just fine.
KP
F. DABNEY
Andy Harman (aha...@one.net) wrote:
: fel...@warwick.net (Marty Feldner) wrote:
MDC/Roundhouse was teh same formula- maybe the same paint repackaged as
410m. Next to this stuff, pure lacquer would be fun! As I mentioned
before, I found that MEK made a good thinner- and I actually used
Testor's Cement for Plastic for my MEK- so that will give you an idea...
Try brushing Testor's Liquid cement on a plastic car for paint!
Andy Harman
fda...@nmsu.edu (F. DABNEY) wrote:
>MDC/Roundhouse was teh same formula- maybe the same paint repackaged as
>410m. Next to this stuff, pure lacquer would be fun! As I mentioned
>before, I found that MEK made a good thinner- and I actually used
>Testor's Cement for Plastic for my MEK- so that will give you an idea...
>Try brushing Testor's Liquid cement on a plastic car for paint!
Yeah, MEK or Acetone for a base... whenever I opened a bottle I
thought a nurse was sneaking up behind me with a needle <g>. Such a
potent alcohol-like smell but much more penetrating. As paint goes,
it made a pretty good glue.
Andy