Orange peel paint in Y reg cars

It's simply down to what the manufacturer decides. Some decided on the orange peel effect. Others the shiny. Both finishes were quite intentional. Mike.

Think so. Nothing could beat the old twin pack for a straight off the gun finish. But it's now banned for factory use and modern paints are water based - and not IMHO as good.

Most of the premium manufacturers seem to have got this right now - Audi / BMW / Mercs of current year don't suffer. My Y reg Volvo isn't a sufferer either but the 2002-2003 models are awful.

Are you kidding, or what?

My last BMW had water based paint, and that was a '92.

I looked at a parked black new 5 Series. Didn't think the finish anything special - or not like the mirror gloss you got with decent two pack, or even well polished cellulose.

IMHO, a metallic doesn't show a gloss being less than perfect in the same way as a dark solid colour.

No he's not. Every single car I have seen since about 1998 has had this horrid orange peel effect. It's obviously a way to produce a false finish to the car.

They've got the setup wrong, Orange peel is not an effect on vehicle finishes it's a balls up caused by (to name a few) insufficient air pressure, incorrect material viscosity, incorrect spraying distance.

Vehicle paint finishes should NOT have orange peel effect.

Steve.

Do you really believe that manufacturers would carry on spraying thousands of cars with the wrong setup, giving the wrong finish, without noticing and doing something about it?

Of course not. The reason it wasn't corrected, is because that was the finish they wanted.

Unless intended. Mike.

Exactly.

Yes, I believe they think it gives a false impression of shiny surface, which it does to some extent. Of course it also means you can't obtain a truly great shine either.

I believe it became 'fashionable' for a time. When I remarked about it to one or two owners, they quite liked it. Whether they actually did, or were saying it because it was 'their car', I don't know. Personally I've always preferred a smooth finish. Mike.

Absolutely, I actually prefer a good old fashioned solid colour that you can polish up to a brilliant shine with some work. The modern lacquered stuff just can't be got that shiny any more.

Yes. They could not afford to do otherwise. Cashflow is surely paramount and customers wanting new cars have no choice other than to buy what is available to them, especially if the paint defect affected all manufacturers. I've just picked up my VW from being serviced and they managed to get dirt & possibly grease on the light coloured fabric interior. What can I do about it? Nothing. Same thing happened to a frien with a Merc - he complained via their customer feedback card they left dangling on the rear view mirror, but it went unanswered. They couldn't give a toss because they know we've got to go back to either them or another dealer for the next service. Want a car with a decent amount of rear legroom? Well, tough, you cant have one because between them the manufacturers have decided not to bother. Wanted a car in this country with an airbag before they took off as sale gimmicks in the mid 1990s? Nope, you couldn't have one despite being around in some countries / some makes for some years before that. I think you're over estimating an individual consumer's power in these matters!

Sorry, I just can't accept that explanation. It's been decades since cars were in short supply apart from certain models. I think your explanation is too far fetched to be believable. The idea that the finish was inherent in the paint, like Hammerite, and too costly to rectify, is not credible at all. Like to give some evidence to support it? Mike.

Yes. Find any big factory with staff wages to be paid, loan interest to be paid off, ever increasing taxes to pay, a production line churning out stuff that would accumulate at goods-out. There simply isnt the time or money to halt production or sit on stock for any length of time whilst someone resolves a minor tecnical problem with something.

When vehicle painting if you end up with the orange peel effect you've not painted the vehicle properly, it still boils down to a bad setup which has resulted in a poor finish. Orange peel is the paint failing to flow out to a level finish which has therfore been incorrectly applied and can only be described as a poor finish.

However I am not at all surprised manufactures call orange peel intentional because it's easier to spray a peel effect and leave it in the paint finish than it is to remove.

Standards are not what they were so they'll call it an intentional finish which in my opinion it's still a crap finish.

Ok agreed, but the intended finish is still a crap finish nonetheless which only proves it has not been properly applied.

Steve.

OK. I've never seen a perfect gloss on a water based paint. I've done far better myself on my SD1 using black cellulose and a cheap spray system.

And where my E39 was repaired, the gloss is better than the factory finish. Wish I could say the same about the colour. ;-(

We wasn't disputing that its crap, just that its intentional, whether by design or accident I'll bet we never know!

I reckon it's a fundamold with water based paints. Same with domestic ones

- a water based paint never has anywhere near the gloss of an oil based one.

Could well be.

However, and this is only my own opinion, to me the finish of the paint is of little importance on a low range car (we're talking less than £30k here). Most of these are bought for a function, and IMHO paint finish is the least of your worries.

Go buy a Merc, or Ferrari or Aston Martin, then yes, expect a perfect finish.