powder coating

[John Hertog <crossram@xxxx>]

Hi as well

Well, on this one I'd have to disagree with good buddy Russ at least to some
extent..

1/ powdercoating doesn't have to be glossy - it can be applied in flat,
satin or semi-gloss finish.
2/ I am guessing at this one but I see no reason to think that powdercoating
would not fare as well as engine paint in high-heat areas. After all, it IS
baked on in an oven..
3/ Powdercoating is much superior to paint in terms of staining, chip
damage, etc and exposure to chemicals.

My suggestion to Richard would be to inquire directly of his local
powdercoating facility as far as the question he raises . Richard, the shop
in my area that provides this service has undoubtedly already done engines
and cylinder heads as well as pretty much anything else you can think of. If
you wish me to inquire of them what they think, e-mail me privately. I have
already consulted their powdercoated-paint chip sets - there's an amazing
variety to choose from, both in terms of color, and of luster.

The only items I have had powdercoated as far as Chrysler 300's are
subframes, black-painted suspension components, rear axle housings and all
brake backing plates. I am quite satisfied with the results and the look.
If I were building a car that I knew I was going to keep "forever" , I would
probably invest more in powdercoating - such as the engine, all brackets and
pulleys, anything that was painted black. As far as engines, of course, I
mean to say engines that were painted black at the factory . It appears that
there is no equivalent powder paint available in the later, '62 and up
turquoise color.

Yes, powder-coating is over-restoration, of course, to standards better than
what the factory used. True purists might want to stick to regular
paint...But I submit the factory "look" can be closely approximated with
powdercoating... at least as far as chassis components - and help preserve
the car over time.

John