Hey Spanky,

I run a small custom guitar shop, and I can tell you from experience that by far the easiest way to have a guitar painted it to take it to an auto/body shop!

If you try to do it yourself using spray paint or even a small HVLP setup, it'll take months to fully dry/cure. A body shop will not only have the correct paint, but more than likely they'll have a UV room where they can "cure" the finish and it'll be ready to assemble in about a half hour's time. They'll also have all the buffing compounds needed to buff it out to a high gloss.

So I'd say put down the Krylon, and take your guitars to the local body shop. You'll get a great "factory" paintjob, and save yourself a TON of hassle!

"Beer: The cause of--and solution to--all of life's problems" Homer J. Simpson

The Gremmies on Apple Music

Reranch is a GREAT site for DIY folks.

Just remember that you must wait a long time for the paint to cure. I've refinished a lot of nice looking DIY paintjobs simply because the person who did it couldn't stand to wait the 6 weeks or so to put thier guitar back together again.

"Beer: The cause of--and solution to--all of life's problems" Homer J. Simpson

The Gremmies on Apple Music

That kind of makes sence. I once read that guitar refinishing was closer to auto refinishing than furniture refinishing. On the the other hand, there are some purist who would want a nitrocellulose lacquer finish. I image an autobody shop would give you a poly urathane finish.

My Web Site - Tunes - Pictures - Guitar Projects - Hard Rock Cafe Guitar Pins

I work for a company that has a body shop, and when I spoke to the painter, who has 25 years experiece, about the different types of paint that can be used, his recomendation was to use the state of the art materials. While he can and will use nitro, the cost is almost 4 times what urethane is. The nitro paint itself, because of haz-mat issues, is around + or - $100 a quart, depending on the color, and the labor involved is much more extensive. Plus, the new materials are much more durable and if you're building a guitar to PLAY, it will wear much better. If you're restoring a vintage guitar to be a collectors showpiece, then nitro is most likely the way to go. The bottom line is, once the guitar is painted, 99 out of 100 people won't be able tell the difference.

I also had no idea you had to wait that long for it to cure. about 10 years ago I painted a Fender Mustang almost the same color Green Brian uses as the background on this site and it looked great for about a week and then started chipping in no time.

A friend of mine's neighbor had retired from selling paint equipment and he helped me do it. I always thought it chipped because he only let me put a couple coats of paint and a couple coats of finish on it. SOmeone else told me we shouldn't have used hardeners in the paint.

I can't wait 6 weeks so it looks like I have to find a pro.

How many coats are required and would you take one to Maaco, or should you go somewhere more high quality? I'm looking to do one jet black, nothing fancy but I want a super high gloss.

Spanky

surfie,> I work for a company that has a body shop, and when I spoke to the painter, who has 25 years experiece, about the different types of paint that can be used, his recomendation was to use the state of the art materials. While he can and will use nitro, the cost is almost 4 times what urethane is. The nitro paint itself, because of haz-mat issues, is around + or - $100 a quart, depending on the color, and the labor involved is much more extensive. Plus, the new materials are much more durable and if you're building a guitar to PLAY, it will wear much better. If you're restoring a vintage guitar to be a collectors showpiece, then nitro is most likely the way to go. The bottom line is, once the guitar is painted, 99 out of 100 people won't be able tell the difference.

$100 a gallon, I'd buy that, but $100 a quart, nope, too much mark-up going on there for my tastes.

The viewpoint taken by your experienced painter is one of longevity of appearance over functionality. A car should look good, but the paint job won't affect the basic function of transporation. OTOH, a guitar should also look good, but it's prime mission is to produce tone. Alas, here we find a clash of ideals.

It's a well documented fact that I won't belabor here, but if you want your guitar's body to breath, and vibrate at its best, then you can't, lemme repeat that, you can't plug up the pores with a plastic-like finish, simple as that. You should protect the wood from natural damage such as aging and exposure to the elements, but you can, and should, do that with wood sealers such as oil, varnish, shellac, or lacquer. Nitrocelluose comes under that last heading, as witness its flammability. But it does not clog the wood, thus reducing the wood's chances of giving you great tone. And just as important, I've yet to see a guitar neck that played as well with a plastic finish as it would have with a nitro- finish, or even just oiled and left alone after that. That crap and my thumb/fingers just don't get along - yuck!

To get back to your friend, he wants you to enjoy his workmanship for a long time, and he's got a good point. But you don't drive a car by the feel of the paint job, do you? You certainly do play a guitar by the tone of the wood (and other materials), and the finish most certainly does play a crucial part in the process of generating tone. In this case, I'd have to vote for functionality over form..... IOW, if I have to refinish very decade because I wore the nitro- away, then so be it, I'd rather have the great tone, even if I have to pay someone to do a re-finish job every so often.

(But note the many, many guitars out there from the 50's, 60's and 70's that still have their original finish, before the days of goverment inspired "nitrocelluose is a bad thing so you have to use something else". The finish on many of the these older instruments is in a state of partial or total destruction, and it may be ugly to look at, but man-o-shevitz, do these things sound ever so sweet.)

In summary:

Spanky, unless this is your only axe, and you're in a hurry, then do it yourself. Many of the links already posted are good, and I've got one or two more if you want. But do consider this option, even as SurfBandBill just said - its the most rewarding thing you can do for yourself!

unlunf

MY RIGHT HAND IS FASTER THAN YOURS!
(copyright 2003, Bruce Welch)

Last edited: Apr 05, 2006 15:52:18

sr,

Pickup a Custom Shop copy of Rory Gallagher's famed 'Noburst', and then go play the real thing. (I haven't, but I know someone who has.) It just isn't fair, to the copy. The reason is the same as why the Stradivarius is so acclaimed today, centuries after it was made. It's all in the aging of the wood. I'd like to say 'it's a known fact', but I don't believe I could support that with documentation, but it is commonly accepted lore that if you 'exercise' wood on a daily basis, forcing it to vibrate (hopefully musically), it will sound much better after a few decades (or centuries) than a lump of wood that has just sat there in a display case, and never been picked up.

By extension, the same is true for a piece of wood that has been enclosed in a piece of plastic (polyurethane, whatever). If it can't get its exercise, then it won'd ever develop what we call "that sweet, oh so sweet tone". Just ask Ivan how Hank's Strat felt as he plucked a string while hugging it up close and personal. The guitar's body vibrated in deep sympathy, not as an afterthought while the string was modulating the pickup(s). That's a difference that can't be found in any new instrument, no matter what the finish material might be.

Bottom line, your idea has merit, but only in the instant of "now". It's 'in the future' that we have to play our guitars, and to do that with the best possible results, we need to look to the past.... which brings me full circle back to my beginning statements.

HTH

unlunf

MY RIGHT HAND IS FASTER THAN YOURS!
(copyright 2003, Bruce Welch)

Brian,> I have never bought into that either. Its an electric guitar. All that matters is the vibration of the string over the pickup. Any effect by the finish would be in the noise compared to other factors.

All IMHO of course.

Then why not just play a Steinberger, and be done with it? Or better yet, an Emmett Stick? No extra wood to worry about, just pure string vibrations.

Call me old fashioned, but I think that every part of a guitar plays some role in the oveall sound, even on electrics.

unlunf

edited to correct spelling - there's no strikethrough on this forum!

MY RIGHT HAND IS FASTER THAN YOURS!
(copyright 2003, Bruce Welch)

Last edited: Apr 06, 2006 16:40:13

Brian,

I think it actually started more as request for opinions, not so much as an argument. Yeah, we do have a difference of opinion, don't we though? Not the first time, either, so I have no doubt we'll weather this one just fine, as we have in the past.

unlunf

p.s. I edited my post, you were correct of course. I don't know how I got the link correct (I checked before posting in the first place), yet managed to name Billy Martin's arch-nemesis! And the forum really could use the strikethrough feature, just for cases like this.

MY RIGHT HAND IS FASTER THAN YOURS!
(copyright 2003, Bruce Welch)

I have painted about four guitars with lacquer...you don't have to wait weeks before reassmbly, just a week will do (of course, I live in Colorado, which is very dry). I used Guitar ReRanch, and it costs between $70-$100 in materials to do it right. That is, wood filler, primer, top coats, and clear coats, plus sand paper kit. If you are painting over an exisiting paint job, you might be able to skip some of the steps. Then again, maybe not.

Bear these things in mind: vintage Fender guitars were painted in Nitrocellulose lacquer. It is very high-lustre and has a depth that can't be beat. However, it requires lots of coats, lots of sanding, and lots of TLC. It continues to dry & shrink for years, and eventually it will "check" and produce spider webs, as you see in many old Fender finishes. You can achieve a very thin paint surface with these lacquers.

Urethane is what is most commonly used today ... it is a rubber-like product, and it encases your guitar is a thick coat. You can shoot a guitar in about two coats and get a satisfactory surface, without a clear coat. IT is great for solid colors. It is much more durable than lacquer. Some people feel it muffles the resonance of the instrument and ruins a guitar. But, I'd argue, tone is in the ear of the beholder. I think we all agree, there are fine sounding modern Fenders that have urethane paint jobs.

It's a question of labor and what kind of result you want. Cheapest thing to do is go to a car shop, request a certain (popular) car paint color, and have then shoot it along with a car that comes in to be painted that color. They can shoot what's left of the paint for the car, and save you bunches on paint.

If you want a vintage Fender finish, however, go with ReRanch or one of the other paint suppliers that can give you authentic Nitrocellulose paint. It will take time, but you'll get pride in having done it.