> I have been following this chassis painting thread and wanted to
> throw in my 2 cents. I was led to believe that one should not use
> a paint like Por 15 or the one Harold suggested, because a Morgan
> chassis 'flexes' as part of it's handling characteristics, and
> these paints will ultimately crack allowing water to penetrate, or
> flake off. This is why the factory ultimately went with a
> 'galvanizing' process, because it was the only thing they found
> was unaffected by the flexing.
> Jeff
Hi Jeff,
Here in the land of ice, snow, salt and rust we have all become experts
on what can last well with a car and what cannot. I imagine Harald has
similar training.
Curiously enough, the rusting reality turns out to be the reverse of
what you state. Galvanizing is no longer considered a protection against
anything here and it is not even mentioned even as a salesman's come-on.
The zinc used in the process cannot flex whatsoever and cracks rather
sooner than later. Once cracked..the corrosion enters and is "trapped"
in the metal and it travels under the galvanizing at a accelerated pace.
Morgan hurries this rusting process along by drilling the chassis
immediately after it has been galvanized and compromising the seal from
the galvanizing before the car has even been built.
POR-15 seems to have the same characteristics as Jotamastic 87 (and
might indeed be the same product). They both have been tested to direct
sprays of salt water for 1000 hours without rust and both are flexible.
They both bond with the metal so if the seal is compromised in one spot
that is the only spot that can rust and the repair is a simple
re-coating of the affected area.
It is a chore to put on, but once on it actually raises the value of
your car as rust ceases to be a factor in its life or yours.
Lorne
|