Zinc Phosphating

1972_911t · Post by **1972_911t** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 9:19 pm

Ive just picked up my car from the e-coaters and on the spec sheet it says its been zinc phosphated, is this similar to galvernising? does it offer good rust protection?

Steve

davidppp · Post by **davidppp** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:03 pm

Hello, Steve.

Its not like galv...and the rustprotection as ever depends on film thickeness.

They should be able to tell you that..or you can measure it with a special gizmo..

Done right, its good, and a good base for the real paint.

alone its only a primer and will not be very waterfpoof..even atmos moisture will eventually get in..

Kind regards
David

1972_911t · Post by **1972_911t** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:07 pm

Hi David I know the E-Coat is 50 microns thick, but the Zinc Phosphate thickness isnt listed.

Steve

davidppp · Post by **davidppp** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:44 pm

Hello, Steve.

That is the e-coat..e-coat is just short ofr electophoretic coating..and the actual paint which is deposited is zinc phos..

50 mu is not enough to give much vapour barrier, its mainly an adhesive with some rustprevntive property which depends on prompt overcoating with a vapour barrier...

Kind regatrds
David

1972_911t · Post by **1972_911t** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 11:54 am

Hi David

Thats not how its described on the spec sheet I have, the zinc phosphating is described as a seperate 11 stage pre treatment process involving spraying the shell with various solutions including zink, nickel and manganese phosphates followed by a chromic rinse and various other rinses. This process is then followed by electrophoretic coating with powercron lead free paint.

I must say though what a difference thismakes to a shell if it wasnt for the odd bit of welding here and there it could easily be mistaken for a newly manufactured shell.

Heres some pics;

Unfortunatly not everything was to my liking some complete idiot decided it would be a good idea to use a fork truck to push my shell What do you think of this will it straighten or will it require a new section welding in?

Steve

davidppp · Post by **davidppp** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 1:43 pm

Hello, Steve.

I'd be most interested to read the full spec..I only have what I can find on the web..

The damage is qquite tricky and will definitely need pulling IMHO...

Emailed d you..

Kind regards
david

Ian Donkin · Post by **Ian Donkin** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 3:54 pm

Did the e-coat company do that to the rear end?

Hope someone (other than you) is paying for it!

Other than that, it's looking good - was it expensive?

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:06 pm

Steve: that should straigten out fine: as David says, it'll need a bit of tension applied at the same time: ideally externally.

Good news is that you won't need very much: a ton, perhaps 1 1/2 max. I use a little 1 ton ratchet type winch for this sort of thing: just weld on a tempory bracket, or clamp something on, anchor the car to something, the winch to something else, apply tension (just a little) and start beating!

Work back in time from how the accident happened and ignore damage that is being caused by tension: i.e if you've got a tight crease, you'd beat that, but not the gentle ripples that may radiate away from it (if that makes sense). The 'time' principle is that you are reversing the way the accident happened: so in this case you would start at the damage that occured last (so furthest from the impact point), and work back to the bit that was hit first. This is usually the best way to minimise further stretching.

I'm having great fun trying 'proper' panel beating at the moment: if it turns out O.K. I'll pop a thread up about it (if it's a disaster I'll feign memory loss and deny all knowledge

).

BTW, the shell looks brilliant, it really does look fantastic. Lovely to work with I would imagine: did you go to the company directly?

1972_911t · Post by **1972_911t** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:11 pm

Hi Ian

Unfortunatly yes the e-coat company did the rear damage, and yes they are going to pay for the repairs. It was impossible for them to deny doing it because it had obviously been done after the e-coating had been applied as it had scratched of the coating in that area.

The whole process cost £1525 + vat £750 for the chemical stripping and £775 for the e-coat.

Steve

1972_911t · Post by **1972_911t** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:20 pm

Hi Barry

I wont personnaly be doing the repair to the damage ill leave that to the person that does the paint and also finnishes of the the arches ive welded on.

Yes I went to the company direct, however I dont think the company I went to actually does the e-coat, I think they do all the stripping and cleaning then take it elsewhere for e-coat becasue when I noticed the damage the manager went away to phone them to see what they had to say about it. They had just dropped it off without saying anything about it and no one there had noticed untill I got there. It was the first thing I noticed, right after thinking is that really my shell its looks so good then F******!!!!

Its not ideal but as long as they cover the costs of repair then its not so bad, just a bit crappy that what was a perfect corner will now need beating and reshaping.

Steve

hot66 · Post by **hot66** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:35 pm

that looks superb

Apart from teh damage, looks like they have done a good job

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 6:24 pm

Oh well, at least it didn't fall off the trailer

.

Any chance you could P.M. their details for me? At the very least the stripping probably works out cheaper than doing it by hand ...

Is it off for paint as the next stage or have you got soem more to do on the shell 1st?

1972_911t · Post by **1972_911t** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 9:01 pm

Hi Barry

Heres there web site http://www.surfaceprocessing.co.uk/

How you getting on with the sealer? Do you think it would also be suitable as interior sound profing underneath the carpets instead of the stick on pads?

Steve

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:31 pm

Thanks, Steve: I've made a note of that.

The sealer is coming up on monday, and hopefully will be going on the car later in the week: I'll report back then.

As for sound deadening, I'm not sure. My instinct would be a stonechip type product might be better, don't know why, just think perhaps it might give a few more pounds (£££'s) for your pounds (lbs) if you see what I mean. Underneath the car this type of product has a clear advantage because it is literally bouncy, but TBH inside the car I don't think it'll be worth the cost. If it was my car, I would bung in some sound pads where simple to fit, and perhaps some acoustic insulation anywhere near the engine bulkhead.

In the morning I'll go and bash some of the sample sheets, and see how they are: suspect they won't sound much different to undersealed panels though

.