What's your opinion on clearcoating over decals?

[roadhawg]

I think it ends up being a personal preference on if you want to clear over decals or not.

Exactly. I don't care either way, and to be quite honest about the accuracy thing, I don't think judges at model shows care either. As far as my own, some I clear, others I don't....just depends on my mood. I have found, however, that gold foil printed with an Alps printer can end up looking spotty or not quite as bright underneath clear, so use caution there.

[martinfan5]

Exactly. I don't care either way, and to be quite honest about the accuracy thing, I don't think judges at model shows care either. As far as my own, some I clear, others I don't....just depends on my mood. I have found, however, that gold foil printed with an Alps printer can end up looking spotty or not quite as bright underneath clear, so use caution there.

For the most part I feel the same way, but the NASCAR decals that I have been using for the last few years, I clear coat over them, I like having them protected just a little bit.

[DR JAY]

For what it's worth, I also clear over decals. This is mostly because I want to protect the colour coat from oxidizing and I also want to be able to polish/rub out fingerprints and such from handling for contests etc. I'm afraid of decal damage from such activities and the "home made" decals that I sometimes use (Keith Marks,decals by my Hobby Store Guy, etc) are very thin and fragile at best. Besides, I'm kinda known 'round these parts for my deep and shiny paint jobs and pearl clears...(Colour coat, then pearl clear, then decals, then clear for polishing, then sunglasses)

[shafer]

the superspeedway cars are now clear coated over to make the car more slippery, i prefer to clear my decals to keep them from drying out and cracking

[2002p51]

Oh boy, here we go again! First let me preface my remarks by saying that in the past I have been threatened with actual physical bodily harm for expressing an opinion that differs from the established paradigm. So if you feel the need to get your panties in a twist because of what I'm about to say go slam a door or break some dishes or go sit in the closet and pout, but leave me out of it!

That opinion? I never clear over decals. When? Never, and here's why;

Like Harry said, race cars shouldn't look like show cars. They shouldn't have a deep, high gloss finish. They simply don't need the clear and look better without it. Second, the decals don't need the so-called "protection" of a clear coat if they have been applied properly. I've got models that were decaled over 40 years ago and have never had a decal flake off or peel.

Clear if you want and if you feel you must but understand it isn't going to look realistic.

Also, this myth about always clear coating on superspeedway cars is just that. Some teams have done it in the past, once or twice, but it has proven to be unnecessary and not worth the time and labor it takes. Of course these days 99% of the cars you see are not painted at all but wrapped in vinyl. Part of the reason they do that is because it makes it easy to change the graphic design of the car with the almost weekly change of sponsors. They peel it off and apply next week's scheme in 1/4 the time and 1/10 the cost of paint. You defeat the entire point of using a wrap on a 1:1 car if you clear coat over it.

I've been covering NASCAR as a photographer since 1983, been in the garage, up close and personal with the cars throughout this time. I'm hear to tell you that, in person, NASCAR race cars don't look anywhere near as "pretty" as they do on TV. That little screen can be very deceptive. They are smooth but not overly shiny.

And in spite of that, I've still been told I don't know what I'm talking about.

[MAGNUM4342]

I've been up close and personal as well. Each team differs in opinion every bit as much as the builders here. I can tell you that the King, requires his cars always recieve twelve coats of wax prior to each race.

Note that there is a high gloss shine everywhere except the numeral decals.

[2002p51]

[MarkWelby]

Right on Drew! Well said.

[MAGNUM4342]

Huge difference here. the photo I posted is of a car with an actual paint job and nascar approved stickers applied. The photo posted by Drew, is of a car that every inch of graphics are on a huge sheet of plastic and applied by a heat gun. There's no comparison at all. It still boils down to personal preference. I don't know what you are trying to prove Drew with one photo and no text? You'll note that I did not dispute your post nor did I offer any bodily harm. ( i've had that happen too). Bottom, line everyone should build burger king cars. Have it YOUR way. if you like glossy and your decals protected go for it! If you want the decals on top of the final coat, do it that way. It's your model. There is no wrong way. I will say that properly applied decals are just like bare metal foil. They don't NEED to be clearcoated if they are done right in the first place.

[MAGNUM4342]

Hopefully Drew can put a timeline to how long they've been using those kinds of graphics. I gave up on NASCAR when Adam Petty died. This is how I think of those graphics though.

Imagine you just bought a brand new kit, and the box itself is plain white, because all the "photos of painted and assembled model" are on the shrinkwrap instead.

[2002p51]

Hopefully Drew can put a timeline to how long they've been using those kinds of graphics. I gave up on NASCAR when Adam Petty died. This is how I think of those graphics though.

The very first race I covered for Stock Car Racing Magazine was at Riverside in 1982. This car, driven by Bobby Allison was painted solid white. EVERYTHING else, all of the graphics and all of the green panels, were vinyl stickers:

So it's been going on at least since then. Over the years, as the vinyl printing technology improved, more and more vinyl was used. There were still a few fully painted cars here and there, mostly though just the base color was painted. But the economics and labor saving of vinyl over paint, and the ease of changing schemes has made paint almost completely obsolete in NASCAR shops these days.

[2002p51]

It still boils down to personal preference. . . . Bottom, line everyone should build burger king cars. Have it YOUR way. if you like glossy and your decals protected go for it! If you want the decals on top of the final coat, do it that way. It's your model. There is no wrong way.

On this we have to agree to disagree. I feel that building a model of an actual car requires that the model should represent that car to the best of the builder's ability. I personally don't like black cars. So would it be okay if I built an RCR Goodwrench car and painted it hot candy apple red, because that would be my way? No, that would be wrong, the car should be black. If the 1:1 race car doesn't have a deep gloss, show car finish, the model of that car shouldn't either.

HI will say that properly applied decals are just like bare metal foil. They don't NEED to be clearcoated if they are done right in the first place.

And that I completely agree with!

[MAGNUM4342]

I'll agree to disagree, if you'll allow me some clarification. If you are building a model for your enjoyment on your shelf, go with the burger king thing. If you are building for competition or just stiff realism, then research of the actual vehicle is required to get all details right, cleared over decals or not.

[2002p51]

I'll agree to disagree, if you'll allow me some clarification. If you are building a model for your enjoyment on your shelf, go with the burger king thing. If you are building for competition or just stiff realism, then research of the actual vehicle is required to get all details right, cleared over decals or not.

Ahh, but you see, doing the research, getting the details right, is a huge part of the enjoyment I get out of this screwy hobby in the first place. If I want to do the Burger King thing, do it my way, I'll build a custom or a hot rod. If I build a race car, I want to get the overall look right, no matter what my personal preference is. That, to me any way, is the whole entire point of building a model of a 1:1 car in the first place. To replicate it as it is, not how I think it should be.

[MAGNUM4342]

Ahh, but you see, doing the research, getting the details right, is a huge part of the enjoyment I get out of this screwy hobby in the first place. If I want to do the Burger King thing, do it my way, I'll build a custom or a hot rod. If I build a race car, I want to get the overall look right, no matter what my personal preference is. That, to me any way, is the whole entire point of building a model of a 1:1 car in the first place. To replicate it as it is, not how I think it should be.

Ah yes...but that's YOU. (and please don't get me wrong here, no disrespect intended) This thread isn't about you is it? It's the OP and his personal preference. So my preference (which is honestly more along the same lines as you) or your preference doesn't really enter into it. That's why I basically say to the OP, build it however you enjoy it.

I'm right there with you Drew on the acuracy thing and honestly, I'm good friends with Futurabat (the guy is marrying my sister ) and when it come to accuracy of one of his NASCAR kits he is the most anal, annoying, gotta have it 100% accurate sonuvagun you ever met to the point of driving myself and my sister round the bend! But we have to remember this thread isn't about you or I.

[W-Machine]

At 1/24 or 1/25 who's going to be able to tell? If you were building an 1/8 scale maybe, but even then that's getting pretty fussy.

I'm with you on that.

[2002p51]

No, it isn't about you or I, it's about the hobby, and making the hobby better. Lifting the skills and improving the models turned out by others, like the original poster.

I don't think there are any other modeling hobbies, (and I'm thinking about model railroading as an example) where building a replica of something, but doing it any way you want, is acceptable.

[2002p51]

I just went back and looked at the original post and it specifically asked for opinions. So in that way, yes, it is about you and I and whatever our opinion is.

And that's what's good about this forum over that "other one", the free expression of opinion. Cause on that other one, well . . . .

[MAGNUM4342]

I just went back and looked at the original post and it specifically asked for opinions. So in that way, yes, it is about you and I and whatever our opinion is.

And that's what's good about this forum over that "other one", the free expression of opinion. Cause on that other one, well . . . .

Now on THAT note we totally agree!

[Terry Sumner]

Ah yes...but that's YOU. (and please don't get me wrong here, no disrespect intended) This thread isn't about you is it? It's the OP and his personal preference. So my preference (which is honestly more along the same lines as you) or your preference doesn't really enter into it. That's why I basically say to the OP, build it however you enjoy it.

I'm right there with you Drew on the acuracy thing and honestly, I'm good friends with Futurabat (the guy is marrying my sister ) and when it come to accuracy of one of his NASCAR kits he is the most anal, annoying, gotta have it 100% accurate sonuvagun you ever met to the point of driving myself and my sister round the bend! But we have to remember this thread isn't about you or I.

Kevin...yeah..I hadn't expressed an opinion one way or the other. Like Drew posted, I was just looking for opinions of some guys who build stock cars. I was just trying to get a feel for what the stock car modeling community thought about it.

[bbowser]

Kevin...yeah..I hadn't expressed an opinion one way or the other. Like Drew posted, I was just looking for opinions of some guys who build stock cars. I was just trying to get a feel for what the stock car modeling community thought about it.

Now you know. We're all over the map

[2002p51]

Penske's 22 Car is the only Car that is fully Clear Coated, that I know of!

Apparently not always:

These were shot early on race morning at the Bristol spring race in 2011.

[Chuck Most]

This talk of matte finishes against gloss (paint vs. vinyl) raises another accuracy issue I keep seeing with NASCAR stock car models.

I've seen more than enough Cup cars in my time, and none of them have what you'd call a mirror-gloss finish. Shiny? Yes, but not like what I see in some stock car models. Cleared decals or not, there's just something weird about a stock car model with a high-gloss finish. Again, the painted areas on a 1:1 stock car are somewhat glossy, but I'm talking about eleven coats of hand-buffed lacquer that would look more at home on a Ridler contender than a roundy-rounder. No real stock car is that glossy, but you see models of same done that way all the time.

[2002p51]

Actually I really don't care who doesn't and who does, I'm not paying for it!!!!

Well, you bring up an important point. A lot of people loose track of the fact that a NASCAR race team is, at it's core, a business. And no business can survive by spending money unnecessarily. Adding a clear coat to a race car is a significant expense in both labor and materials. (I was told by a body shop guy that a gallon of clear is over $125 these days!) That's one of the biggest reasons they all use vinyl wraps now. It's a simple matter of economics. You can have a car in the paint both for a couple of days every time you change sponsors or have it wrapped in an hour or two.

[Guest Johnny]

Had that car been repaired after a practice brush with the wall and was getting new vinyl?

Terry! Newer cars with lots of graphics would be ok glosscoated over. But the older cars before "wraps" the painted graphics would be shiney while the "decals" and numbers would tend to be duller.

I have done mine both ways over time. I find not clear coating makes them more realistic.

Heck, most local short track cars look like jewels under the lights at the race. But to see them in the daylight you ask "is that the same car?"

It is like the old bare bulb light strings at the car dealer's used car lot! All those old beaters looked like new!