Clear coating race car models. Should they be that shiny?!

[W-409]

Even if some Race Cars wouldn't be that glossy or shiny, I think it just looks better when the model is shiny or glossy, even if the real deal isn't... It doesn't look so nicely done, if the paint job is just left "As It Is" after the paint and clear coat. I have done this "Wrong" many times, just because it looks like the model is much better quality. Just like my '64 Belvedere in NASCARS Section. I guess the real car was not as shiny as my build is, but it looks better like that, it is VERY hard to make the car look good if it has Dullcoat or something on it, In My Opinion of course.

But I will say this again: I know the Drag Cars better than any else Race Cars... They are usually very nicely finished, at least here in Finland. They are like Show Quality. And I guess it's the same thing in the USA. Of course not all of them, but some of them are very nicely done, and that's what I'm shooting for when I'm building. We had American Car Show here in Finland a couple of weeks ago, and there were Drag Cars and regular "Show Cars". The Drag Cars were just as nicely finished as the Show cars. The paint jobs were really smooth and shiny.

An Example:

That is as nice and shiny as you can get, I think.

[Pete J.]

I think the error here is that we are all referring to "race cars" like they are all the same and this is just not true. As Drew stated. do the research. Find out what is appropriate and do that correctly. Stating that glossy clear coat is wrong on all race cars is as grossly incorrect and saying it is correct. If you want to state your opinion, please specify the type of race car. Here is is photo of Vettel's car at San Paulo last year. Looks very glossy and clean to me. No hint of semigloss even on the stickers. If I were building this one(and I will) I will clearcoat because even though the designs and sponsors are stickers, they have the same gloss as the paint and there is no hint of the edge of the sticker. You would have to get within inches of the car to see the edge of the sticker. In scale that would mean looking at it with a magnifying glass. In short, do the research and match the finish on the car you are replicating at a reasonable scale distance

.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Pete J.

[Scale-Master]

And then there is the issue of some people who like to preach the perspective of "all race cars are not shiny" as an excuse for being unable to build super clean and shiny cars.

I'll bet that Red Bull F1 car (pre-race) is cleaner than my real Camaro that is under a cover in the garage since it was detailed a couple months ago.

[Pete J.]

And then there is the issue of some people who like to preach the perspective of "all race cars are not shiny" as an excuse for being unable to build super clean and shiny cars.

I'll bet that Red Bull F1 car (pre-race) is cleaner than my real Camaro that is under a cover in the garage since it was detailed a couple months ago.

Amen!

[2002p51]

Okay Pete, as counter point to your shot of the Red Bull F1 car I submit the following cars that I shot at Bristol this year:

Okay, okay, that was a ringer. This car is obviously done in a satin finish on purpose.

But look at Tony Stewart's car:

This is what the original poster is talking about. This car is less shiny than the F1 car and way less glossy than most of the models you see on a contest table..

This car is 100% wrapped in vinyl, there's no paint used here at all. You can go to the Joe Gibbs Racing web site and see time-lapse videos of the wrapping process. It too is far less glossy than most models.

And that's all he and I are saying.

[Scale-Master]

But those NASCARs are only one segment of "race cars" , both in subject matter and historical time frame. Not indicative of all race cars. And as has been agreed upon, the Red Bull F1 car (also just one segment of "race cars") is very glossy and a contemporary of those Cup cars. Different eras and subjects will have different requirements.

So we are right back to "each project needs to be assessed on its own merits."

[2002p51]

First of all, they are not NASCARs, but that's a whole 'nother rant!

Second, while it's true they only represent one segment of racing, these are the cars most commonly seen with over done gloss on contest tables.

[Dragline]

I clearcoat my racecars.... Since I build for myself and my Dad, we are the only two who's opinion I truly care about.

I post my shiny cars here and have never heard a peep. Perhaps it's because someone didn't want to ruffle my feathers or whatever the case may be.

To me it matters little. I like shiny racecars.

Bob

[David Thibodeau]

A topic done to death...............................................

And I am GUILTY of super slick finishes with two part urethane....

I am GUILTY of Roof flaps displayed up on my NASCAR models

I am GUILTY of window nets hanging out the window of my NASCAR models

I am GUILTY of using Tire decals instead of the stencils

I guess that is four counts of breaking the holy law???

Who cares!!! Its my models!

[2002p51]

A topic done to death...............................................

And I am GUILTY of super slick finishes with two part urethane....

I am GUILTY of Roof flaps displayed up on my NASCAR models

I am GUILTY of window nets hanging out the window of my NASCAR models

I am GUILTY of using Tire decals instead of the stencils

I guess that is four counts of breaking the holy law???

You are hereby sentenced to enter an IPMS National where you will be stoned into submission and forced to count every rivet on a 1/600 scale HMS Titanic!. Resistance is futile.

[David Thibodeau]

Oh yeah.... I forgot I am a rivet counter as well.....

More than plug wires is just stupid......

[2002p51]

[High octane]

The fact that you are not "worried" about airborne particulates, grease and other chemicals, has nothing to do with their factual presence.

If your glass cabinet has a door on it, then all that stuff is on your Models.

Maybe hermetically sealed in a Mayonaisse jar on Funk and Wagnalls porch,---- but otherwise, there's dirt.

CadillacPat

Then maybe a "clean room" is needed to display my models? And when guys come over to check them out they should get scrubbed up and in gowns, booties, and caps as well. Good idea.

[CadillacPat]

Then maybe a "clean room" is needed to display my models? And when guys come over to check them out they should get scrubbed up and in gowns, booties, and caps as well. Good idea.

Nick, Your Guys in Gowns and Booties are a little more information than I care for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CadillacPat

[afx]

Something that has been sort of bugging me for a while is the clear coating of racing models, especially older subjects. I've been to a ton of races, mostly road races, over the past 33 years, and to a car, I have never seen them shine like most of the models I have seen. Especially contest models. Curious as to what others think.

I agree Jim. I build vintage/historic race cars almost exclusively. I don't clear my bodies or my decals. Yes I make the paint and decals as smooth as I can but I don't think a high polish or deep shine looks correct. At least not on the era of cars I build ('50s-'70s).

[David Thibodeau]

[Jay]

Most newer race cars are clear coated now... NASCAR cars especially on the plate tracks. They clear over all the decals, body wraps, etc... seems the edges of the decal layers were creating drag. Believe it or not, with hi def TV's & cameras now, the "good from a distance/speed" no longer applies. I'm not saying they have show winning paint by any means, but they do take care in the details now and make sure the car looks good on camera...

I say try to build as close to the reference you have as possible....

Edited April 19, 2013 by Jay

[Pete J.]

Okay Pete, as counter point to your shot of the Red Bull F1 car I submit the following cars that I shot at Bristol this year:

Okay, okay, that was a ringer. This car is obviously done in a satin finish on purpose.

But look at Tony Stewart's car:

This is what the original poster is talking about. This car is less shiny than the F1 car and way less glossy than most of the models you see on a contest table..

This car is 100% wrapped in vinyl, there's no paint used here at all. You can go to the Joe Gibbs Racing web site and see time-lapse videos of the wrapping process. It too is far less glossy than most models.

And that's all he and I are saying.

Drew - Seems to me that we are saying similar things. Clear coats are often misused, especially the urethanes. Some people put them on way to thick and it looks like the car has been dipped in paint. Wrong approach, it doesn't matter what car it is. A realistic paint job will leave the panel lines at a correct thickness and not bury detail even with clear. When I first saw the "dipped/wet" look I was surprised by the sheen but got over that very quickly. Everything should be to scale. Having said that, a model should have a finish free of scratches and other maladies. Once you do that, depending on the lights as to how high the gloss would be. Lay down an even scratch free, booger free paint job and it will have a high gloss. Even the vinyl M&M car had a pretty good shine that decals can not replicate. Just putting them on the surface will leave an apparent difference in sheen between good paint and the decal that you can not see on the photos you have put up. The photos show an even gloss across the body without and significant change. Look at the light line running across the fender line on the #14 car. That line runs the full length of the car and had equal shine across the sponsorship signs . I don't see any breaks in the reflections caused by stickers any where on that car. Only way I know of to get that is a very light coat of clear polished to a even sheen. Put the decals on the surface, it breaks that up.

But, this is typical of this car and this series only. Frankly, a lot of racing teams are very proud of their cars and appearance can be a big part of that. There are series that tear up the finish more than others and some have cars that are positively beaters. There is everything in between. As you know, I am a detail fanatic. I research the heck out of my models. That is a big part of the fun. As a judge I have to drop that and judge on the quality of the build. Frankly, too glossy of a paint job is at the bottom of the list of problems with paint quality. Top of the list is dirt, fingerprints, rub throughs, paint bleed on masked lines, fisheyes, orange peel, uneven color, drips, and runs. By the time you get to the end of that list frankly there aren't a lot left to choose from. Trying to kick a model out because the paint is too glossy it a hard sell. There are too many other "basics of modeling" that eliminate models from top recognition long before you get to that. Yea, it may be glossier than a particular model might be, but if the builder succeeded with the basics, that is a good model.

If you are a detail nut case(guilty as charged) then itching that scratch is for personal satisfaction. I love to build. I also love to learn about what I build. I think that passion show in my cars and I know it does in yours, but saying that high gloss on race car models is wrong is painting the field with too wide of a brush. A solid modeling skills comes first.

[MAGNUM4342]

Each team is different. They all have a process they believe in. Back in the day, when markings were painted on Lee Petty did not care. In many cases the sponsor and numbers were painted on the car the day before and in some cases the day of the race. Usually this left no time to worry about the look of the car beyond the lettering and numbers being right. When vinyl numerals and sponsorship decals became available Richard Petty started having the men in his crew wax the cars between 12 and 16 times, then the decals were applied. The decals came with a glossy surface to begin with but never were they clear coated or polished themselves.

To me this facet falls under team research, but I highly doubt any team cleared thier car's markings. If the model is properly painted and the decal properly applied it will not dry up and flake off for the life of the model. However, if one were to choose not to believe this, and clearing the model gives them peace of mind I see no reason why not to. It is here that for me the accuracy question falls flat. Throw it out the window because of this:

YES, you are making a replica of a race car. However the race car in question was made from steel and it's decals most likely made from vinyl. Both pretty durable as long as they aren't struck by some thing hard...like another car, AND they are not expected to last long. The replica model though, for the sake of argument, is plastic, quite often painted with inferior to automotive paints and it's 'decals' are thin layers of paint over a clear glue. Substantially less durable than the 1:1 and in need of an entirely different assembly process, materials, and a completely different attitude against damage.

Then one must consider the new age method of "painting" modern race cars with huge sheets of heat applied plastic, which is as glossy as the hot wheels stocker on the shelf because it's decorated the exact same way.

[CadillacPat]

I still say it's in the eye of the Builder.

If the Builder wants to Clearcoat it and make the paint and graphics truly come to life, then it's as accurate as can be!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CadillacPat

[rustbucket82]

I still say it's in the eye of the Builder.

If the Builder wants to Clearcoat it and make the paint and graphics truly come to life, then it's as accurate as can be!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CadillacPat

truer words have never been spoken. After all, it is only a hobby.

Edited April 19, 2013 by rustbucket82

[2002p51]

Most newer race cars are clear coated now... NASCAR cars especially on the plate tracks. They clear over all the decals, body wraps, etc...

But that completely defeats one of the most important reasons for using a vinyl wrap; it's removable!

There was a video I saw a couple of years ago of an interview with crew chief Chad Knaus. It was shot in the race shop and in the background you could see two crew guys pulling all of the decals and wrap off of the 48 car. They couldn't have done that if it had a clear coat over it.

Watch the video at this link:

http://joegibbsracing.com/category/videos/

Not a paint booth in sight.

[2002p51]

The photos show an even gloss across the body without and significant change. Look at the light line running across the fender line on the #14 car. That line runs the full length of the car and had equal shine across the sponsorship signs . I don't see any breaks in the reflections caused by stickers any where on that car.

That's because it's all just one big sticker. Watch the Joe Gibbs video above.

[IMSANUT]

And then there is the issue of some people who like to preach the perspective of "all race cars are not shiny" as an excuse for being unable to build super clean and shiny cars.

I'll bet that Red Bull F1 car (pre-race) is cleaner than my real Camaro that is under a cover in the garage since it was detailed a couple months ago.

I am certainly hoping that this not so subtle inuendo is not a slam but instead an observation. I have been, I believe, in not "soap box mode pointing fingers." I merey postulated that a wet look like the photos from NNL this year, in particular of the Greenwood Stars and Stripes Corvette, do not represent what the 1:1 vehicle looks like. Heck, even the NASCAR and F1 examples shown do not have that "wet" look. I am by no means saying race cars, in my instance, road racing vehicles should not have a shine to them. Far from that. What I am saying, again if accuracy to the subject is of consideration, as it is to me, and others from what I can tell, these cars do not have the look of WET that multiple coats of clear provide. They do not look like miniatures of the real thing, and furthermore, they do not have the scale look I think many of us strive for.

Yes, this is a hobby, and yes it is about fun. But aren't these supposed to be miniatures of the real thing, unless of course they are fantasy ideas?

I started this thread because I was interested in seeing if there was similar thought. It seems there are those who agree and have constructive thoughts. Others, not so much...........

[2002p51]

Yes, this is a hobby, and yes it is about fun. But aren't these supposed to be miniatures of the real thing, unless of course they are fantasy ideas?

I started this thread because I was interested in seeing if there was similar thought. It seems there are those who agree and have constructive thoughts. Others, not so much...........

Exactly.