OK...for all of those who are going to flame me because your Z is absolutely perfect...and you wouldn't change a thing on it....and believe you SHOULD have gotten crap paint for the money you spent...please leave now. For those of you that are getting more paint chips in this car than you ever have before on blunt nosed, inexpensive, economy cars you never cared about read on.

We all know about the 3M and/or Avery (and other) paint protection film, right? Well, this isn't a debate over it's effectiveness, but possibly a different solution or improvement to a situation I believe we are stuck with. Even if there is some kind of recall due to inferior paint (like the GM's of the past), it isn't likely to happen for years, and I don't want to be driving a car that looks like it has done nothing but follow gravel trucks the entire time I owned it!

One theory is the cars are hitting the shore and being driven sooner than ever before, and the paint isn't curing out completely prior to being subjected to road debris. Thus the problems so many are reporting.

Another is that the water based paints being required today are not as hard as the solvent based paints of yesterday.

Another (surely offered by some of the brighter members of this board) is that people just aren't being careful as to where they are driving!

Personally, I don't know when all this water based paint requirements started with the EPA, but purchased a '99 Wrangler with what I believe to be the worst front end of any vehicle (in reference to the angle with which debris hit the painted surface) and after 3 years of never worrying about it found I had less than five small, nearly undetectible chips! Now I have a car with a fairly sleek front end with greater deflection properties and a number of chips with less than 900 miles! AND many others are reporting the same but worse with more miles!

What I am wondering is this: Could the front end be lightly wet sanded (yes, I know you would remove the majority of the factory clear coat...so what's your point?) and have maybe three wet coats of high quality solvent based clear coat applied. Then wet sand and apply another two or three wet coats? Would this not only provide better protection, but better luster or a "deeper" look?

Even a high quality paint shop could do the above for @ $1000. And "NO" I don't think I should have to pay this on top of what I already have to get what I thought I was getting in the first place...but would be willing to invest it to protect what I've already spent if Nissan is going to leave us holding the bag. Granted this is more than even the best chip guard protectant film...but not by much, and no lines. Additionally, it won't be bullet proof, but necessary touch ups won't be nearly as difficult as what is required when a chip makes it through the film.

Anyway...wondering if any paint gurus would like to comment on my logic? Good idea? Bad idea? Not worth the investment? Exactly how much more protection might this provide?

 

No one has an opinion? WOW...that's a first on this forum. Or is it because I specifically told those of you who would flame to leave? Maybe post was too long and you got bored?

 

I'm certainly no expert but I don't think you can put a "solvent" based paint over a "water" based. You would either have to strip it down or re-prime, color coat then clear. Don't quote me on this.

 

I was concerned about the "reaction" myself also until I spoke to a couple body shops. They didn't express any concern as long as the color coat/base coat is cured completely. Additionally, they couldn't comment on my theory because they didn't know anything specifically about the paint that Nissan uses. Still looking for answers....but thanks for at least participating.

 

Not sure I understand your last statement...but understand your earlier points in your post. To comment on your thoughts...yes, there can be a point at which cohesion is lost or broken prior to adhesion...but this is typically when the paint is either applied too thick or prior dried coats are not prepared correctly. The chipping beyond impact point is common on vehicles where a damaged area is repaired and blended and requires a topcoat/clearcoat...often the clearcoat blends over areas that haven't been sanded for prep. At least this is exactly what happend on a prior car of mine. Don't know all the plus or minus points on our thoughts...would be nice if a body shop paint guru were to read and comment.

 

Call 1-800-NISSAN-1. If enough of us call they will have to put out a service bulletin to fix this problem. Corporate is saying that they have no idea that this is a problem. All they need to do is put the clear bra layer on and paint protectant on the rest of the body. We should not have to pay for a brand new car that chips off with a fingernail. They are examining my car Friday, and I should have an answer soon. But more people need to call in and not just accept this flaw. Think about what your car will look like in a few months or a few years after it has been weathered.

 

I agree that the paint used on some of today's cars is just terrible. Not only is the color layer super thin but the clear layer designed to protect the color layer seems to be a waste of time. They not only scratch easier then anything but suffer from paint chips as well.

I had an '82 280ZX Turbo with 100k miles and the original paint was in far better condition then most 1-2 year old cars I have seen out there.

In regards to a solution, I am not sure that adding a clear layer to the front end would help all that much. I too considered that option as well as a a standard bra, doing nothing, and the clear bra for the front end. The blunt nose on the Z is a challenge.

After much debate I decided to go with the Xpel Clear bra. Not only is it nearly invisible even up close but it does protect the paint and headlights really well. For about $400 I have the whole front and mirrors done and I no longer even think about the front nose getting chipped -- what a relief.

This is the third car I have had the Xpel kit put on and I really like the stuff. Really for the protection it offers there are very few drawbacks. When I brought the 350Z home from the install my wife asked why I did not get the kit installed --- she couldn't even see it standing 3 ft from the car, but it was there.......

My $0.02
Ja

 

hi jelledge,

can you post some pictures? Thanks.

 

I have tried taking pictures showing the clear bra on the car but it is very difficult. The bra is so clear that on my Daytona Blue it is just about impossible to see. Even with your eyes up close it is tough to see it.

About the only things that are visible is the slight line where the bra ends on the hood (about half way up the hood).

The important thing about getting the bra installed is the installer. I had to have mine done twice because the first installer screwed it up bad and tried to blame the kit. Not got my money back and went to a certified XPEL kit installer and had no problems. I guess the Z's bumper install is one of the most difficult cars to do because of the size of the single front end piece and the curve of the bumper.

Do you still want me to try and take some photos?
Ja

 

I agree with schwarme. At least we should call NNA and make them aware. It's all about numbers. The higher the percentage of customers that are unsastified the more likely they are to fix the problem. Even if you put on the clear coat and are unhappy with the paint you should call NNA. David @ Ext. 3857 is the guy you should talk to. His only job is to deal with issue's on the 350Z.

 

So, does color make a difference? It would be nice to know the numbers of Z colors having the paint problems, for comparison. We may see that some colors are more prone to paint chips than others.

 

well yeah, let's at least see how invisible it is Thanks.