The answer is absolutely yes, no, perhaps.
For most automobiles the painting during original production is fully (or nearly) automated. Touch up, or spraying in places the the automated tooling can’t reach may still be done manually.
Get some robots.
here Rhythmdvl brings up two concrete prices for different levels of service, the $500 and the $2000.
Would anybody be willing to go into more details about what these 2 distinct services (or, let’s say, some 5 distinct services that would more accurately capture the majority of paint jobs) would entail and how the cost would break down?
E.g. is the difference between $500 and $2000 in the lack of grinding of metal surfaces? Or maybe in only doing grinding of some surfaces and not of others?
Since Rhythmdvl did estimation of paint jobs for a living, I would imagine that he or somebody like him could actually give a very detailed explanation of which operations are done in which cases and how much do they cost or, even better, how much time do they take (at least, if the work involved is done by comparably skilled people for a comparable wage). After all, price levels can change, but presumably the time expenditure proportions would be quite stable, unless a technical innovation results in major labor productivity improvement on one of the operations.
**code **- You are not showing any understanding of the process of painting a car, or the car painting business. The vast majority of the time spent is in hand work that cannot be performed by a machine. If it could, that machine would be much more valuable in other industries. Most of that work is done at low labor rates requiring minimal skills.
You probably haven’t found out how much the paint costs, or what the fixed overhead costs of simply owning a paint shop are. On top of that, there’s no reason to think that there is much of a market for complete paint jobs, even if the price were drastically reduced.
Keep in mind these were early to mid-nineties pricing.
The base paint for a car started around $250 for basic sanding and a 6 month warranty. Again, it’s a franchise so YMMV, but our owner figured it was better to add hardners and whatnot to the paint (things people would pay extra for) and spend the same amount of time as the ‘higher-end’ services so the car would come out better and the paint would last longer (3-5 years). The few peopel who went the bottom line paint were typically selling their cars or had no extra money to spend. If we did a baseline job, are they going to tell people they went the low-cost route and knew what it would look like? No, it was better to lose a bit of margin and have a better reputation (you got that painted at Maaco?). Higher priced services–I think our top-end service was $500 (paint only, no bodywork) had the hardners and detail sanding. It’s main feature was a 5 year warranty. Given the bulk that the company did overall, our discount on paint and materials was pretty high–so you were actually getting some good materials for the final coats, materials that rarely had warranty problems. (Though given the cost of our services, many people were likely selling/disposing fo the car within the five years.)
Bodywork was done by eye. I worked with the bodymen for a while and when I wasn’t sure of something I’d have one come out and take a look and give me a time. As mentioned by others upthread, a dent can be one thing in size but in two different places on a car resulting in different times. For some things (e.g., replacing a panel) there are books with standardized times.
Keep in mind the times are not necessarily related to the actual time it takes to compete a piece of bodywork. For example, someone with two years experience is going to take a lot longer than someone with ten years to fix the same ding–should more experience mean you work harder (fix more cars) for the same hourly rate?
The bodywork really drove the price, so there’s no telling how much something ‘should’ cost to repair and paint. Rust here and there and a few dents can make a huge difference.
The major differences between us and the independent shops were prep–how carefully and thoroughly we masked things off, what was removed, how carefully and closely the panels were sanded, etc. The other area of difference was in the condition of the paint room. We were a production shop and given the speed that things moved through we ran a far from dust-free booth. But anyone who came into our shop was shown cars waiting in the paint line, cars in the prep area, and finished cars–and I was sure to point out the slight imperfections (painted chips, overspray) so they knew what they were getting. I knew that we would be several hundred to several thousand lower than an independent shop, so it was easy to encourage someone to price-compare and make sure they knew what they were getting.
I got a Maaco paint job on my 10 year old Camaro, $500, looked great, when I finally sold it 5 years later it still looked great - definitely increased my resale value.
TriPolar, is it not obvious to you that the topic of the thread shifted away from the OP title? I am now asking questions about the mechanics of that very hand work you mention. Such mechanics may include the kinds of tools involved, the types of operations and sub-operations (e.g. maybe sanding one type of panel is fundamentally different from sanding another, much smaller panel), the time and money costs of it all. And this all just for the process considered per car - there are also, in theory, all sorts of interesting questions to be asked about statistics of these various procedures being performed or “should have been performed but weren’t” (not that this thread would survive long enough for discussion to touch on that).
BTW, if somebody wanted to do dissertation on this stuff, what department you figure it would have been done? Mechanical engineering? Industrial engineering? Or are there think tanks dedicated to this inside of major automakers’ R&D outfits?
You aren’t getting the point that these are things that can’t be performed by machines. It is not because a lack of productive tools or procedures, it’s because every single case is unique, and a human has to evaluate the procedure and how to perform it. Every rust spot is different, and you have to remove as little material as possible, because everything thing you remove has to be replaced with something. Masking has to be precise or something doesn’t get painted, or something that shouldn’t does. There are no machines to perform tasks like these that could be economical in the process of painting cars, or almost anything else. And the number of actual cases are so low and conducted under such diverse circumstances, there aren’t a lot of interesting statistics.
When you can make a robot that can do any of the prep tasks more efficiently than a human does now, you would be wasting your time selling it to paint shops. Try grinding the rust out of a piece of metal before you start considering whether tools or procedures would do anything to make the process more economical.
ok, so TriPolar has developed telepathy and now knows for sure what point I do and do not get. Good to know.
Or maybe TriPolar has failed to read my post #25 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13824193&postcount=25
I just explained to you that you don’t understand what you are talking about, with specifics about the points you brought up in post #25. I’m not telepathic, but my conclusion has been verified by your response. You are not able to even suggest a feasible means of improving the efficiency of any part of the process you have been discussing.
no sh*t, Sherlock! I am exploring a topic completely unfamiliar to me for the first time in my life and, what do you know, I cannot suggest feasible means :smack:
Why don’t you resume this line of thought over at the pit thread, TriPolar?
I don’t have anything to say in the pit. I can hold a rational discussion here.
You guys haven’t spent any time around a body shop I am guessing. With the exception of a super high end restoration job the following comments apply.
First off, for a proper paint job, the surface is sanded, and cleaned. It is not sanded to bare metal. Beside being very time consuming (read expen$ive) it would take off any of the electro deposited primer that prevents rust (read a dumb thing to do)
I can honestly say that I have never seen brush on paint stripper used any any commercial body shops I have been in and I have probably been in more of them than you have. Machine sanding works great for large flat areas (the hood, roof, door trunk etc) where the difference comes between paint jobs is the detail areas that can’t be machine sanded. A cheap paint job gets a few minutes. A high end paint job might get 10 hours of hand work before the paint is laid. big difference in the result.
Getting back to the OP. I don’t think a robot would improve things that much in a a commercial paint shop. First off, the guys that are laying paint at a body shop (particularly at a place like MAACO or Early Shieb) are good. They have lots and lots of practice. The problem with this type of paint job is a lack of proper prep (see above), and shitty paint.
Give a MAACO guy a car that had top quality prep, and a gallon of great paint you will get a result that will knock your socks off.
Rick, thank you for your response. Questions:
do the cheap paint shops like MAACO do at least the machine sanding of the large areas?
why doesn’t MAACO let me pay more for better paint? Is better paint so much more expensive than cheap one, so that I wouldn’t want to do that? Or is better paint pointless when you are painting on top of poorly prepped surface?
in a quality paint job, how are those small surfaces sanded which, as you say, may take many hours of work? What tools are used?
I have only observed the extremes, high end restorations and cheap discount paint jobs. I have seen brush on paint stripper used exactly once. You’re the one that mentioned dipping parts into a vat of stripper. Every high end paint job I’ve seen had the paint sanded of to bare metal. Every low end paint job I’ve seen didn’t, unless the car’s owner sanded and primed themselves. And they looked like shit without the sanding, and only slightly better with it. In the worst case of I’ve seen, the new paint over old began to peel within weeks, and less than a year the car was back to it’s original color. We seem to be in perfect agreement on the time factor and importance of prepping a car before painting.
The whole car is machine sanded, primarily for adhesion. How much sanding for visual effects depended on the level of service. Back then the Ambassador service was the cheapest and just covered sanding for adhesion, the Professional level (about $100 more) covered sanding for light chips and scratches, and so on. If you have a slight nick in your current paint you may never notice it. It could be just through the clear coat, for example, or the overall dullness means it doesn’t stand out. But with a fresh coat of paint every surface imperfection will stand out. This machine sanding takes care of most, but not all of these imperfections.
This is a MAJOR difference between Maaco and an independent shop. We have teams that do this all day, but don’t spend an inordinate amount of time inspecting panels before sending the car on. We were careful to be sure the customer knew what they were getting (again, we had a great owner, so YMMV) and what they should expect. An independent shop will (generally) spend a lot more time to be sure they get out every nick and imperfetion in the paint (remember, this is just paint prep I’m talking about at the moment), and may go as far as wet-sanding panels.
Our paints were actually pretty high quality–primarily because we bought in such bulk. But so many factors come into play that affect the overall finish (e.g., surface prep, how much dust is in the paint booth, how and where it is dried) that it would be a waste to put too high value paints on a car. We’re not going to build up a finish in multiple layers, and you’re not really expecting to hold onto that car for another ten years. Remember, most cars that need a paint job are already ten or so years old. (note I’m talkign about the general case, not accident repairs)
Not that you couldn’t get higher quality paints, but again if you’re going that route you’re going to be spending several thousand dollars more for a marginal gain in appearance. Are you painting a high end Porsche or a Camaro (Bitchin’ or otherwise)?
Here’s a good example: door jambs. Do you want to spend $150 per jamb extra for us to prep them? We can, and it makes sense if we’re changing the color. But let me walk you out to the finish area and show you how little difference they make. Spend the $300 to take care of the rust or more dings (you’d be amazed at how many dings I can find in a quick walkaround that you never knew were there). And then what about the hatch? Do you want to spend to repaint that too?
Lastly, consider the conditions of the paint booth and drying area. Ours was clean and had good ventilation, but there was no way we would be able to prevent some dust, hair, etc. from settling on the car on it’s way into the booth or as it was being painted/drying. In contrast, I’ve seen shops that look like they could manufacture computer chips in there. The major difference is that I could move eight to ten cars through the booth in a day; they could move one or maybe two.
While our paints did look fantastic, the marginal difference between ours and an independent’s is relatively small (immediate appearance-wise; longevity beyond five or so years notwithstanding), particularly when you consider that up close you’ll see much more of a difference in final outcome due to differences in prep.
But we did an absurd amount of business, and though no one is perfect we had great customer loyalty and approval. One of my best selling ‘tools’ was the shop itself–showing the before/during/after cars. Not cars we had painted for the purpose, but cars in the process. I could point to all the above imperfections and describe what it would take to get rid of them (and some people did pay to get near-perfection), but most were very happy with our niche.
ETA: Stripping
GM cars had a MAJOR problem years ago–the clearcoat would just flake right off. Lots of the blues and grays had the problem with the paint flaking off down to primer too. Not just GM, but they were a main offender. In those cases, we used chemical stripers to pull down the offending panels (sometimes the whole car), reprime, and move them through the line. We could do it without stripping–if someone only had $200 to spend, then they could at least get a better looking car, but one FAR from perfect. In those cases, we’d have them sign a gazillion “I understand” disclaimers and explain (and show) them what to expect. Not so much from an avoidance of a warranty (though none cold be given), but to make sure they would be happy and knowledgable with what they were buying.
Many years ago I worked in sales at a body shop.
Whenever someone , typically with a collectible or sports car, wanted a better
paint job I would suggest to them they may want to walk to the back of the shop and tip the painter $100.
The painter would see to it that the car got prepped better, and he would also spend more time spraying the car. The difference in quality was obvious.
The painters at cheap body shops can be very good. As mentioned above, it is typically the prep work and materials that are lacking.
I worked at one of the best shops in the country. I’m sorry, I should have said “to the primer” instead of to “bare metal”, but the rest is accurate. The paint itself is sanded off. In small repaired areas, the repair will be taken down to bare metal, filled, primed and painted. The rest of the panel will either be blended with clearcoat or taken down to primer, then repainted along with the repair. I was actually at a shop over the weekend checking on a car and have some good photos to illustrate this, but I just moved and have no internet other than my phone at the moment.
suppose we consider car painting from a purely utilitarian standpoint, i.e. not in terms of aesthetics but purely in terms of keeping the car’s body from rusting. As well as any other positive implications of the painting for the purpose of keeping the car running for as long as possible with minimal repairs expenditure.
Looking from this angle, what is the difference between the quality expensive jobs and low quality inexpensive ones?
low quality ones are still poor, because a large part of making sure the primer/paint provides corrosion protection is surface preparation. IF you don’t have the right kind of primer for the base material, the primer and paint will peel off and bare metal will be exposed… try getting paint to stick to aluminum sometime.
if you’re re-painting, and you don’t properly prepare the surface, then you might end up painting over rust which will just continue to rust because as I said before, iron is an asshole.
if I paint over the rust, where will the rusted metal get the air and the water to keep on rusting? Will these substances go through the paint or will this also depend on the peeling of the paint?
Can the problem of peeling off of the primer and paint be described as “our state of the art primer and paint suck nowadays”? Or has the research in these areas hit the wall where no matter what chemical cleverness you do, it will still peel off from poorly prepped surface?