When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I agree paint it the color you like as long as you plan to keep the car for a good while. If planning to flip it within a few years - go back original. However, white in modern urethane BC/CC or even single stage pops like it never did back in the lacquer and enamel days. If your car had an older, dingy paint job the new paint in white may transform it.
Very valid point. My 67 is white (factory tagged). It had a repaint before I bought it. My guess.. 12-ish years ago. It is single stage. But to your point, even a contemporary single stage white is a whole lot diff than the dingy white lacquer. My white 67 really does 'pop'. Also, that 62 I am working on (see that link in my prior post).. it was repainted must have been 20+ years ago with single stage urethane white. Even that, after I finessed the rear 1/2 of the car back to life, looks pretty darn vivid (read.. 'pops').
So it may be worth your while to actually see, in person, a recent white paint job on a mid-year with contemporary paint used (be it sgl or 2 stage paint). You may find that 'hey... man.. that white really is not as boring as I thought'.
You only go around once-----go with what you like!
Contrary to some folks belief we are not the custodians of these things, we are the owners and as such we can do anything we damn well please with them.
Very valid point. My 67 is white (factory tagged). It had a repaint before I bought it. My guess.. 12-ish years ago. It is single stage. But to your point, even a contemporary single stage white is a whole lot diff than the dingy white lacquer. My white 67 really does 'pop'. Also, that 62 I am working on (see that link in my prior post).. it was repainted must have been 20+ years ago with single stage urethane white. Even that, after I finessed the rear 1/2 of the car back to life, looks pretty darn vivid (read.. 'pops').
So it may be worth your while to actually see, in person, a recent white paint job on a mid-year with contemporary paint used (be it sgl or 2 stage paint). You may find that 'hey... man.. that white really is not as boring as I thought'.
Jim
A good example - freshen up the chrome, have the window moldings polished, replace any dull, scratched glass and a white Corvette can look like a million bucks. Still remember a white 65 convertible with tan top and interior I saw at Eureka Springs years ago that was beautiful
Very valid point. My 67 is white (factory tagged). It had a repaint before I bought it. My guess.. 12-ish years ago. It is single stage. But to your point, even a contemporary single stage white is a whole lot diff than the dingy white lacquer. My white 67 really does 'pop'. Also, that 62 I am working on (see that link in my prior post).. it was repainted must have been 20+ years ago with single stage urethane white. Even that, after I finessed the rear 1/2 of the car back to life, looks pretty darn vivid (read.. 'pops').
So it may be worth your while to actually see, in person, a recent white paint job on a mid-year with contemporary paint used (be it sgl or 2 stage paint). You may find that 'hey... man.. that white really is not as boring as I thought'.
Jim
Big fan of single stage here....in fact, won't have a classic car done in base-clear. Don't like the look, don't like the peeling sunburn clearcoat after 10-15 years. Both of my GTO's are single stage enamel, the '65 done in 1985, the '76 done in '93....and both still presentable with NO peeling. I love it when I pull up next to a 5-10 year old Toyota pickup with peeling clearcoat in my original paint 1983 Toyota pickup at a light, and my paint isn't peeling or in need of re-doing. Love the look and the durability of single stage, even though 99% on this and other forums prefer base/clear and the wet look. (Glazed Ham look, IMO)
Big fan of single stage here....in fact, won't have a classic car done in base-clear. Don't like the look, don't like the peeling sunburn clearcoat after 10-15 years. Both of my GTO's are single stage enamel, the '65 done in 1985, the '76 done in '93....and both still presentable with NO peeling. I love it when I pull up next to a 5-10 year old Toyota pickup with peeling clearcoat in my original paint 1983 Toyota pickup at a light, and my paint isn't peeling or in need of re-doing. Love the look and the durability of single stage, even though 99% on this and other forums prefer base/clear and the wet look. (Glazed Ham look, IMO)
Not to get off-topic of the OP.. but really not too far off topic... do not discount single stage paints.
As we can see. they do have a diff look and feel to them, and they are not the 'cousins we dont talk about'.
I have a number of cars.. been restoring them my whole life. I progressed from sgl stage to BC/CC. In my last 3 restoration projects, it went as follows;
65 GTO.. BC/CC as that is what everyone was doing.
38 Ply Biz Cpe.. BC/CC (this time water based) as BC/CC is now what I was familiar with.
40 Ply PU (my most recent).. and here is the kicker..... MY BC/CC cars are beautiful.. true craftsmanship of the man behind the spray gun. That said,, there is a certain look to them that is just not right for a classic. Most people would not notice or care. But there is just a certain something 'less classic' going on visually. So I swiched gears intentionally and went single stage.
Short of it... I am really liking the 'back to single stage'. The 67 vette obviously looks great.. updated 'pop' to the paint.. but not 'too pop-ed'. Like... classic with just the right level of 'pop' to it. Hard to describe.. .but it is like mixing your own satin black paint. The off the shelf stuff is not quite right.
Also, with sgl stage, you have huge repair and finesse options. For example; On SS, if you get a chip (we do drive these things after all) you can mix up the paint with the catalyst, add a layers of paint to fill in the chip, and wet sand with a 1000 grit block to get the repair at the same paint level as the original paint. Compound it.. and viola'... never know there was an issue there. try that with BC / CC. It is because of this, the 62 I am re-nosing, the rear had checks and chip all over it. I have finessed what was a 25 footer to a decent 5 footer driver.
So.. long winded.. but people are quite correct indeed to suggest you consider SS. I am coming back SS thinking it is more 'correct.. but still updated at the same time' for painting classics. SS is not the ugly stepchild.
I do believe that I will do my 62 in SS. Now it is just a question of what color.. same as the OP on this thread.
Cheers - Jim
My 38 Cpe.. BC / CC. The GTO is behind it. It too BC / CC
Back to single stage about 4 years ago on the Ply PU. Something about it just looks more 'right' but at the same time 'updated'. The right balance.
Unless you have a museum quality car you should not be looking at it as an investment, therefore paint it the color that will make you happy. If you could order a new 1964 Corvette would you be buying a white car. Yes what we do to our cars does matter down the road. Look at the thread with the title 'The Ruin's of Midyear C2 63-67.' for examples. Bottom line is be happy or bend to peer pressure. The trim tag code may not matter to the next prospective owner after you. If it does he can keep looking. If I was looking I would not be in the market for a white car (plain), black car (hot, high maintenance and mutes body details) or silver car (always looks like it needs paint). Having stated this all C2s are beautiful no matter the color and I would even own a black one if that was the only color available.
I'm in a similar bind. I have a 62 SWC numbers matching but its saddle/saddle. Great interior color but horrid exterior! Does any one have an opinion on the silver or silver blue with the saddle? Thanks, Dave (new here)
Hey guys...I thought I had made a decision, but now I am having second thoughts. I am doing a restoration on a 64 coupe, I have a thread here showing the progress. The car was ermine white with dark blue interior from the factory. I don't know why, but personally I have never cared for white on C2s. No disrespect to those of you with white C2s. However, I love white on my 54. So here is my dilemma, I had it all set to paint the 64 silver blue, (I love that color) but now I am wondering if I should keep it the original color for history sake or silver blue because it's the color I love. The car is truly all numbers matching and being restored to original except for shocks, rear monospring, chambered exhaust and vintage air. What do you guys think? I need some advise and other points of view. I am still leaning towards silver blue, but I would like to hear what you all have to say. Thanks for your help!
If the choice is between history and love, I'll take love every time!
In addition, I too think that white somehow isn't the best color for a Sting Ray.
I'm in a similar bind. I have a 62 SWC numbers matching but its saddle/saddle. Great interior color but horrid exterior! Does any one have an opinion on the silver or silver blue with the saddle? Thanks, Dave (new here)
My mind's eye tells me that with the saddle interior, silver blue will look better than silver.
I'm in a similar bind. I have a 62 SWC numbers matching but its saddle/saddle. Great interior color but horrid exterior! Does any one have an opinion on the silver or silver blue with the saddle? Thanks, Dave (new here)
Indeed a rare car
Seriously though - I would not change the color on an original saddle/saddle car.
My ‘66 was originally Mosport Green and when my father bought it in ‘75 it was already black. He had it painted black again in the ‘90s and I wouldn’t change a thing. I remember that car when from when I was 2 years old and it’s “always” been that way.
My ‘66 was originally Mosport Green and when my father bought it in ‘75 it was already black. He had it painted black again in the ‘90s and I wouldn’t change a thing. I remember that car when from when I was 2 years old and it’s “always” been that way.
Paint it any color you want and enjoy!!
It’s black and I’ll never go back!
Matt - I don’t see your car ever leaving your family anyway so the color doesn’t matter.
Get at a blank and duplicate everything else except the color, and stamp COPO or the custom color code there and then make up a cool story to tell us all!
I'm in a similar bind. I have a 62 SWC numbers matching but its saddle/saddle. Great interior color but horrid exterior! Does any one have an opinion on the silver or silver blue with the saddle? Thanks, Dave (new here)
I actually think either silver or silver blue would be ok (and unusual) with saddle interior (which I love).
Silver and saddle reminds me of an old fighter plane. Cool. However- silver blue and saddle is just GOOD! (A mixture of almost any blue and saddle guts is pleasing to me).
I disagree with Frankie since it's all opinions, if I personally wound up with a saddle tan paint car the first thing I would do is change the color. Call it whatever the marketing department may, it's a metallic brown Corvette.
(Maybe them's fightin' words)
Last edited by ChattanoogaJSB; 11-24-2017 at 08:20 AM.
11-22-2017, 03:33 PM
Unless you have a museum quality car you should not be looking at it as an investment, therefore paint it the color that will make you happy. If you could order a new 1964 Corvette would you be buying a white car. Yes what we do to our cars does matter down the road. Look at the thread with the title 'The Ruin's of Midyear C2 63-67.' for examples. Bottom line is be happy or bend to peer pressure. The trim tag code may not matter to the next prospective owner after you. If it does he can keep looking. If I was looking I would not be in the market for a white car (plain), black car (hot, high maintenance and mutes body details) or silver car (always looks like it needs paint). Having stated this all C2s are beautiful no matter the color and I would even own a black one if that was the only color available.
