TRACTOR PARTS Allis Chalmers Case & David Brown Farmall & International Ferguson Ford & New Holland John Deere Massey Ferguson Massey Harris Minneapolis Moline Oliver & Cockshutt Kubota / Yanmar

TRACTOR MANUALS

Allis Chalmers	Case	Farmall IH	Ford 8N,9N,2N	Ford
Ferguson	John Deere	Massey Ferguson	Minn. Moline	Oliver

Antique Tractor Paint and Bodywork

Primer

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register

Author

James Nauert 42

05-18-2006 12:58:37

Report to Moderator

Would a sandable primer be the best thing to fill in pitted sheet metal? If so what kind would be compatible with John Deere classic green and would i have to paint over it with John Deere buff primer?

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-19-2006 10:56:58

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to James Nauert 420W, 05-18-2006 12:58:37

Hi James,

Well, you are getting more than one opinion so you can have some options. Somehow I don't think you are after expensive, premium products, suitable for a Mercedes, under your old technology tractor dealer paint, JD or not. But I could be wrong about that. The pits are the pits - really. They are a PITA to deal with. Here's my own thoughts on how to deal with them from a post quite a while back. It's still the same today. Those products won't break your bank account either. I am assuming you do not have supplied air breathing equipment, in which case you would want to replace the reference to MP182 to MP 181 in the PPG economy line of OMNI. Or, alternatively, you can consider the DuPont 131S mentioned by davpal but don't expect miracles from it - or the MP181 either for that matter. If the pits are more than just a very few thousandths deep, you really need a two-part finishing putty as the primary filler, followed by a surfacer product to top it off. I don't think you would have a compatibility problem with the JD paint (believed to be just alkyd enamel) but since I have never used that particular topcoat, I can't be absolutely positive.

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

1030 brian

05-19-2006 05:08:02

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to James Nauert 420W, 05-18-2006 12:58:37

I guess we should have asked how big are the pits?

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

davpal

05-18-2006 21:16:31

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to James Nauert 420W, 05-18-2006 12:58:37

If you have a finishmaster store near you get some PPG K-36 urethane primer and do the whole surface to seal it. Then get some Finishmaster Premium Finishing Putty and use a plastic spreader to put it on over the pitted areas very thin and wait for it to dry. Now sand it smooth and reapply to any pits you miss and keep that up until its pretty smooth. Now you can use the Dupont 131 S Gray Fill N Sand primer. Some guys call it bondo in a can. Spray it on over the finishing putty quite heavy and wait a little while for it to dry. It dries really fast because you shoot it with laquer thinner. Now you can really get down to making the surface really beautiful by wet sanding with some 400-600 grit and keep doing that with a block to get it flat and finally a foam pad with some 1000 grit and wet sand it. The fill and sand wet sands very smooth and nice. You will have a beautiful finish ready for paint in no time and your John Deere Green will go over it very well. You don't need the John Deere primer if you use the Dupont and PPG first. Good luck, that wet sanding is what really makes your paint look great.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-19-2006 11:07:30

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to davpal, 05-18-2006 21:16:31

Davpal,

I've used the 131S in the past over many years and this is the first I have ever heard of it being referred to as "bondo in a can". Are you sure you have not confused it with a sprayable polyester? The 131S is nothing more than an old technology lacquer-based primer-surfacer that has no more filling ability than any other similar product. To me, the only place for 131S in today's 2K world is as an inexpensive iso-free surfacer solution for those w/o supplied-air.

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

davpal

05-19-2006 21:31:46

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to Rod (NH), 05-19-2006 11:07:30

Perhaps you should read the can where it says "fill and sand" on the front of it. This product has a much higher build rate than other similar products. When you go to the finishmaster store and ask for a high build filler primer this is what they will give you most of the time unless you ask for a more expensive epoxy filler primer. I have the can in my hand and where the drips went over the edges a coulple of years ago the primer is probably at least 1/8 of an inch thick, quite a high build product. The bondo in a can reference came from a professional body working friend of mine that always has a unique way of putting things. The guys at the finishmaster store called it that too. I like it because it is easy to work with, wet sands much better than any other product I have worked with and seems to do and adequate job for what the above gentleman was asking about. No real confusion here, it works, I like it and I thought he may too. Later

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-20-2006 10:06:34

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to davpal, 05-19-2006 21:31:46

Oh, I have read the can. In fact I have a can right here:
third party image

It's about 5 years old and still unopened. It likely will never be opened since I've moved on to a 2K surfacer (PPG OMNI MP182). As I said before, I am quite familiar with the product having used it on quite a few occasions in the past. It certainly is a unique description to refer to 131S as "bondo in a can". With that as a standard there are an awful lot of "bondos in cans" out there. The tech sheet for it indicates a DFT of 1-4 mils in 2-4 coats. That's at most 2 mils per coat. Similarly, the 182 surfacer tech sheet indicates a 1.5-2.0 mils DFT build per coat. Really no significant difference there. I believe those numbers are quite typical of standard surfacers although some of the 2K high-build ones go a little more than that. I therefore take issue with your statement that it "has a much higher build rate than other similar products". There really is nothing special about the 131S concerning build unless one piles it on excessively - which is (was) far too common and can lead to sandscratches showing up later due to continued solvent evaporation and product shrinkage. I'd be very surprised if there are many pro body shops still using the stuff nowadays. To imply that any primer-surfacer product can be used to build up 1/8" is quite amazing and very misleading. The sixty or so coats required to obtain that is not realistic. I consider that thickness the high end for even spreadable polyester fillers (affectionately referred to collectively as "bondo"). I do agree that it is inexpensive, sands easily and (best of all) is iso-free. That's why I still recommend it to those w/o supplied-air as I did to James above. I just don't want him to expect any superior filling properties from it because of the "bondo in a can" reference. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I'm glad the product serves your purposes. It no longer serves mine. Peace.

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

davpal

05-20-2006 11:37:28

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to Rod (NH), 05-20-2006 10:06:34

You really have a way of selectivly reading and putting a spin on peoples comments. If you go back to my post I said the "drips over the edge of the can were at least 1/8 of an inch thick indicating a high build product" Nowhere in that statement would I imply you could spray any primer 1/8 of an inch thick. I don't need somebody to insult me every day on this board because he cant read between the lines and try to overwhelm us with his superior intellect. People on this board ask for advice, not a lecture.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-20-2006 18:06:21

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to davpal, 05-20-2006 11:37:28

When you talk about high build primers or surfacers, UNLESS it is a "sprayable body filler", which they aren't, the only difference is the build per coat. You still have to sand the stuff down to a reasonable level. The Dupont product may do the job in fewer coats, PPG has a similar product called Kondar. I actually got ripples with a sanding block in 1983 when I used that stuff, did not know it until I put on the topcoat. I traded the pickup off, I imagine the paint fell off a short time later. I think I would rather just use a 2K surfacer, put on 2 or 3 coats, sand, then put on a couple more then sand again. Perhaps with the 131, you could put on 2-4 coats sand and be done, but it's still a lacquer primer surfacer and you can't actually leave any more on the surface than you can with any other surfacer. And, after the body filler, all you need to do is cover the sanding scratches, any good surfacer will do that.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

EX-pro

05-20-2006 18:34:05

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to CNKS, 05-20-2006 18:06:21

The lacquer-based products will continue to shrink down after your paint job is done. After a year or so you'll be more likely to see sanding marks or repairs. Try the URO.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-20-2006 19:26:22

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to EX-pro, 05-20-2006 18:34:05

Everyone has their preferences depending on what they have used. I see no reason to use anything but PPG MP 182 2K surfacer. It only costs about $80 a gallon, I can get at least 2 tractors out of it if I do everything right the first time, probably 3.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

EX-pro

05-20-2006 19:57:55

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to CNKS, 05-20-2006 19:26:22

Fair enough. Is MP 182 a two or three part mix?

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-21-2006 06:20:02

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to EX-pro, 05-20-2006 19:57:55

The PPG OMNI MP182 is a 2K surfacer in PPG's "economy" OMNI line of auto products. It uses only two components, the basic surfacer and one of two available hardeners, one fast and one slow. The tech sheet for it is here. I have never used the DuPont URO product you mention so I can't comment from experience with it. Is it the 1120S/1140S product? The tech sheet for that indicates a DFT of 1.5-1.8 mils per coat (4.5-5.5 mils in 3 recommended coats). That seems to me to be not significantly different than the DFT of the MP182 - 1.5-2.0 mils per coat and 2-4 coats recommended. Granted, the comparison is between two different "quality levels" from different manufacturers - a PPG economy product and a DuPont premium product. Both are 2K surfacers with similar qualities (including presence of isos) but one costs a lot more than the other. I can understand a pro collision shop sticking with a premium "system" as recommended by the manufacturer for all products in the process. Manufacturer warranties, time saved, color matching and ability to pass costs along to customers/insurance companies are prime considerations. And of course customers will usually judge the product by the color match with the rest of the auto. But from a DIY standpoint doing an overall on an auto, or more specifically a farm tractor for himself, none of these considerations are applicable at all. Even time saved, unless it it very significant, is not a prime consideration. However, cost of product is. That and the functional quality of the product. I believe CNKS is correct when he says it's understandable when someone recommends a product that they use themselves, knows it works well and is comfortable using it. I agree, we all do that. But the needs of users can be very, very different.

I am not trying to start a "my product is better then your product" discussion here. But I am interested in what technical justification there might be for a DIY to spend so much more ($225/gal compared with $80/gal) for a product that basically does the same thing, keeping in mind this forum is primarily concerned with farm equipment and (I think) the readers are mostly DIYs working on their own equipment. Can you provide some kind of "value-added" reason why the more expensive product is worth it? Neither product is recommended to be applied directly to bare metal, so other products should preceed their use. Fade or chemical resistance wouldn't seem to be operative since we are not talking about a color topcoat. Chip resistance could be something but that is very hard to define, at least comparatively. I don't know. I am searching for something along those lines that could justify the higher cost for the URO surfacer to a DIY doing his tractor. For this type of product, even keeping within the same manufacturer (which is generally recommended) is probably not that important or even keeping within the same quality line of the same manufacturer. I don't know what DuPont offers in their NASON economy line for 2K surfacers but they are probably a lot less expensive than the URO premium product.

The reason I bring this all up is I've done some similar thinking on the products I use/have used. For instance, I've moved to a 2K surfacer from an old lacquer-based surfacer because I think the added value (for the exact same reasons you mention) is worth the extra expense to me for my own jobs. Conversely, I have moved down in presumed quality levels in an epoxy primer purely because of cost savings. I used to use PPG's premium epoxy primer DP (now DPLF w/o lead) exclusively. It is a very fine product in my opinion. But since PPG now offers the MP170 in their economy OMNI line at somewhere around one third the cost, I have moved to that product. It seems to work as well as the more expensive DP. There may be some reason why I should spend so much more and stick with the DP but I have been unable to define it.

Most DIYs doing work for themselves usually have to make some kind of cost/quality decisions on these products, even if they are very crude ones. I'd be interested in your thoughts and those of other pros, such as B---, on this.

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

EX-pro

05-22-2006 08:49:22

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to Rod (NH), 05-21-2006 06:20:02

Yes it is the 1120 or 1140 primer with 1130 converter and 1125 activator. I would say the value added for the DIY is versatility. URO can be mixed to very high build or mixed as a three-part sealer. 4:1:1 is the mix on the can, but can be 6:1:1 Thick or 4:1:3 Sealer. This would allow The DIY fewer chemicals to have around. The can doesn�t recommend over bare metal, Paint school does if metal is sanded with 180. I�ve sprayed it on several entire bare metal vehicles and never had it lift. These are the primers people who want to run their car in primer as a finish are using. 1120 is tintable if you would like colored primer. If a DIY wanted to prime then paint next month or year, this would work fine. Chip/scratch resistance is a hard one to measure, but I believe it is superior in that area also. I agree that most DIY are going to be on the cheap, but there must be a small percentage that want to know what is used for a �show quality job� either to spray themselves or to request it be used by whomever they are considering paying to do the job. I obviously beat the Dupont drum. I�ve used most other top lines. I keep coming back to Dupont for the long lasting paint job, not the low price.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-22-2006 14:58:49

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to EX-pro, 05-22-2006 08:49:22

Thanks for the response. There's nothing wrong with beating the drum for DuPont. I probably sound like I am doing the same for PPG. Frank Stalfire will be pleased though. He's the DuPont factory rep who posts here occasionally. I agree that versatility is worth something although to me it wouldn't be worth the cost difference noted for my own work. It could be for others. They'll have to judge for themselves. If I wanted a higher build than normal for some reason, I'd just shoot a couple of extra coats instead of paying a high premium to avoid doing it. The delta cost for that is not as high and the extra time to do it is not important, at least to me. I'm also a firm believer in not trying to use a surfacer for the heavier fills that are better done with polyester filler or a polyester finishing putty. I don't routinely use a sealer but when I think I should, I just shoot a coat of epoxy primer. That has always served me well in that regard and I have it on hand anyway since it's my mainstay bare metal primer.

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-22-2006 10:56:33

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to EX-pro, 05-22-2006 08:49:22

So you are saying that instead of my usual procedure of using epoxy primer over bare metal, then following with surfacer, I can just use 1120 or 1140, use it as a primer surfacer, sand and topcoat? As far as the 180 grit, my sheet metal is sanded with 100 or 150 anyway, not to mention some 80 grit marks prior to body filler. Does it have a recoat window, as epoxy does, or can I let it sit a long time, then just sand before topcoating? Sounds pretty good, still don't like the price. Although the PPG epoxy, surfacer and catalysts are pushing $200 for a gallon each of epoxy and surfacer. I wonder if it can be used under PPG products, as I like what I'm using, and don't want to break in a new dealer, or have to figure the color out again -- With PPG MTK, I have adjusted the toners to give what I think is a more accurate color. Rod, does PPG have a similar product??

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-22-2006 15:03:18

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to CNKS, 05-22-2006 10:56:33

I'd guess PPG's K-36, or K-93, premium surfacers in the Deltron Line would be the equivalent to the URO, subject to personal preference, of course. I've never used either and don't know how much they cost, but I'm pretty sure they're pricey - probably similar to the URO. They are also mixable as a sealer if you are so inclined. But you have to depart from the tech sheet instructions to apply either direct to bare metal. I am sure you can do it and have it work. But it's definitely not the preferred practice per the manufacturer. You could do the same thing with the 182 for that matter. I don't do it that way because I think epoxy first provides better corrosion protection than you get from any surfacer product, 2K or not. Apparently PPG thinks so also because of the wording in the published tech sheet. The same goes for the URO if you read that sheet - pretreat with 2 coats of an etch primer or use 5717S/5718S (phosphoric acid) chemical treatment. If the Paint School Ex-pro refers to is official DuPont training, then I submit they are not following their own written instructions. Not that it can't be done successfully. I am sure it can be. But you wouldn't know it from the written document and I think it is arguable whether the result is as good by going direct. It would be interesting to see Frank's input on that. There may a newer revised tech sheet that has different instructions but you'd expect it to be on DuPont's website if there was. I don't think you would have a problem at all in putting MTK over the URO. You won't get PPG to bless it but you should have no problem if you choose to go that way. I wouldn't try to tint it with MTK however. That would be a greater risk. Anyway, Ex-pro's the user here. I'm not. I'm just looking at what's in writing from DuPont - and it's not unlike what's in writing from PPG for similar products.

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

EX-pro

05-22-2006 15:23:17

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to Rod (NH), 05-22-2006 15:03:18

It was a Dupont factory school in Pomona California from a handout titled "Best practices for URO"

My take on mixing paint systems is this. In painting there are two types of adhesion, chemical and mechanical. Chemical adhesion requires chemically clean surface and all time windows be followed to get good cross-link between layers. Mechanical adhesion is the amount of bite you give via sanding. If you have both kinds of adhesion, you'll have no lifting problems. Most of the time you can get by with one or the other. If you mix systems, you may give up part of the chemical adhesion, but as long as you have good mechanical adhesion you'll probably be OK.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-22-2006 15:54:36

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to EX-pro, 05-22-2006 15:23:17

Agree fully with your take on adhesion. I just found it odd that the school didn't agree with what's in writing from corporate on base metal preparation. Could be the tech sheet on the website is old info. It wouldn't be the first time for something like that to happen.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

EX-pro

05-22-2006 11:42:16

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to CNKS, 05-22-2006 10:56:33

That is what I'm saying. You could URO prime then Sand 400 wet then either URO seal and topcoat or just topcoat directly. A DIY could finish prep in 280 or 320 dry and URO seal and topcoat. I believe the open window is 2-4 hours with no sanding required. It is sold in quarts also.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-22-2006 14:47:57

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to EX-pro, 05-22-2006 11:42:16

Thanks for the response, no doubt about it being a good product. The high cost is probably due to it's multipurpose use. As you say I could probably eliminate a product (epoxy) and use the URO, for all practical purposes, but I'm not sure anything sticks as good as epoxy. I have no need for sealers, as long as I stick with the same manufacturer. I don't believe URO has any real advantage over the epoxy + 2K surfacer, at least not the way I do it. Unlike a lot of people, I don't have a rust problem on bare metal. No visible rust on bare sheet metal even after several months. If it sits that long, I do sand it again just to be sure. Typically, I will then put on epoxy, then surfacer within an hour. All I have to do is clean my gun between the epoxy and the surfacer. I usually wait until the next day to begin sanding. PPG MP 182 covers and builds very well, in fact sometimes I'm concerned that I have too much on. I would have to do the same sanding and recoating, if necessary, if I used URO. I usually stop after the second sanding. But, if I tried URO, I would probably like it. I don't like sanding. I have just starting using a new air sander I just purchased. It leaves a smoother surface dry than I can do wet by hand. So far so good. Used it so far to color sand -- it doesn't leave the scratches that my inferior hand sanding does, even on curves.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-19-2006 06:04:45

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to davpal, 05-18-2006 21:16:31

Davpal -- Do you know the finest grit of sandpaper used over the products you mentioned, or any good surfacer for that matter, that will allow proper adhesion of the topcoat (I use PPG MTK acrylic urethane). I have heard that there was an upper limit, I thought about 800 grit. PPG recommends 600, but that may be the coarsest they think will give a smooth finish. I am asking because I am currently doing some color sanding/buffing on the inside of the fenders. Have used 2000 as the final sand. Difficult to sand and buff all the nooks and crannies and curves. I have a couple of places where I got to rough and got down to the primer. I'm debating whether to leave it alone or spot it in and resand and buff that area. I was going to scuff with a scothbrite pad, but am curious how fine a whole panel can be and still get adhesion.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Rod (NH)

05-19-2006 11:43:36

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to CNKS, 05-19-2006 06:04:45

CN,

I doubt you want buy more tools but if you find yourself heading in the direction of color sanding and buffing as the fix for your "dirt" problem, you might want to consider the CP mini buffer. I have the RO sander version of it with both 2" and 3" pads and love it. Personally, I think it is better suited to tractor work than a conventional full-sized RO unit. The small size is a joy to use. The 2" pad should also work on the buffer version although you might have to improvise for that small a bonnet. I wouldn't want to do an automotive hood with one. But that's a different situation than most tractor configurations. Len sells 'em. That's where I got mine.

Regarding the spotting in on single stage topcoats, I'd consider either spotting with an artists brush, depending on size and location of the cut throughs, or reshooting the entire panel with color. I realize you don't want to reshoot the panel because of your dirt problem. However, trying to effectively spot in a color patch with a gun using a single stage paint requires an expertise that I've never been able to master. I always wind up with a noticeable line of demarcation after all is said and done. That's why I always just scuff and reshoot the entire panel if I have to make a repair in the topcoat. If the cut-through(s) is quite small, I've just spotted the area with an artists brush and left it at that. That's better than a primer spot, even in an area that is not that noticeable. It all depends on how important a critical close inspection is to you. If you are talking about reshooting the entire panel, I've reshot MTK over a 400 grit scratch with no problem and see no real reason to go finer. BTW, my MTK sheet says 400 grit (machine or dry hand) or 500 grit (wet).

Rod

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-19-2006 15:03:40

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to Rod (NH), 05-19-2006 11:43:36

What I intend to do if I decide to is to sand or scuff the area, recoat only the rub through, and a lttle past, then color sand the MTK, then buff it and the surronding area. In theory it shouldn't show, or at least it "should" look better than it is now, but I'm at the point now of diminishing returns, so I am probably better off leaving it alone. It will be visible, above and behind the tire.
I wish I had known about your buffer earlier, also the sander. I have had a full size quality circular buffer for about 3 years, Makita 9227C, excellent quality and balance, I use it for the first step, compounding. I recenly purchased a Porter Cable orbital 6 inch, ok except for the tightest areas, such as the inside of fenders with their bracing, etc. I use it for the polish. It can be run on edge, with a little descrition. Has Mequiar's name on it. Orbital is usually thought of as a detail buffer, not for new paint -- but this one is a GOOD buffer. Will not burn the paint and does not leave scratches. But I could use another for the tight places, and may eventually purchase the one you have. I just used an air sander I got from Len this week, he had it highlighted on his web site. Used only once, DRY sanding MTK with 1500 grit. It does a good job, better than I can hand sand wet, but is also 6 inch, requiring some hand sanding. Next step is to try it with 3000 grit wet -- I do not know at this point if that will help much, but I'll find out. The 1500 grit 3M finish paper does not clog -- amazing.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

EX-pro

05-19-2006 06:14:07

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to CNKS, 05-19-2006 06:04:45

CNKS, Clear coat will stick well to about 1200 grit and single stage will stick well up to 600 grit. 2000 grit is for buffing back up.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-19-2006 11:14:01

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to EX-pro, 05-19-2006 06:14:07

Thanks, I wasn't planning on painting over the 2000 topcoat where I screwed up although my question may have sounded like it. Also it has been polished, therefore the paint certainly won't stick to it without sanding. Was just curious how fine I could sand surfacer without problems. I have never used finer than 600, usually 400. I asked because when I color sand I sometimes get scratches that are more than what improper buffing will produce. At that time I can't tell if they are in the color coat or the surfacer. Probably caused by a piece of grit under the sandpaper in one or the other, that I did not notice while sanding. Finer paper won't cure that problem anyway. I can paint better than I can sand and buff, I have not done enough of it to get my technique down yet -- but I'm getting there.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

1030 brian

05-18-2006 19:20:31

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to James Nauert 420W, 05-18-2006 12:58:37

I've used a product by dupont called Uroprime. A very good product. It can be used as a high build, or as a surfacer. Exellent to use, however the price has gone through the roof, 225.00 for a gallon not including the acctivator. The auto body supply place that I get my stuff from sold me an "aftermarket" product last week that I have yet to try, but I was told that is just as good for alot less $$. Good Luck!! Brian

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

EX-pro

05-19-2006 06:20:02

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to 1030 brian, 05-18-2006 19:20:31

"URO" is all I use. I would say it could be built up to 1/16 inch with no problem. You can also mix it thin to be your sealer coat just before you spray your color. A fully set up gallon of URO would do more that one tractor.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

wddave

05-18-2006 16:38:08

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to James Nauert 420W, 05-18-2006 12:58:37

A finishing/blending filler called Icing works very well. Sands nice and seems to have very few pinholes that are common with filler.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

CNKS

05-18-2006 14:48:52

Report to Moderator

Re: Primer in reply to James Nauert 420W, 05-18-2006 12:58:37

Use body filler or a two part putty. Unless the pits are very shallow, primer, primer surfacer, surfacer, or high build primer (I think I convered most of them) won't fill the pits unless they are very shallow. Even then you will have to apply and sand several times. Such products will fill 80 grit sanding scratches and leave a good surface for topcoat. I prefer an epoxy primer, generally not sandable, for good adhesion, then a sandable surfacer or primer surfacer over that. The JD primer should be ok, either over bare metal or preferably over the epoxy, unless it is non-sandable. In that case I would skip it and use a primer surfacer over the epoxy. You don't need both the primer surfacer and the JD primer.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

[Options] [Printer Friendly] [Posting Help] [Return to Forum] [Log in to Reply]

TRACTOR PARTS	TRACTOR MANUALS

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home | Forums

Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy