Looking to repaint a 1974 7GCBC. The plane only has 600+ hours TT with the original paint and fabric. Local shop says fabric still in great shape. I really want to take it back to the factory color and scheme, light blue and white with stars on tail and wings. Not sure what the pattern is called. Will the factory repaint planes? Is that worth it? Any recommendations on making sure this is a back to original type job. Would want this to be a restoration type project. Or does that even matter?
Painting 1974 7GCBC
- Thread starter jao1972
- Start date
JOA-
There's more to your story, I'm sure. Thirty years and the fabric is in great shape, but not the original paint? So it's been repainted? What process was used (i.e. Stits/Polyfiber, Ceconite, Superflite)? There should be notes in the airframe logs. More details will help.
Paint adds weight, and anything you add needs to be compatible with what's underneath. If your fabric is truly original and in good shape, you might consider blessing your lucky stars (hah!) and not messing with it.
My '74 ECA needed recovering in '92, though I don't know if it was hangered or not. Its fabric was still good this summer when I ripped it off to rebuild the wings, but that's in another post...
For their new wings, ACA is using a Superflite-like process, per my conversations with the sales dept.
-Alex
There's more to your story, I'm sure. Thirty years and the fabric is in great shape, but not the original paint? So it's been repainted? What process was used (i.e. Stits/Polyfiber, Ceconite, Superflite)? There should be notes in the airframe logs. More details will help.
Paint adds weight, and anything you add needs to be compatible with what's underneath. If your fabric is truly original and in good shape, you might consider blessing your lucky stars (hah!) and not messing with it.
My '74 ECA needed recovering in '92, though I don't know if it was hangered or not. Its fabric was still good this summer when I ripped it off to rebuild the wings, but that's in another post...
For their new wings, ACA is using a Superflite-like process, per my conversations with the sales dept.
-Alex
JOA-
If you have an original, not oversprayed, factory finish on your 1974 it is Randolph dope. If the fabric is still good, and there are no underlying structural issues it is a relatively easy task to heal, blend, any ringworm, spray with rejuvinator and then respray with pigmented dope. Randolph is now owned by the same people that make Polyfiber, after confirming you have the original finish call for their excellent manual.
Dope and Polyfiber/Stits are the only covering systems that can be rejuvinated, all Aeronca/Champion/Bellanca Champion aircraft left the factory finished with dope. All ACA aircraft have had a polyurethane finish, pre-2001 ACA used Superflight II, 2001 and subsequent have used an ACA in house combination of products that achieve a shiny finish with the minimum of effort but is NOT FAA aproved for use in a non-ACA recover.
Tom-
If you have an original, not oversprayed, factory finish on your 1974 it is Randolph dope. If the fabric is still good, and there are no underlying structural issues it is a relatively easy task to heal, blend, any ringworm, spray with rejuvinator and then respray with pigmented dope. Randolph is now owned by the same people that make Polyfiber, after confirming you have the original finish call for their excellent manual.
Dope and Polyfiber/Stits are the only covering systems that can be rejuvinated, all Aeronca/Champion/Bellanca Champion aircraft left the factory finished with dope. All ACA aircraft have had a polyurethane finish, pre-2001 ACA used Superflight II, 2001 and subsequent have used an ACA in house combination of products that achieve a shiny finish with the minimum of effort but is NOT FAA aproved for use in a non-ACA recover.
Tom-
Alex and Tom, thanks for the great feed back. That's a lot of great info to chew on. The plane is actually my father's. He bought it around 1980 or so and it is has been hangered since he's had it. I know he has never had it repainted or recovered. And has never mentioned any damage history or it having been recovered. The paint has cracked, peeled off in spots, etc. and been patched and repaired over time. It's also faded a good bit. The local mechanic said he could remove the existing paint and repaint it. I just wasn't sure if that was possible. The guy has fully restored a couple of Citabria's. I also didn't know if ACA repainted planes. The color scheme and markings look original to me. The idea is to have the repaint to be just like the orginal in color and markings. I also didn't know if having the factory repaint the plane would help with the value.
JAO-
No extra value in having ACA do the repaint, in addition the current ACA system is entirely different than the one used on your plane if it is all original.
Your mention that your mechanic offered to remove the existing paint and respray is confusing, whatever was used in the cover/finishing has penetrated the fabric and cannot be removed. If the original dope was oversprayed with enamel it could be VERY carefully sanded off prior to respray.
The first task is to confirm what the present finish is.
Tom-
No extra value in having ACA do the repaint, in addition the current ACA system is entirely different than the one used on your plane if it is all original.
Your mention that your mechanic offered to remove the existing paint and respray is confusing, whatever was used in the cover/finishing has penetrated the fabric and cannot be removed. If the original dope was oversprayed with enamel it could be VERY carefully sanded off prior to respray.
The first task is to confirm what the present finish is.
Tom-
Thanks again for the input Tom. That's good to know about the factory job. As you said, what I need to do is first confirm what is on there and then go with that. As far as taking the paint off to the fabric, in some places the paint has cracked and just flaked off of the fabric. I guess the mechanic assumes he can get the rest off that way. I need to inquire about that some more. Does that sound like the same system you are talking about if it's cracking and peeling like that? It's like a hard, brittle shell when it flakes off.
JAO-
Some flaking is common on 30 year old dope, I doubt that you could, or would want to remove all of the dope in that manner. As long as the undelying fabic is still good I would suggest removing any loose, flaking, dope, build up the bare areas with clear, and silver, non-tautening dope. Any cracks, or ringworm, should be blended in, after a light sanding you spray with rejuvinator and respray the color. It's really simple, but time consuming, you can do this as a flying project if you don't mind the odd looks. Inspect your existing cover/finish, decide on a plan, get the Randolph Manual, all of the Champion/Bellanca built aircraft had Randolph dope.
Tom-
Some flaking is common on 30 year old dope, I doubt that you could, or would want to remove all of the dope in that manner. As long as the undelying fabic is still good I would suggest removing any loose, flaking, dope, build up the bare areas with clear, and silver, non-tautening dope. Any cracks, or ringworm, should be blended in, after a light sanding you spray with rejuvinator and respray the color. It's really simple, but time consuming, you can do this as a flying project if you don't mind the odd looks. Inspect your existing cover/finish, decide on a plan, get the Randolph Manual, all of the Champion/Bellanca built aircraft had Randolph dope.
Tom-
JAO,
Mind if I add my own unique, yet warped, opinion?!? If the plane is 30 years old and still has the original fabric, that obviously means that the fabric is also 30 years old. So are the wood spars, ribs, compression struts, drag and anti-drag wires, control cables, fuselage longerons, tailpost, etc., etc., and on and on. My point is....after 30 years of never being seen (except through small inspection holes) I would want to inspect the hell out of the entire structure, especially the wood spars (remember the AD?). 30 years is a long time for anything, including fabric...even if it is dacron.
If you are going to go to all the time and expense to flake off the old finish and repaint the fabric, why not do a complete recover job instead and give yourself some peace of mind about the overall condition of the aircraft???!! Yes, it will probably cost more for materials and possibly even time (though it will take alot of time to flake off the old finish), but the 'value' of seeing and inspecting the spars and other structures would override the additional expense. Just doing a 'flake and repaint' job will give you a few years of shiny finish, but you'll eventually be doing a recover job anyway, 'cause that 30 year old fabric won't last forever. If you do the recover job now (and do it right, i.e., follow the manuals in regards to approved topcoats...like, no Imron over fabric!), you'll have another 30+ years to enjoy the plane before having to think about another recover/repaint job. And you'll have the peace of mind of knowing your spars and other structures have been thoroughly inspected and approved for return to service.
It's your money, not mine, but please give it some serious thought. I'm an A&P/IA, and am quite 'anal' about doing what I think 'should', or 'ought to be', done. I prefer to err on the side of caution.
That's my epistle for the day....let us all know what you decide to do. Good luck!
Mind if I add my own unique, yet warped, opinion?!? If the plane is 30 years old and still has the original fabric, that obviously means that the fabric is also 30 years old. So are the wood spars, ribs, compression struts, drag and anti-drag wires, control cables, fuselage longerons, tailpost, etc., etc., and on and on. My point is....after 30 years of never being seen (except through small inspection holes) I would want to inspect the hell out of the entire structure, especially the wood spars (remember the AD?). 30 years is a long time for anything, including fabric...even if it is dacron.
If you are going to go to all the time and expense to flake off the old finish and repaint the fabric, why not do a complete recover job instead and give yourself some peace of mind about the overall condition of the aircraft???!! Yes, it will probably cost more for materials and possibly even time (though it will take alot of time to flake off the old finish), but the 'value' of seeing and inspecting the spars and other structures would override the additional expense. Just doing a 'flake and repaint' job will give you a few years of shiny finish, but you'll eventually be doing a recover job anyway, 'cause that 30 year old fabric won't last forever. If you do the recover job now (and do it right, i.e., follow the manuals in regards to approved topcoats...like, no Imron over fabric!), you'll have another 30+ years to enjoy the plane before having to think about another recover/repaint job. And you'll have the peace of mind of knowing your spars and other structures have been thoroughly inspected and approved for return to service.
It's your money, not mine, but please give it some serious thought. I'm an A&P/IA, and am quite 'anal' about doing what I think 'should', or 'ought to be', done. I prefer to err on the side of caution.
That's my epistle for the day....let us all know what you decide to do. Good luck!
Blair-
You are 100% correct, when Ceconite was first marketed as a "lifetime" cover I regularly reminded the hangar bums that the wood and steel tube structure was designed, in the days of cotton, for inspection every 10-15 years. The same point is valid for metalized Stinsons, Tri-Pacers, etc.
Today with powder coating, metal spars and modern corrosion control products a well maintained, and hangared, aircraft should be able to safely operate for the life of the cover. Careful inspection is certainly required prior to making the decision to rejuvinate/respray. A friend recently purchased a completely original 1975 ECA-with 650 TT, that has been well maintained, and hangared, this is a viable canididate for rejuvination/respray, but an exception from the norm due to it's extremely low time.
Tom-
You are 100% correct, when Ceconite was first marketed as a "lifetime" cover I regularly reminded the hangar bums that the wood and steel tube structure was designed, in the days of cotton, for inspection every 10-15 years. The same point is valid for metalized Stinsons, Tri-Pacers, etc.
Today with powder coating, metal spars and modern corrosion control products a well maintained, and hangared, aircraft should be able to safely operate for the life of the cover. Careful inspection is certainly required prior to making the decision to rejuvinate/respray. A friend recently purchased a completely original 1975 ECA-with 650 TT, that has been well maintained, and hangared, this is a viable canididate for rejuvination/respray, but an exception from the norm due to it's extremely low time.
Tom-
I appreciate everybody's input into this. I apologize for the delay in responding to this. I have been kind of swamped the past few weeks and have had to put this aside for a bit. Back on it now though.
Again, thanks for all the great input. Blair, I totally see where you are coming from. Looks like two approaches can be taken here, repair job or restoration. I guess the real issue is cost. Does anybody have some ball park figures for rejunate/respray vs. total fabric replacement and paint?
Second question, what is the best new fabric to use and paint or dope?
Again, thanks for all the great input. Blair, I totally see where you are coming from. Looks like two approaches can be taken here, repair job or restoration. I guess the real issue is cost. Does anybody have some ball park figures for rejunate/respray vs. total fabric replacement and paint?
Second question, what is the best new fabric to use and paint or dope?
Jao-
These prices are from a local, well known fabric shop, $2500.00 for a rejuvinate/respray after the owners heals/blends the cracks, 23,500. for a simple recover with no underlying issues to resolve, both prices using Randolph dope.
The only fabric available today is Dacron, sold as Ceconite, Superflght, and Polyfiber. Look at your present factory Randolph dopes longevity, durability, and ease of repair/rejuvination when you consider changing to another product. Either Randolph dope, or the Polyfiber/Stiss process will provide similar proven benefits, both have stood the test of time in addition to verified QUV Meter testing. Polyurethane looks good, goes on easy, but is VERY difficult to repair/blend the repairs in, and all Polyurethanes have a known problem with cracking. Given time I suspect Poly will eventually become a first class product, but it is heavier then either dope or Polyfiber.
Tom-
These prices are from a local, well known fabric shop, $2500.00 for a rejuvinate/respray after the owners heals/blends the cracks, 23,500. for a simple recover with no underlying issues to resolve, both prices using Randolph dope.
The only fabric available today is Dacron, sold as Ceconite, Superflght, and Polyfiber. Look at your present factory Randolph dopes longevity, durability, and ease of repair/rejuvination when you consider changing to another product. Either Randolph dope, or the Polyfiber/Stiss process will provide similar proven benefits, both have stood the test of time in addition to verified QUV Meter testing. Polyurethane looks good, goes on easy, but is VERY difficult to repair/blend the repairs in, and all Polyurethanes have a known problem with cracking. Given time I suspect Poly will eventually become a first class product, but it is heavier then either dope or Polyfiber.
Tom-
djpacro
Member
With my 8KCAB, one wing had recent fabric and we changed the colour - rubbing it back and starting with a new coat of white worked well. The other wing needed new spars from an old wingtip strike - 20 years ago it had been recovered in razorback which I definitely don't like at all. We used pre-sewn Ceconite 102 envelopes from Spruce for that wing and the fuselage. The fuselage envelope wasn't the best fit.
A number of fuselage formers and stringers needed replacing. Needed some new wing ribs as there were quite a few minor cracks. Rework to all wing ribs (including the new ones) to ensure the metal didn't rub on the spar and to provide adequate relief radii.
A related question aimed at Blair:
Long lead time here to get the right color Randolph as it can't go by air so we went for Classic Aero - the color is mixed locally. (Classic Aeros is from Poly-Fiber Inc as well and they have also taken over the Randolph dopes) Cheaper was a bonus BUT - the color was very thin and it needed many more coats than stated by the instruction manual. Less thinner was required than per the manual. More coats required than if it had been Randolph. The local agent denied this. Has anyone else experienced this?
A number of fuselage formers and stringers needed replacing. Needed some new wing ribs as there were quite a few minor cracks. Rework to all wing ribs (including the new ones) to ensure the metal didn't rub on the spar and to provide adequate relief radii.
A related question aimed at Blair:
Long lead time here to get the right color Randolph as it can't go by air so we went for Classic Aero - the color is mixed locally. (Classic Aeros is from Poly-Fiber Inc as well and they have also taken over the Randolph dopes) Cheaper was a bonus BUT - the color was very thin and it needed many more coats than stated by the instruction manual. Less thinner was required than per the manual. More coats required than if it had been Randolph. The local agent denied this. Has anyone else experienced this?
Dave-
No experience with Classic Aero dope but Randolph availability issues seem to be resolved here. I understand that after years of product improvement effort (attempting to be competative with the admittedly superior Randolph dope) by Polyfiber they discovered the reason that Randolph was so durable after the purchase and Randolph will continue to be produced to the same formlae.
Tom-
No experience with Classic Aero dope but Randolph availability issues seem to be resolved here. I understand that after years of product improvement effort (attempting to be competative with the admittedly superior Randolph dope) by Polyfiber they discovered the reason that Randolph was so durable after the purchase and Randolph will continue to be produced to the same formlae.
Tom-
Dave,
Sorry Dave, I don't have any info on this problem other than what we all learned while at the Pitts factory. Some colors just will NOT cover the silver at all, yellow being one of the worst. Those colors that will not cover well need a coat or two of white over the silver first, then several coats of the color. All in all, the white coats save you several extra coats of the thin colored coats, possibly ending up lighter in the long run?!?!?! When I painted the Kitfox I only needed two coats (i.e., one crosscoat) of the red or blue Polytone to cover the silver, but it took 5-6 coats of the yellow to get any coverage.
Sorry Dave, I don't have any info on this problem other than what we all learned while at the Pitts factory. Some colors just will NOT cover the silver at all, yellow being one of the worst. Those colors that will not cover well need a coat or two of white over the silver first, then several coats of the color. All in all, the white coats save you several extra coats of the thin colored coats, possibly ending up lighter in the long run?!?!?! When I painted the Kitfox I only needed two coats (i.e., one crosscoat) of the red or blue Polytone to cover the silver, but it took 5-6 coats of the yellow to get any coverage.
djpacro
Member
Blair, I should've given you more information.
We put white over the silver.
The real problem was with the red over the white. To thin for spraying, the red needed much less volume of thinners than Randolph dope (compared with the previous job done by the same shop). From memory was 4 coats of red to cover the white.
(Is it your Kitfox?)
We put white over the silver.
The real problem was with the red over the white. To thin for spraying, the red needed much less volume of thinners than Randolph dope (compared with the previous job done by the same shop). From memory was 4 coats of red to cover the white.
(Is it your Kitfox?)
Dave,
No, the Kitfox belonged to a guy in CA. I built it for him. After I wrote the covering procedures manual for the Kitfox back in the '80's, the factory (Denny Aerocraft) got several requests from customers to have planes built for them, ('cause they didn't have the skills, time or equipment, etc....whatever?!?!) I was living/working in Logan, Utah at the time. Dan Denny forwarded several of these contacts to me, and I finally decided to do one. By the time the kit was ready to ship I was working at the Pitts factory (Christen Industries), in Wyoming.
It took me much longer to build than I anticipated. I was working on airplanes all day long, and had to go home and work on airplanes again at night.....it almost made me sick of airplanes!! I really got burnt out!! (Especially when it was 20 below out in the shop! I covered the wings in my dining room!!)
I flew it for about 2 years before the owner finally came and got it. (I put the 40 hours on it so he wouldn't have to get his own restricted flight area in CA.)
I really quite enjoyed the airplane, but would rather have a 7AC, BCM, CCM, L-16A or B. Or, if the world were perfect...a Citabria, or even a Super Decathlon!!!
(Boy...what along winded answer to such a simple question!?!?!)
Blair
No, the Kitfox belonged to a guy in CA. I built it for him. After I wrote the covering procedures manual for the Kitfox back in the '80's, the factory (Denny Aerocraft) got several requests from customers to have planes built for them, ('cause they didn't have the skills, time or equipment, etc....whatever?!?!) I was living/working in Logan, Utah at the time. Dan Denny forwarded several of these contacts to me, and I finally decided to do one. By the time the kit was ready to ship I was working at the Pitts factory (Christen Industries), in Wyoming.
It took me much longer to build than I anticipated. I was working on airplanes all day long, and had to go home and work on airplanes again at night.....it almost made me sick of airplanes!! I really got burnt out!! (Especially when it was 20 below out in the shop! I covered the wings in my dining room!!)
I flew it for about 2 years before the owner finally came and got it. (I put the 40 hours on it so he wouldn't have to get his own restricted flight area in CA.)
I really quite enjoyed the airplane, but would rather have a 7AC, BCM, CCM, L-16A or B. Or, if the world were perfect...a Citabria, or even a Super Decathlon!!!
(Boy...what along winded answer to such a simple question!?!?!)
Blair
Tom said:
Tom,
Am I reading this correctly (forgive me, I'm a newbie), $23,500 for a recover?
The reason I ask, is I am considering purchase of a Citabria or Decathalon, but only have tie down availability for 6 to 7 years at my airport (Camarillo, CA). At $23,500, the breakeven point would be 14.5 years (hanger vs. tie down cost) for a recover. I'm not sure the fabric would last that long in the So. Cal. sun.
Michael
Michael -
I read it the same way you did, $23,500 for a recover and paint job. One mechanic told me it would cost around $22,000, but I was told by several other people (that I thought knew what they were talking about) that you could get a recover/paint for around $10,000.
I should have done more homework b/c I can't believe there is such a descrepancy. Does anyone else have any quotes on a recover job for a Citabria? I've still got a few years before it will be a major issue for me, but I would certainly like a better idea on the cost of it.
I read it the same way you did, $23,500 for a recover and paint job. One mechanic told me it would cost around $22,000, but I was told by several other people (that I thought knew what they were talking about) that you could get a recover/paint for around $10,000.
I should have done more homework b/c I can't believe there is such a descrepancy. Does anyone else have any quotes on a recover job for a Citabria? I've still got a few years before it will be a major issue for me, but I would certainly like a better idea on the cost of it.
FYI-
The huge difference in price between the $10,000. recover, and the $23,000. recover, is the prep work and the covering process.
Is the shop going to completely strip the aircraft, sandblast the tubing and reprime, or simply remove the old fabric and recover with a modern, low labor, spray three coats, polyurethane covering system.
You get what you pay for, polyurethane covering systems look nice and shiny, go on quickly with much less labor then the well proven Randolph dope covering system, but are known for theit tendancy to form cracks, and difficulty of repair.
Tom-
The huge difference in price between the $10,000. recover, and the $23,000. recover, is the prep work and the covering process.
Is the shop going to completely strip the aircraft, sandblast the tubing and reprime, or simply remove the old fabric and recover with a modern, low labor, spray three coats, polyurethane covering system.
You get what you pay for, polyurethane covering systems look nice and shiny, go on quickly with much less labor then the well proven Randolph dope covering system, but are known for theit tendancy to form cracks, and difficulty of repair.
Tom-
Tom,
What do you recommend for someone who has to store their plane outside in the Southern California sun (no hangers available) - the the full Randolph covers, which I sounds like it would last longer, but is more expensive, OR the cheaper, less durable polyurethane covers?
Thanks,
Michael
What do you recommend for someone who has to store their plane outside in the Southern California sun (no hangers available) - the the full Randolph covers, which I sounds like it would last longer, but is more expensive, OR the cheaper, less durable polyurethane covers?
Thanks,
Michael