Bike Painting Colours ?

Samc1234567890

I bought a bike frame to build up and the paint on the frame is all flaking off and scratched so im getting it re done i don't know whether to get it anodised or powder coated it will be one or the other but what colour should i do, i was thinking red and white any ideas ? thanks

welshkev

Well, red is the fastest colour

zulu12

Powder coating is the way to go, just make sure you let someone reputable do it though.

slickmouse

id go for red, blue or yellow, or perhaps something in between two of those

whats your favorite colour ?

Samc1234567890

I like red think ill go with that, is it necessary to have it sand blasted thanks

cooldad

Yes but powder coating is pretty rubbish on bikes.

Kowalski675

Samc1234567890 wrote:

I like red think ill go with that, is it necessary to have it sand blasted thanks

The coater does all that (they strip it in a bath of seriously nasty chemicals then shotblast it). You just need to tell them what colour you want, and make sure they understand which parts you want masking.

Samc1234567890

does anyone know any decent places that do this and how much it will cost thanks for the help

welshkev

Argos cycles in Bristol, £120

Kowalski675

£120? Jesus, are they doing it in metalflake, with 24 carat gold flakes, or are people in Brighton a bit stupid? :shock:

welshkev

Kowalski675 wrote:

£120? Jesus, are they doing it in metalflake, with 24 carat gold flakes, or are people in Brighton a bit stupid? :shock:

Not as stupid as people from West Yorkshire cos people from Bristol can read

Kowalski675

Lol, hadn't spotted my typo there, but unless your £120 is a typo there must be some seriously gullible people in Bristol.

And you're missing an apostrophe...

welshkev

Like you said above though, they do a proper job.

Strip, prime, paint and finish. My mate had his bike done there and it still looks good as new about a year later (admittedly its a road bike) but they do a fantastic job.

Kowalski675

You could get two or three bike frames done in a top quality job for that price (depending on what colour/effect powders you want). £120 is ridiculous.





There's only £100 there, and that's candy red over metallic silver (and an awful lot bigger than a bicycle frame).

welshkev

Did you do that? If so I'm sending my frames to you and I want mates rates, so a tenner and a pack of haribo should do it

Argos is actually more than £120 for mountain bikes:

http://www.argoscycles.com/renovations/prices/

Kowalski675

welshkev wrote:

Did you do that? If so I'm sending my frames to you and I want mates rates, so a tenner and a pack of haribo should do it

Nope, LSN Coatings did those, no mates rates. Even the last pair of wheels I had done only cost a straight £100, and that was silver metalflake over gloss black:



Candy green over metallic silver was only £70:



Were Argos on crack when they wrote that price list? Even Andy at Triple S doesn't charge anything like that (and he's bloody expensive - I have over a thousand quid of his powdercoat on one bike):

http://www.triple-s.co.uk/prices.htm#Bike

BigAl

In terms of recommendations for powder coating - well it depends where you are!

I got a 'quick' quote from 'Sprayblasting' in Wycombe. £50 to strip, sandblast and powder coat a frame. You can choose from all the RAL colours

As for what colour to spray your bike, Mmmmm, - I'd go for something that tones with your hair (unless you're ginger, of course) or perhaps your eyes. Or maybe go for a mix of red and white, you could then post freely on pinkbike. Personally I'd take a sample of local mud and ask them to match it - you'll never have to clean your bike again

mattbarnes

cooldad wrote:

Yes but powder coating is pretty rubbish on bikes.

Wrong. I've had a couple of frames Powder Coated by BettaBlast near Newcastle and they do an outstanding job at a fraction of the price of 'specialist' bike painters. I learnt the hard way by having a frame painted by Bob Jackson Cycles a couple of years ago. It was expensive, it took eight weeks to get it back and the finish was sh!t. My first ride out resulted in loads of paint chips.
Having used BettaBlast to powdercoat my frames I know for a fact that its cheap, very hard wearing, turnaround is a matter of only days and the finish quality is top notch. Its highly recommended.

NOTE: Anyone considering getting their frame powder coated must realise that its essential to get the BB shell re-tapped and refaced after the painting is done. The old paint is blasted off and when the frame is put in the oven to 'bake' the new coat, old stray bits of paint will bond into the threads of the BB shell making it impossible to screw the bottom bracket back in.

Maro

Rasta colours FTW

Kowalski675

mattbarnes wrote:

cooldad wrote:

Yes but powder coating is pretty rubbish on bikes.

Wrong.

Yeah, I was going to comment on that post, but it's such a stupid statement that I couldn't be bothered. Powdercoat's cheaper, tougher and harder wearing than wet paint, and available in a multitude of colours (plus candies, flips, metalflakes, textured finishes etc), so is ideal for bike frames.

cooldad

Clank wrote:

You've both been misinformed. Rimstock (who supply much of AM's wheel requirement) paint AM's wheels, as they do for JLR, Nissan......(I've played with some AM wheels, BTW). It's a more durable finish and is available in far more finishes than powder coating. Where do you get your data from??

Here's my previous spiel on the subject:

Here's some details, gleaned from about 15,000 hrs of aggressive part testing in a related industries, which should give a better picture.

There is very little chemical adhesion between polyester powder and metal substrates. What you mostly have is a microscopic interlock beteen the plastic and the metal surfaces. Now, I don't know if you've seen metal surfaces under a microscope but there is little in the way of surface roughness. Either way, the powder grips the metal. A slight knock can (and will) dislodge the plastic from the metal surface (without breaking the plastic, so it still looks good, givng the impression that it's doing it's job), causing micocavities between the plastic and the metal where moisture will form. Add to this that the plastics are often hydroscopic and more moisture can react with the surface. This moisure leads to corrosion, which lifts further plastic and the problem just runs away with itself. It's a plastic coating - there is no repair strategy apart from blast off and start again, by which time, the underlying substrate is usually significantly damaged. Aluminium can still suffer too, and there is even less grab between the plastic and the metal in these cases.

Primers used in paint form a chemical bond (or should do) with the metal surface - the two combine so one shouldn't be able to lift away from the other, without taking some of the metal with it. The paint then (or should) bond with the primer. Two layers, chemically attached to each other and to the underlying surface. If done right it can have better wear properties than just powder coat, and better impact performance too. This is why the paint is still on my car, when the powder coating has long since flaked off in sheets.

It is the speed of the powder coat process which industry likes, because that process speed makes it a lower cost alternative. If you get someone to quote for respraying a bare bike frame, then get a quote for getting it powder coated, you'll notice the difference. However, a lot of industry also realises that paint is a superior finish and will use is despite the time/cost disadvantage. That, and you can paint bigger parts (oilrigs etc).

If you want further evidence - talk to anyone involved in exterior finishes in the auto OEMs (not accessories, they're generally pretty clueless). Anyone involved in metal finishes in the aero industy will tell you the same. Same with petro-chem; bike building; yellow goods (JCB are happy to talk about such things), white goods. You'll get the same answer as the one I've just given.

It could be argued that the exception to this is if the plastic coating is based on true adhesive chemistries - epoxy for instance. These give a very, very tough surface (but at serious cost penalty), but this is NOT a powder coating process - it's a paint process.

That's it, in a nutshell.

Quite simply, I believe him over you.

Kowalski675

cooldad wrote:

Primers used in paint form a chemical bond (or should do) with the metal surface - the two combine so one shouldn't be able to lift away from the other, without taking some of the metal with it. The paint then (or should) bond with the primer. Two layers, chemically attached to each other and to the underlying surface. If done right it can have better wear properties than just powder coat, and better impact performance too. This is why the paint is still on my car, when the powder coating has long since flaked off in sheets.

He must've been using some crap powdercoaters. A thin wet paint finish is far more likely to flake off than powdercoat - take a look (for example) at any Mk1 Bandit frame that still has (what's left of) the OE paint, compared to a powdercoated one (look at all the flaking here, above the oil cooler and on the lower frame cradle - you won't get that with powdercoat):



Powdercoat uses (zinc) primer too. I've had shitloads of powdercoating done over the years and done right it's a far tougher, more durable and corrosion resistant finish than wet paint (I'd never even consider wet paint on motorcycle wheels, even if it wasn't three times more expensive). The only disadvantage it has it that you'll never get that 100% glass smooth finish of a really well applied wet paint finish, which matters for car/motorcycle bodywork, but not things like a bike frame. A well applied powdercoat finish is almost as smooth as wet paint (and a good powdercoat job will have a better finish than an average wet paint job). So, your original statement remains complete cobblers, lol.

Kowalski675

cooldad wrote:

Now, I don't know if you've seen metal surfaces under a microscope but there is little in the way of surface roughness.

Er, that's what the bead/shotblasting's for...

cooldad

What are you quoting me for?

Clank wrote:

Here's some details, gleaned from about 15,000 hrs of aggressive part testing in a related industries, which should give a better picture...

...If you want further evidence - talk to anyone involved in exterior finishes in the auto OEMs (not accessories, they're generally pretty clueless). Anyone involved in metal finishes in the aero industy will tell you the same. Same with petro-chem; bike building; yellow goods (JCB are happy to talk about such things), white goods. You'll get the same answer as the one I've just given.

Quite simply, I believe him over you.

Kowalski675

Believe what you want. Some people believe that the world's flat, god exists, or NASA never actually landed an astronaut on the moon, but they're all wrong too, lol.

cooldad

Except he has facts and you have a pic of a dirty motorcycle.

Kowalski675

Believe what you want. Makes no difference to me what you do or don't put on your bike frame. I've had more than enough powdercoating done over the years to know what the real facts are.

cooldad

That's like saying you've had enough rectum examinations to make you an expert proctologist.

Kowalski675

Whatever. Simple fact is that you're wrong - powdercoat is an ideal finish for bike frames, and far more durable (and cheaper) than wet paint. Even proper wet paint, never mind the waterbased shite that manufacturers have to use for OE finishes these days, since the tree huggers stopped them using proper paints. I relly don't care what you do with your bike though, makes no difference to me.

And, since you're so fond of correcting others' linguistic infractions, and accusing others of using "random word salad", that should be "rectal" in your post, not "rectum".

cooldad

Thank you for the correction, unlike you I am not an expert on either rectums or rectal exams.

Kowalski675

Neither am I. I just speak English, rather than "random word salad"...

Oh, and what you meant to say was "I am an expert neither on rectums, nor their examination". If you're going to criticise others so often for their linguistic skills, at least make an attempt to get yours somewhere near approximating correct...