The message to which you are about to reply is shown first. GO TO REPLY FORM



 VIEW    REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

Re: Hey!!! 200 85

posted by  someone claiming to be Evan R on  Wed Nov 15 22:27 CST 2000 [RELATED]

Okay, here's what I SHOULD have said:

From my experience in salt-laden Michigan, neglected finishes seem to hold up better with non-metallic paints than with metallic paints.

And this is largely true because (like early 80's underhood wiring) in the early 80's, manufacturers were experimenting with more environmentally friendly ways to make things like metallic paint and insulation. And like always, some experiments failed. Fords of the early 80's were notoriously bad - I had an '84 Ranger on which the paint came off in sheets.

Of COURSE there are metallic-painted cars of this era that still look good with the original paint - but look around and you'll find that there are more that look BAD.





USERNAME
Use "claim to be" below if you don't want to log in.
PASSWORD
I don't have an account. Sign me up.
CLAIM TO BE
Use only if you don't want to login (post anonymously).
ENTER CAPTCHA CODE
This is required for posting anonymously.
OPTIONS notify by email
Available only to user accounts.
SUBJECT
MODEL/YEAR
MESSAGE

DICTIONARY
LABEL(S) +
IMAGE URL *
[IMAGE LIBRARY (UPLOAD/SELECT)]

* = Field is optional.

+ = Enter space delimited labels for this post. An example entry: 240 muffler


©Jarrod Stenberg 1997-2022. All material except where indicated.


All participants agree to these terms.

Brickboard.com is not affiliated with nor sponsored by AB Volvo, Volvo Car Corporation, Volvo Cars of North America, Inc. or Ford Motor Company. Brickboard.com is a Volvo owner/enthusiast site, similar to a club, and does not intend to pose as an official Volvo site. The official Volvo site can be found here.