Learning to spray paint

[mhorowit]

I've assembled my compressor, mounted a regulator/filter, have done
some sandblasting, and done some grinding with my die grinder. Now
it's time to learn how to use the paint sprayer.

I've been spraying water on a cardboard surface, but the viscosity/
volitility of water is such that I fear I'm not getting much out of
the exercise.

My end objective is to spray 2-part epoxy primer, but that's expensive
to learn on.

Any suggestions on an inexpensive medium to practice with? Enamel
diluted IAW directions? Interior housepaint? - Mike

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 06:08:51 -0700, mhorowit > wrote:

>I've assembled my compressor, mounted a regulator/filter, have done
>some sandblasting, and done some grinding with my die grinder. Now
>it's time to learn how to use the paint sprayer.
>
>I've been spraying water on a cardboard surface, but the viscosity/
>volitility of water is such that I fear I'm not getting much out of
>the exercise.
>
>My end objective is to spray 2-part epoxy primer, but that's expensive
>to learn on.
>
>Any suggestions on an inexpensive medium to practice with? Enamel
>diluted IAW directions? Interior housepaint? - Mike

be sure to put a water trap in the air line. mine is a sintered jobbie
which combines a step down pressure regulator in one.

I had a friend who painted an Aeronca fuselage with a commercial spray
gun. at the end of the job he guessed that the overspray on the floor
was worth over $200.

I took the hint and sprayed my entire Auster fuselage with enough
overspray to leave just the faintest green dust on the floor. cost of
the overspray was probably $2.

what I used was a miniature Revel type airbrush. it gave a spray just
as wide as the tube and actually sprayed just as fast as a full size
gun. The revel type is the really simple airbrush with the plastic
handle, on off air button control and the little glass bottle. It
blows air past a paint nozzle just like a flit gun.

I found that the airbrush would eventually gum up with dry epoxy paint
even when washed out in solvents.
They cost me $14 each in various shops and over the course of the
fuselage spray task I used 4 of them.

The other benefit is that they spray so little solvent into the air
that you have a far healthier environment to work in.

dont be fooled by the diminutive size of the airbrush. they actually
work beautifully on tube fuselages.

One thing I found is that it is easy to miss the face of a tube. have
someone else look over the fuselage for missed areas. You'll find them
guaranteed.

I practised on the first tubes with the actual thinned epoxy paint.

Stealth Pilot

[mhorowit]

On Aug 20, 10:34 am, Stealth Pilot >
wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 06:08:51 -0700, mhorowit > wrote:
> >I've assembled my compressor, mounted a regulator/filter, have done
> >some sandblasting, and done some grinding with my die grinder. Now
> >it's time to learn how to use the paint sprayer.
>
> >I've been spraying water on a cardboard surface, but the viscosity/
> >volitility of water is such that I fear I'm not getting much out of
> >the exercise.
>
> >My end objective is to spray 2-part epoxy primer, but that's expensive
> >to learn on.
>
> >Any suggestions on an inexpensive medium to practice with? Enamel
> >diluted IAW directions? Interior housepaint? - Mike
>
> be sure to put a water trap in the air line. mine is a sintered jobbie
> which combines a step down pressure regulator in one.
>
> I had a friend who painted an Aeronca fuselage with a commercial spray
> gun. at the end of the job he guessed that the overspray on the floor
> was worth over $200.
>
> I took the hint and sprayed my entire Auster fuselage with enough
> overspray to leave just the faintest green dust on the floor. cost of
> the overspray was probably $2.
>
> what I used was a miniature Revel type airbrush. it gave a spray just
> as wide as the tube and actually sprayed just as fast as a full size
> gun. The revel type is the really simple airbrush with the plastic
> handle, on off air button control and the little glass bottle. It
> blows air past a paint nozzle just like a flit gun.
>
> I found that the airbrush would eventually gum up with dry epoxy paint
> even when washed out in solvents.
> They cost me $14 each in various shops and over the course of the
> fuselage spray task I used 4 of them.
>
> The other benefit is that they spray so little solvent into the air
> that you have a far healthier environment to work in.
>
> dont be fooled by the diminutive size of the airbrush. they actually
> work beautifully on tube fuselages.
>
> One thing I found is that it is easy to miss the face of a tube. have
> someone else look over the fuselage for missed areas. You'll find them
> guaranteed.
>
> I practised on the first tubes with the actual thinned epoxy paint.
>
> Stealth Pilot

A winner! I was worried about overspraying the neighborhood. I'll
GOOGLE for Revel+airbrush - Mike

[Morgans[_2_]]

"mhorowit" > wrote

> A winner! I was worried about overspraying the neighborhood. I'll
> GOOGLE for Revel+airbrush - Mike
>
The water trap suggestions should be taken as a "must."

I am not sure how it carries to using an airbrush, but I would imagine that
it does.

I use a HVLP conversion sprayer, which is High Volume Low Pressure and the
conversion means it takes relatively high compressor pressure, and regulates
it downward, to as low as 15 pounds per square inch. The higher pressures
atomize the paint better, but at the cost of more over spray. A decent 100
buck HVLP can also spray a very narrow pattern, and when used with low
pressure, almost no overspray.

For water control, I made a primary water trap myself, then used a
filter/desiccant to get the air really dry. You can get them at NAPA, and
they go inline right before the gun.

For my water trap, (follow along carefully, here <g>) I took the air from
the compressor, and went into a 1 1/4" T, with the air coming in the side.
On the bottom side of the T, there is a petcock (valve) to drain out water
once it accumulates. You can also leave it open a very small amount, and
water will dribble out. In the top of the T, there is a 6' tall 1 1/4"
steel pipe, and at the top a reducing coupler, which goes to a regulator,
and then to a quick connector to hook your air line into, going to your
sprayer.

The trap works better than commercial units for two reasons. One, is that
the small air line going into a large pipe will allow the air to cool, and
will cause the water vapor to condense out. Two, since the air is moving so
slowly, the water will run down the sides of the pipe, and can drain out the
bottom.
--
Jim in NC

[cavelamb himself[_4_]]

Morgans wrote:
>
> The water trap suggestions should be taken as a "must."
>
> I am not sure how it carries to using an airbrush, but I would imagine that
> it does.
>
> I use a HVLP conversion sprayer, which is High Volume Low Pressure and the
> conversion means it takes relatively high compressor pressure, and regulates
> it downward, to as low as 15 pounds per square inch. The higher pressures
> atomize the paint better, but at the cost of more over spray. A decent 100
> buck HVLP can also spray a very narrow pattern, and when used with low
> pressure, almost no overspray.
>
> For water control, I made a primary water trap myself, then used a
> filter/desiccant to get the air really dry. You can get them at NAPA, and
> they go inline right before the gun.
>
> For my water trap, (follow along carefully, here <g>) I took the air from
> the compressor, and went into a 1 1/4" T, with the air coming in the side.
> On the bottom side of the T, there is a petcock (valve) to drain out water
> once it accumulates. You can also leave it open a very small amount, and
> water will dribble out. In the top of the T, there is a 6' tall 1 1/4"
> steel pipe, and at the top a reducing coupler, which goes to a regulator,
> and then to a quick connector to hook your air line into, going to your
> sprayer.
>
> The trap works better than commercial units for two reasons. One, is that
> the small air line going into a large pipe will allow the air to cool, and
> will cause the water vapor to condense out. Two, since the air is moving so
> slowly, the water will run down the sides of the pipe, and can drain out the
> bottom.


I second the HVLP approach.
Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8 years.

It makes very little overspray, and works fine.

Richard

[Morgans[_2_]]

"cavelamb himself" <> wrote

> I second the HVLP approach.
> Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8 years.
>
> It makes very little overspray, and works fine.

I should add that there is not enough tea in China to make me spray a
fuselage with an airbrush, when I could fill the quart HVLP gun one time, or
perhaps two, and do it all. The waste factor difference would be very
small, indeed.
--
Jim in NC

[Kyle Boatright]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "cavelamb himself" <> wrote
>
>> I second the HVLP approach.
>> Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8 years.
>>
>> It makes very little overspray, and works fine.
>
> I should add that there is not enough tea in China to make me spray a
> fuselage with an airbrush, when I could fill the quart HVLP gun one time,
> or perhaps two, and do it all. The waste factor difference would be very
> small, indeed.
> --
> Jim in NC

Agreed. Time has a value. Personally, I'd use one of the little HF touch
up guns. Handy, inexpensive, and can be adjusted to provide a fairly fine
spray pattern.

Another thought is using a brush (Horrors, I know ;-)). No overspray and
you get very good control of where the stuff goes.

An earlier suggestion about having someone else look it over when you're
done is a winner. There are probably 1001 nooks and crannies in a fuselage.
You will miss some.

KB

[cavelamb himself[_4_]]

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> "Morgans" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"cavelamb himself" <> wrote
>>
>>
>>>I second the HVLP approach.
>>>Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8 years.
>>>
>>>It makes very little overspray, and works fine.
>>
>>I should add that there is not enough tea in China to make me spray a
>>fuselage with an airbrush, when I could fill the quart HVLP gun one time,
>>or perhaps two, and do it all. The waste factor difference would be very
>>small, indeed.
>>--
>>Jim in NC
>
>
> Agreed. Time has a value. Personally, I'd use one of the little HF touch
> up guns. Handy, inexpensive, and can be adjusted to provide a fairly fine
> spray pattern.
>
> Another thought is using a brush (Horrors, I know ;-)). No overspray and
> you get very good control of where the stuff goes.
>
> An earlier suggestion about having someone else look it over when you're
> done is a winner. There are probably 1001 nooks and crannies in a fuselage.
> You will miss some.
>
> KB
>
>

Tommy taught me to set up bright lights all around the subject
and to watch the paint in the glare.

Worked for me...

[Ernest Christley]

Morgans wrote:
> "cavelamb himself" <> wrote
>
>> I second the HVLP approach.
>> Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8 years.
>>
>> It makes very little overspray, and works fine.
>
> I should add that there is not enough tea in China to make me spray a
> fuselage with an airbrush, when I could fill the quart HVLP gun one time, or
> perhaps two, and do it all. The waste factor difference would be very
> small, indeed.


I second the cheapy HF HVLP sprayer. The suck at spraying regular
paint, but the watery aircraft paints are a perfect match for it. It
puts down PolyTone in a perfect layer.

I used a $6 airbrush from Northern Tool to spray a lot of the tube on my
project. It clogged up beyond repair about halfway through the
fuselage. It was actually beneficial that it was so small, because I
couldn't have gotten a touchup gun into all that small spaces between
tubes. I ended up doing a large section with a 3" roller. That worked
really well for everything except the tight corners. If I had to do it
over again, I'd roll as much as I could and hit the corners with the
modeler's airbrush.

--
"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in
a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, with chocolate in one hand and
wine in
the other, loudly proclaiming 'WOO HOO What a Ride!'"
--Unknown

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote
>
> Agreed. Time has a value. Personally, I'd use one of the little HF touch
> up guns. Handy, inexpensive, and can be adjusted to provide a fairly fine
> spray pattern.

Yep, I have atouch up gun too, but I don't know of a HVLP touch up gun, so I
have found they have a lot more overspray. That is the biggest drawback, to
me.

> An earlier suggestion about having someone else look it over when you're
> done is a winner. There are probably 1001 nooks and crannies in a
> fuselage. You will miss some.

Yep. That is why I like a spray instead of a brush. <g> Along with the
having someone else look for misses, another best suggestion is to get
plenty of light. LOTS of light. So many lights, you get as many as you
think you need, then triple it!

The key here, is to always have a light source so that it will reflect off
of the surface and to the eye. You HAVE to be able to see these reflections
to know if it is going down thick enough, if it is missing a surface, if
there is a run, and if ...... You get the idea. Light, and lots of it is
key.
--
Jim in NC

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 02:50:58 +0000, Ernest Christley
> wrote:

>Morgans wrote:
>> "cavelamb himself" <> wrote
>>
>>> I second the HVLP approach.
>>> Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8 years.
>>>
>>> It makes very little overspray, and works fine.
>>
>> I should add that there is not enough tea in China to make me spray a
>> fuselage with an airbrush, when I could fill the quart HVLP gun one time, or
>> perhaps two, and do it all. The waste factor difference would be very
>> small, indeed.
>
>
>I second the cheapy HF HVLP sprayer. The suck at spraying regular
>paint, but the watery aircraft paints are a perfect match for it. It
>puts down PolyTone in a perfect layer.
>
>I used a $6 airbrush from Northern Tool to spray a lot of the tube on my
>project. It clogged up beyond repair about halfway through the
>fuselage. It was actually beneficial that it was so small, because I
>couldn't have gotten a touchup gun into all that small spaces between
>tubes. I ended up doing a large section with a 3" roller. That worked
>really well for everything except the tight corners. If I had to do it
>over again, I'd roll as much as I could and hit the corners with the
>modeler's airbrush.

you tried to get by with just one???? :-) :-)

buy a dozen of them :-)
expect them to gum up and replace them.

I must throw out the 5 gummed up ones I still have in the workshop.
Stealth Pilot

[cavelamb himself[_4_]]

Stealth Pilot wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 02:50:58 +0000, Ernest Christley
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Morgans wrote:
>>
>>>"cavelamb himself" <> wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>>I second the HVLP approach.
>>>>Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8 years.
>>>>
>>>>It makes very little overspray, and works fine.
>>>
>>>I should add that there is not enough tea in China to make me spray a
>>>fuselage with an airbrush, when I could fill the quart HVLP gun one time, or
>>>perhaps two, and do it all. The waste factor difference would be very
>>>small, indeed.
>>
>>
>>I second the cheapy HF HVLP sprayer. The suck at spraying regular
>>paint, but the watery aircraft paints are a perfect match for it. It
>>puts down PolyTone in a perfect layer.
>>
>>I used a $6 airbrush from Northern Tool to spray a lot of the tube on my
>>project. It clogged up beyond repair about halfway through the
>>fuselage. It was actually beneficial that it was so small, because I
>>couldn't have gotten a touchup gun into all that small spaces between
>>tubes. I ended up doing a large section with a 3" roller. That worked
>>really well for everything except the tight corners. If I had to do it
>>over again, I'd roll as much as I could and hit the corners with the
>>modeler's airbrush.
>
>
> you tried to get by with just one???? :-) :-)
>
> buy a dozen of them :-)
> expect them to gum up and replace them.
>
> I must throw out the 5 gummed up ones I still have in the workshop.
> Stealth Pilot

I painted the garage walls when we moved in here.
Nothing fancy - just a coat of water based Kilz.

The Wagner Power Painter was my first choice, but even thinned 50:50
(way too thin for this stuff) the WPP would gum up in less than a
minute. It was a prolem withthe pump piston - not the spray head.

I gave up and tried the HVLP. Thinned about 10% he Kilz went on
beautifully. No overspray at all hardly/

Go figure.

The whole 2 car garage tool an hour to paint.

Along the door frames a simple cardboard mask made nice sharp edges.

HVLP - it ain't yer grandpa's spray painter...

[Ernest Christley]

Stealth Pilot wrote:

>> I used a $6 airbrush from Northern Tool to spray a lot of the tube on my
>> project. It clogged up beyond repair about halfway through the
>> fuselage. It was actually beneficial that it was so small, because I
>> couldn't have gotten a touchup gun into all that small spaces between
>> tubes. I ended up doing a large section with a 3" roller. That worked
>> really well for everything except the tight corners. If I had to do it
>> over again, I'd roll as much as I could and hit the corners with the
>> modeler's airbrush.
>
> you tried to get by with just one???? :-) :-)
>
> buy a dozen of them :-)
> expect them to gum up and replace them.
>
> I must throw out the 5 gummed up ones I still have in the workshop.
> Stealth Pilot

You live and learn. It was my first time, and I didn't know any better.
By the time I knew, it was late on a Saturday and the frame was
already sandblasted.

[George Warner]

Can you tell me the model of the HF HVLP cheapy that you're talking about?
There are many on their site.
Thanks


"Ernest Christley" > wrote in message
...
> Morgans wrote:
>> "cavelamb himself" <> wrote
>>
>>> I second the HVLP approach.
>>> Mine is a $90 Harbor Freight cheapie that I've used for the last 8
>>> years.
>>>
>>> It makes very little overspray, and works fine.
>>
>> I should add that there is not enough tea in China to make me spray a
>> fuselage with an airbrush, when I could fill the quart HVLP gun one time,
>> or perhaps two, and do it all. The waste factor difference would be very
>> small, indeed.
>
>
> I second the cheapy HF HVLP sprayer. The suck at spraying regular paint,
> but the watery aircraft paints are a perfect match for it. It puts down
> PolyTone in a perfect layer.
>
> I used a $6 airbrush from Northern Tool to spray a lot of the tube on my
> project. It clogged up beyond repair about halfway through the fuselage.
> It was actually beneficial that it was so small, because I couldn't have
> gotten a touchup gun into all that small spaces between tubes. I ended up
> doing a large section with a 3" roller. That worked really well for
> everything except the tight corners. If I had to do it over again, I'd
> roll as much as I could and hit the corners with the modeler's airbrush.
>
> --
> "Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
> in
> a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside,
> thoroughly used up, totally worn out, with chocolate in one hand and wine
> in
> the other, loudly proclaiming 'WOO HOO What a Ride!'"
> --Unknown

[Morgans[_2_]]

"George Warner" > wrote in message
...
> Can you tell me the model of the HF HVLP cheapy that you're talking about?
> There are many on their site.
> Thanks

Wow, the prices for these have really come down.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=93305

This one (above) is good, because it will work at any angle. I have not used
the exact model, though. Plenty good for primer, and probably good enough for
finish. The gun body material is unknown, but it has all of the controls for
the best spray control. I think it is my first choice.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=43430

This is similar to the one I have used, but you have to be able to rotate your
work, because it can not spray upside down.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=7901

This one is the most costly, and reads like it should be the best.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=7902

This one has all the needed controls, and is smaller, but will not work
upside -down. The smaller size could be a good thing for getting into smaller
places. It reads as though it should spray a smaller pattern. (lower air
consumption)

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=92541

High cost, but the name is one of the most trusted in spray equipment.

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=46719

Another interesting choice in a smaller unit.

You are right. Lots of choices.

I think I would go with the first choice. Some of the other units do not have
as many controls, and that is one of the biggest keys to get the pattern you
need. I do like the spray lines instead of cup on the gun, so you can spray in
any orientation.

I don't need a new unit, but I am tempted to get this one. I don't have one
with the fluid line, instead of cup. I did find I could spray in many different
positions by putting a few elbows and couplings together, so the gun could go
upside down, and keep the cup level. It is kinda' a work-around, but it works
reasonably well for me. <g>
--
Jim in NC

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=90977

Could be a good choice.

[Ron Natalie]

cavelamb himself wrote:

> The Wagner Power Painter was my first choice, but even thinned 50:50
> (way too thin for this stuff) the WPP would gum up in less than a
> minute. It was a prolem withthe pump piston - not the spray head.
>
I have similar annoying experience with the Wagner PowerPainter.

The power roller on the other hand works really well with even
thick paints, but I'm not sure I'd consider painting a plane with
it.

When it comes to PolyFiber, read those instructions VERY VERY
carefully. The first few coats are required to be brushed on
to get the mechanical penetration of the fabric weave.

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 07:45:48 -0400, Ron Natalie >
wrote:

>cavelamb himself wrote:
>
>> The Wagner Power Painter was my first choice, but even thinned 50:50
>> (way too thin for this stuff) the WPP would gum up in less than a
>> minute. It was a prolem withthe pump piston - not the spray head.
>>
>I have similar annoying experience with the Wagner PowerPainter.
>
>The power roller on the other hand works really well with even
>thick paints, but I'm not sure I'd consider painting a plane with
>it.
>
>When it comes to PolyFiber, read those instructions VERY VERY
>carefully. The first few coats are required to be brushed on
>to get the mechanical penetration of the fabric weave.



the OP was talking about spraying the fuselage tubes.

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:19:29 +0000, Ernest Christley
> wrote:

>Stealth Pilot wrote:
>
>>> I used a $6 airbrush from Northern Tool to spray a lot of the tube on my
>>> project. It clogged up beyond repair about halfway through the
>>> fuselage. It was actually beneficial that it was so small, because I
>>> couldn't have gotten a touchup gun into all that small spaces between
>>> tubes. I ended up doing a large section with a 3" roller. That worked
>>> really well for everything except the tight corners. If I had to do it
>>> over again, I'd roll as much as I could and hit the corners with the
>>> modeler's airbrush.
>>
>> you tried to get by with just one???? :-) :-)
>>
>> buy a dozen of them :-)
>> expect them to gum up and replace them.
>>
>> I must throw out the 5 gummed up ones I still have in the workshop.
>> Stealth Pilot
>
>You live and learn. It was my first time, and I didn't know any better.
> By the time I knew, it was late on a Saturday and the frame was
>already sandblasted.


I hope you meant to write bead blasted.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Ernest Christley" <> wrote

> I used one of the self-contained units. It has the associated blower with
> it.

I've never used one of the self contained units. I have read that they are
supposed to be better than the shop air "conversion" units. I wondered it
the cheapies would stack up, since they are usually much more expensive
than conversion units.

So you liked yours pretty well? Have you ever used a conversion unit, and
if so, how did they compare.

I might learn something new today, after all! <g>

Good guns have cork gaskets on the lid. I made one for one of my past guns,
after the included gasket swelled up enough to make it unusable.
--
Jim in NC

[Charles Vincent]

Morgans wrote:
> "Ernest Christley" <> wrote
>
>> I used one of the self-contained units. It has the associated blower with
>> it.
>
> I've never used one of the self contained units. I have read that they are
> supposed to be better than the shop air "conversion" units. I wondered it
> the cheapies would stack up, since they are usually much more expensive
> than conversion units.
>
> So you liked yours pretty well? Have you ever used a conversion unit, and
> if so, how did they compare.
>
> I might learn something new today, after all! <g>
>
> Good guns have cork gaskets on the lid. I made one for one of my past guns,
> after the included gasket swelled up enough to make it unusable.

I have an older self contained HVLP unit, a Croix, which was later
bought by Graco. I love mine. It was not cheap. I have a cheapie
conversion unit and my neighbor has a much nicer conversion unit. We
both like the turbine. There are pro's and con's to the turbine units.
On the pro's they don't require a big compressor and are very
portable. The air quality is great and very dry. My Croix/Graco will
lay down a really nice coat. On the con side, the hoses tend to be
cumbersome, not nearly as easy to move with as the conversion units. The
air is pretty hot coming out, so the paint flashes pretty quick,
particularly here in Texas. Still, all in all, I prefer the
portability and ease of use of the turbine. It had a steep learning
curve coming from a conventional DeVilbus guns shooting lacquer to an
HVLP shooting urethane, but the results look great and last. I have
multiple guns for my unit and a variety of cups and needles for
different paints. My only regret is that I didn't get one of the
gravity fed guns, but they were not in vogue for anything but airbrushes
when I bought mine.

Charles

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Charles Vincent" > wrote

> My only regret is that I didn't get one of the gravity fed guns, but they
> were not in vogue for anything but airbrushes when I bought mine.

Yep, once you go gravity fed, you never look back. The amount of time
futzing and cursing at my gun went from 25% to 2.5% instantly.

I also got some plumbing parts and with two 90% fittings and 3 nipples, you
can make it so you can adjust the angle of the cup in relationship to the
gun, so your paint never drips out the vent, and is always feeding to the
last drop, even spraying straight down, or straight up.
--
Jim in NC

[Charles Vincent]

Ernest Christley wrote:

> I found that if I cinched the strap up so that the bottom of the turbine
> rested under my left arm and on my hip, my head going through the strap.
> I could then snake the air supply hose down my right arm to the gun. I
> was able to move around fairly naturally and easily in the makeshift
> paint booth that way. The supply hose stayed attached to my air fairly
> well that way. It's sort of the same thing you do with a gas welding
> torch.
>
> You don't have air hoses to drag around, but you do have a drop cord to
> worry over; though, it is light in comparison. Lots of extra cheap cord
> curled up under the project so that you're never having to drag it far
> was my answer to that.
>

On my gun you would never carry around the turbine. It is heavy. It
will supposedly drive two guns at once. I also run an extra length of
hose just to give the air more time to cool before hitting the gun.

Charles

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Charles Vincent" wrote
>
> On my gun you would never carry around the turbine. It is heavy. It will
> supposedly drive two guns at once. I also run an extra length of hose
> just to give the air more time to cool before hitting the gun.

I had read that the heat was an advantage to the HVLP process, so I assume
you find this not to be true? Why, or why not?

I would think (guess) that the paint flashing quickly would make it harder
to keep a wet line, but that is my guess, since I have not used one,
(turbine unit) I don't know...

Or could you go with a slower reducer? That brings up a different question.

Do all, or nearly all paints used have different speed reducers available to
use? I have used urethane, enamel, lacquer and latex paints. (the latex
does not count, because that was on house type stuff, and the same with
lacquer, that required no mixing)
--
Jim in NC