Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Is the smell of a new Rick due in some part to the CV?

Paul,

Is it the same process for applying an amber tint to a 4001C64S? I was curious if it is as involved because of the satin like finish. Forgive me if I describe the finish incorrectly.

rickfan60 wrote:Is the smell of a new Rick due in some part to the CV?

In my experience, you can go to any guitar store, walk up to their case display, open a new case and inhale. Same wonderful smell. It's the water-soluble contact cement used to glue the lining in place in the case, and the Tolex onto the case, too.

simer4001 wrote:Paul,

Is it the same process for applying an amber tint to a 4001C64S? I was curious if it is as involved because of the satin like finish. Forgive me if I describe the finish incorrectly.

The only difference here is that a satin-finish CV is used instead of a gloss CV.

In my experience, you can go to any guitar store, walk up to their case display, open a new case and inhale. Same wonderful smell. It's the water-soluble contact cement used to glue the lining in place in the case, and the Tolex onto the case, too.

My DCM 660 came in one of those plastic RIC cases (no Tolex) and it had (has) a pleasant estery sweet smell to it. Maybe that is the Turtle wax or what ever that is they buff them with in the factory.

Nope. It's still the case lining glue. The turtle wax has a pleasant smell once the petroleum distillates have evaporated, but it's nowhere enough to fill a closed case and permeate everything inside.

jingle_jangle wrote:The finish, as it crosslinks, goes through a partially-linked state called "green". This is characterized by the solvents being mostly evaporated and the surface just having left its sticky state. With most CVs, this state is good to go for about 24 hours for recoating without sanding.

CVs take about 96 hours to harden and undergo their first stage of shrinking; following this they can be sanded and buffed; full shrinkage depends upon the wood and number of coats, but can take up to three months or in extreme cases, more. If the wood is open-grained, a second sanding and buffing may be called for.

I have recommended Scratch-X and Zymol as a handy method to restore older CV finishes to good gloss. It is possible to also re-sand and re-buff a dull CV finish to factory freshness. This must be done with great care and requires some specialized power equipment. The results can be nearly as good as a refinish, although it won't undo cracks and chips.

There are probably a lot of variables here but is there an easy way to tell if the CV is still green? I have been piecing this together using info from your posts and post from JH and Dale. This is what I have so far. Is it an accurate overview of the process?

Sand the wood smooth ending with a 220 grit.
Apply a sealer that is compatible with the finish. (2 coats) Any sanding here?
Apply color coats (if any) (no sanding)
Apply CV 1 layer at a time untl the finish is thick enough. 4 coats?
Wet sand with 1000 grit.
Shoot 2 more CV coats.
Wet sand 1500 grit.
Buff.

rickfan60 wrote:

jingle_jangle wrote:The finish, as it crosslinks, goes through a partially-linked state called "green". This is characterized by the solvents being mostly evaporated and the surface just having left its sticky state. With most CVs, this state is good to go for about 24 hours for recoating without sanding.

CVs take about 96 hours to harden and undergo their first stage of shrinking; following this they can be sanded and buffed; full shrinkage depends upon the wood and number of coats, but can take up to three months or in extreme cases, more. If the wood is open-grained, a second sanding and buffing may be called for.

I have recommended Scratch-X and Zymol as a handy method to restore older CV finishes to good gloss. It is possible to also re-sand and re-buff a dull CV finish to factory freshness. This must be done with great care and requires some specialized power equipment. The results can be nearly as good as a refinish, although it won't undo cracks and chips.

There are probably a lot of variables here but is there an easy way to tell if the CV is still green? I have been piecing this together using info from your posts and post from JH and Dale. This is what I have so far. Is it an accurate overview of the sprocess?

Sand the wood smooth ending with a 220 grit.
Apply a sealer that is compatible with the finish. (2 coats) Any sanding here?
Apply color coats (if any) (no sanding)
Apply CV 1 layer at a time untl the finish is thick enough. 4 coats?
Wet sand with 1000 grit.
Shoot 2 more CV coats.
Wet sand 1500 grit.
Buff.

That's one way of describing it. But, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

If there was a "system" (and that's more likely in a factory situation than in a one at a time restoration situation), the above captures a basic outline. I'm sure, however, that this does not accurately describe how the RIC factory finishes anything. But, once again, every single step has variables depending upon the actual instrument being worked on. So the answer to your questions above, and to most other questions about this, is, "maybe", depending upon the "feel" I've described above.

If you were to say:

Dry sand wood smooth. Apply sealer. Scuff sealer lightly. Apply color. Apply conversion varnish. Sand flat. Buff until shiny.

...you'd be closer to the process, because again each individual instrument (in a restoration situation) demands different measures, which depend upon what experience tells me about the way each material behaves (sometimes substitutions are made), the way the wood is behaving, the way paint goes on, the atmospheric conditions at the time, the phases of the moon (just kidding), and so on. What I'm trying to say is that reducing this to a formulaic approach, it should be stated simply, step-by-step, and knowing that each step introduces variables and requires elaboration.

Again, you could have all the "right" materials, a new gun, compressor, and state of the art booth, with some sort of "system" posted in large format on the wall, and still be stymied as to how to go about it. That's because it's experience that dictates success. As I've said to all of the folks who've written me off-list in the last couple of years, with questions similar to yours--my favorite was the non-Forumite who wrote me and asked me if I could teach him to spray paint in a couple of paragraphs, because he suspected that I was busy--that if this was easy, we'd have Rickenbacker painters looking for work on every corner. In fact, even once you've jumped in and gotten your feet wet, it's a long and steep learning curve before you can swim the channel.

Every semester, using a methodology that I devised a decade ago, we teach something like 75 or 100 students who are in their first semester, how to use a spray gun for the first time, and they usually, gun in hand, grasp the basics quite rapidly. However, the system I teach which we use to finish product models, takes roughly 15 weeks to get the "hang" of, and four to five years of regular use and analysis, to be used meaningfully to yield finishes of professional competence. It's a system similar to what I describe in my simplified steps above. The long curve is because, once you've successfully done it the first time, you can count on the next time throwing you a curve ball, so that you've got to pull a trick out of your hat. Four or five years generally teaches you the tricks you need to feel like you really know what you are doing.

And, all you macho dudes out there, my best recent student has been a...25-year-old woman who did it "right" time after time, planned her time, learned the system, was able to organize and prioritize the variables in her head, and about her third year was able to produce one excellent finish after another, seemingly without breaking a sweat.

She was a nervous wreck everytime she plugged in an air-hose coupling, though. Stage fright? But she paints like a pro.

In my sanding ruminations, I gave a lot of though to whether I'd consider doing this if I had to learn it from scratch beginning right now. I decided that, all things considered, there were lots of rewarding things to be accomplished with less work and continual headache. It was really just, as Curly said, "a combination of soicumstances".

So, as you've heard, the journey of a thousand miles begins when you take the first step, and is accomplished one step at a time.

Does anybody out there want to send Ted a guitar or bass to paint? Help him lose his

My first 10 (at least) tries will be my own instruments. I have a pile of wrecked Ricks in my basement that are waiting for me to learn. The thought of doing someone else's guitar makes me a little nervous.

Then go for it, Ted. Goof-ups are what paint stripper is for!

Paint stripper? Really? I've avoided strippers because they usually digest binding and Rick inlays.

rickfan60 wrote: I've avoided strippers because they usually digest binding and Rick inlays.

Interesting..All the ones I know just eat up dollar bills (and then some)

rickfan60 wrote:Paint stripper? Really? I've avoided strippers because they usually digest binding and Rick inlays.

Honest injun. Here's how:

I mask off the bindings with a double layer of GOOD quality masking tape (3M blue or green crepe tape). I chemically-strip the entire guitar and after it's stripped and dry, I unmask the bindings and sand the paint off those. Saves time. I always sand the varnish off fretboards, too, after pulling the frets. Headstocks and backs of necks get chemically stripped.

The danger in using abrasives in stripping an entire guitar or bass, is what I call, "McCartney Syndrome"...you sand, sand, sand, until you hypnotize yourself with those easy, slow, repetitive strokes...before you know it, your instrument's shape has shifted, in best X-Files style. This is why you should never sand under the influence of recreational drugs or alcohol, either.

Cool. I guess I never thought of masking before stripping.

rickfan60 wrote:Cool. I guess I never thought of masking before stripping.

Tell that to the girls!