Technical Any experience with Everglass (or other short strand) over epoxy primer?

I've read all of the filler threads on here....I have looked at TDS from multiple manufacturers. Most have fillers that state in the TDS they can be used over factory finishes.

Having said that, I have yet to find a shortstrand product that says it can be applied over primer or paint. I spoke with Evercoat (the technical department was answered by a lady with an asian accent) who did not seem that knowledgeable. She referred me to Evercoat's field rep.

The field rep said to apply it over epoxy primer and not under. I have also had a couple reputable members on here say to use it over epoxy as well. I am still feeling uneasy about it when the TDS doesn't list it as a substrate.

He also recommended using Finishsand 4:1 instead of epoxy. I feel like this is a no no, because it is polyester, but looking at the TDS, it says it passes 500 hour salt spray.

I am using it over some welded seams, and around door jambs.

Just hoping someone here has used an actual shortstrand and can speak to it.

 

Every bodyman has his own opinions, and do things differently. The work we do, sometimes, doesn't really fall into the instructions for every product. I mix and match products all the time. Almost always, successfully!
OK, First, I almost never use short strand filler. It's a crutch. Not necessary, if your metal work is good underneath.
Second, you can put fillers (regular, short strand, long, doesn't matter) either under, or over epoxy. Epoxy does make a great adhesion product, as well as protecting the metal better than most primers. I've been putting fillers under my primers for over 40 years, it's the way it always was in the past. In more recent times, it's been recommended to put fillers over epoxy. I do both, depending on the situation.
"Most" epoxies are not made for filling imperfections, and heavy sanding. High build urethanes are the more common ones for that. BUT, there ARE special epoxies that are made for that, too. House of Kolor's KP-2 is one, Tamco also makes a nice high build, easy sanding epoxy primer. They also perform the 'usual' duties of epoxy, that is, great adhesion, and good sealing.
Polyesters can be used in place of hi-build urethane primers, as well Some great body/paint guys use them exclusively. To me it's personal choice, for that one.

 

Epoxy is never listed as a substrate because not all epoxies are compatible with polyester products. You need to check the epoxy you are using for compatibility not the filler. However, having said that
I work for Evercoat and we do not recommend using reinforced fiberglass products over epoxies.

 

I’ve used Duraglas over DP90 in the past to fill roof seams. No issue. I would check with the epoxy manufacturer that you’re using and see what they recommend.

 

I have never had a problem applying urathane or any other products over cured epoxy that was sanded

 

Thank you...so your field rep was correct about the polyester, and incorrect about the short strand.

The article does not mention fiber over polyester....or is that a no no as well?

 

Basically the reasoning behind it is reinforced fillers are more difficult to get pressed into the substrate for proper adhesion and require a coarser grit (80 grit bare minimum with 40 being very common) for adhesion. You also don't want a lot of film build of epoxy under fillers so you get a situation where to get that kind of sand scratch on any primer that doesn't have a lot of build you can start cutting through in a bunch of spots and may compromise the integrity of the epoxies adhesion to the metal and we have seen adhesion failures in some instances. So it is not a "this is an absolute no no situation" it's more a "better to be safe that sorry" situation and because reinforced products do not absorb water there is not the corrosion concerns that arise with regular body filler. This is a fairly new revision to the process as we were seeing more issues as the idea of fillers over epoxy gained more traction.

We tend to try and err the side of caution when we produce TDS sheets/Tech tips to reduce the likelihood of problems as much as we can. Guys often don't do what they are supposed to do and try and push products as far as they possibly can and then complain when they fail so we try to make the processes as fail proof as possible. I hope this makes sense. If not you can send me a PM of your phone number and I can give you a call to discuss further.

 

One reason body filler is being used over epoxy or OE finishes is that the resin is different than the old Bondo we grew up with.
It’s thinner and needs less aggressive scratches to bond.
I’ve never used glass over epoxy so I can’t help ya much. But if it has the correct grit underneath and applied over a cured product, it should bond.
I’ve used “all metal” type products in joints before direct to bare metal with no issues.

 

Poly vs epoxy vs urethane/etch could go on for days here.
The key to using chemicals is following the tech sheet info.
I’m not painting directly over a polyester.
I’ve only seen one DTM polly I trust.
I’ve had epoxy go bad under body filler and polyester when the epoxy wasn’t allowed to cure.
The standard for most old car shops I visit is epoxy, body filler, either a urethane or polyester primer followed by epoxy as a sealer before painting.
My next one will be epoxy, body filler then epoxy. Epoxy fillers have improved and I like the idea of not stacking a bunch of different products.

 

So here is my situation....some of these were from 8-9 years ago when I was just starting, so don't bust my balls too bad. I ALSO wish I hadn't tried to save these two cabs and just bought another...but you live and learn.

Worst place is 1/8"...its on the inside of the cab. Everywhere else is probably closer to 1/16" of filler. (That cardstock I'm using is 1/16" for reference).

I was under the impression from reading the TDS sheets that reinforced filler should be used around door edges and welded seams....am I wrong?

Or should I just use primer and the rage ultra?

 

Well the duraglass TDS recommends 24-36 grit bare metal.
Blast the weld area, grind it, duraglass it. Then epoxy and continue over that.

 

Use Fibre-Tech (100633) not Everglass. It will work much better for your application. For some of it you don't really even need that as you are well withing the parameters of regular filler but make sure there are no pinholes in the weld that moisture can get through if you go that route.

 

What's the advantage of the fibre tech over the everglass? Waterproof?

Is it a really "Hard" filler? As in will it hold up better at a door edge, etc? How does the hardness compar to everglass or duraglass (durglass is HARD as a rock, sands hard too).

 

K13 and Anthony are more knowledgeable on current products and techniques, than I ever am. But again, everyone has their own way of doing things. 1/8" of filler is better than 95% of the work out there, so no shame in that! You do need to remove every bit of rust out of those welds, and if there aren't any gaps, or large holes, regular filler would suffice. I take care to put a good sealer/rust preventative on the backsides of all my welds, and new panels, to make sure moisture doesn't creep into any pinholes, or invisible gaps.
As for the issue of stacking so many different products, that's why I almost exclusively use HOK or Tamco's high build epoxy. One product from bare metal, to final paint. No compatibility issues, either.

 

Well now we are opening a can of worm LOL. "Hardness" is an often misunderstood term used with fillers and it is often associated with how easy or hard a product is to sand and that's not necessarily the case. Our easiest sanding fillers are also some of our hardest on Shore D hardness tests so sand ability is not a good gauge. "Hard" can also mean brittle. Too much hardener makes fillers "harder" but it also makes them brittle and you definitely don't want that. You are really looking for strength not hardness per say.

The advantages that Fiber Tech has over regular reinforced fillers are it uses multiple materials (different length fibreglass strands and kevlar pulp)for it's reinforcement strength and it is less prone to cracking. The different materials means it has something in the resin to add strength regardless of how thin you apply it. The larger the fibre the more strength it has but as you spread products with larger fibres thinner and thinner the fibres get pushed aside and you start to compromise the strength as all you are left with is resin. Fiber Tech covers from really thin application (kevlar pulp) to heavy applications (long strand fibres) so maintains it's strength regardless of thickness.

The other thing with Fiber Tech is it is far less prone to cracking than regular reinforced products because it uses a resin that is more "flexible". Now this is where the "hardness" thing comes in again. The product is not soft (durometer)but you can literally apply it to a panel and smash it with a hammer and it will not crack of peel off.

Now it's disadvantage is it's not cheap so you don't want to be using a ton of it but in your case, if you are more comfortable using a reinforced product first, you are not going to need a ton and you can buy it in smaller sizes so it probably won't add much if any cost.

 

At this point cost is not an option....I have learned that a few dollars now is worth it long run when it comes to these things.

The hammer comment is interesting, so using a filler in area prone to stone chips (front valence), or dings from beneath(stones out of tires on fenders), which product do you feel would serve best?

Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions. I really enjoy this type of discussion.

 

Going on the assumption you have done a half way decent job of metal working things I would just use a regular filler. Filler, when applied the correct way and not put on an 1" thick, (and even sometimes then you should see the Merc I am working on currently), is pretty tough stuff. The key though is if you do get paint chips in areas where filler is applied and you are somewhere that has a lot of moisture it's best practice to touch them up so there is no chance for water to wick into the filler. Under fenders is going to be more what you put on the bottom of the fender than what is on the top. It's becoming pretty common practice to use bedliner on the bottom of fenders, bodies etc as it tends to absorb some of the impact from rocks and road debris.

I just wanted to touch on the compatibility thing a bit as well as it has been mentioned by a couple of guys. For a home user it's really not a concern if you actually read the TDS sheets of the products being used and follow them. I don't want to discredit it completely but it is really a way paint companies use to force shops to use all their products for the whole repair by threatening warranty repercussions if you don't. As a home user they won't warranty anything anyways as they will always find something that you did that doesn't meet muster. This is becoming more and more prevalent as the paint companies are starting to buy up or partner with sundry companies and force shops to use specific products. I can also tell you from experience that paint companies change their tune about what is compatible with their products in the blink of an eye if they do need to partner with you to try and kick another manufacturer out of a shop.

In 18 years I can't say I have ever seen an example where products from different companies failed due to compatibility unless it was a known compatibility issue or a case of improper application but as with everything do what makes you comfortable.

 

Okay last question...

Fibertech specifically lists waterproof under its description. When you look at evercoats checklist, it says they are all waterproof...

There are threads on this forum where members have been told by filler reps, that they are only waterproof after being painted...

LOL, everything is waterproof after being painted, what's your take?

 

All reinforced products, except our glasslite, are waterproof because they don't contain talc.

 

Body filler and fiberglass products aren’t the same.
body fillers generally absorb moisture
Fiberglass doesn’t.
It depends on the resin and pigment (the filler part)
All these products along with primer and paint are similar.
A binder that suspends a pigment.
For paint, the pigment or color is suspended in a binder For primers and body filler, it’s a material used as the filler suspended in a binder or resin.
Water resistance is dependent on the resin and filler material.
body filler contains talc. Talc absorbs moisture.

 

The base resins used in regular body fillers and reinforced filler products are the same. So the base resin used in something like Rage Gold is no more or less water resistant than the one used in Everglass. The difference is in the other materials and their ability to absorb water or not. Anything that uses a BPO based cream hardener uses the same base resin regardless of what other material is used in it. Fiberglass resins used for laying up cloth or mat are a different resin than what is used in body fillers hence the need for a different hardener MEKP.

 

Blast those seams, or at least wire wheel and acid etch, need all the rust gone. Epoxy and use your choice of reinforced filler, work it back, use lightweight filler over it.

Those seams aren't any worse than any 60's roof to quarter seam after the factory lead is removed.

 

@K13 and @ Anthony Myrick I want to say thanks for all this info. It's guys like you and Paint Guru who make this forum so educational and really help the

 

I miss paint gurus posts.
He must be busy. I seen him a few months ago at a training class.

 

Next time you see him make sure he knows that he is missed. "The Unwashed" need him!

 

Ok.
He puts on a paint class for teachers each spring.
Brought a chemist/chemical engineer one time. Learned a lot.

 

That's what life is about...education!

 

Well, I learned this.
Resins came from few places. All the different paint companies buy from them. Same for pigments that come from the same places.
A paint company cam add ingredients for different purposes.
A product can reach a supplier un labeled then get several different brand labels installed before shipping.
And that there are a lot of quality lower priced products than the major labels we normally see

 

Care to share any of those???

 

The cheaper 4:1 clears or private/store brand products.