What's wrong with re-painting a Porsche?

[jess5engine]

During my search for a Porsche and subsequent reading of threads, I get the impression that having a re-painted Porsche is looked upon unfavorably. The Porsche I ended up getting does indeed have the original 16 year old paint, but it seems to me that the others I looked at could have made better impressions and probably sold sooner had they been re-painted. Could not having the original paint be that detrimental to a Porsche that is on the market? I can understand a later model that's been re-painted, but what about cars that are 15-20 years old? I also realize that paint can cover up a lot of boo-boo's, but what about having the body shop document condition of car before paint job?

I'm bringing this point up because my Porsche, like most 16-17 year old Porsches, has many rock chips and touch up paint spots that should be addressed at some point. However, do you re-paint and possibly risk losing market value in the event you sell. Or, do you re-paint and live with the fact that it's not original paint, but it certainly looks better.

Jesse

[Mike Kast]

In time they all will need paint. A bad original paint job is not as good as a nice repaint. That being said, a collector would pay top dollar for a mint original paint car. Just the same, my car is for driving and when it comes time and the funds are available mine will be repainted.
There isn't much original left on most my car anyway, why should the paint matter.
Its a selling point. Like, "Never been in the rain"
Who cares if its been in the rain every now and then. It's a PITA to keep clean if you get stuck in the rain but if you wash the wheel wells and the pan and the inside of the bumpers and.....why does it matter? It gets wet when you wash it. Maybe that's what I'll say when I sell mine. Never been wet or driven over 45 MPH, Tack never run past 2000.
I loved this one too, oil religiously changed ever year or 15,000 miles whichever comes first...

[Yargk]

To me at least, it just seems wrong to spray over a paint job. However, if it was brought down to the bare metal and completely done over, it's fine, in fact desirable to me. Upon repaint of the bare metal, isn't there a process that protects as well so undercoating is no longer needed? Haven't some people powder coated their whole cars? Weight savings are good.

[Aussie]

I cant see any problems with it.

Depending on which model you have, if it is collectable or not, it might pay to keep it its original colour.

Just get a good job done on it is the important thing.

[Milu]

With original paint you can see what you are buying.

Colour changes if done on the cheap look awful when one starts finding original colour showing up in nooks and crannies.

A bad repaint looks worse than the scratchs and stonechips (honourable battle scars)

Would you rather buy a $15,000 porsche for $15,000 or the same car for $25,000 after a $10,000 paint job?

[Eric M@ Ashers]

I think it's that most goofs think that if thye car is resprayed then it must be hiding rust or a crash.. which is crazy.... not everyone is out to do that sort of thing.... but other than that there is nothing wrong with it. it's just a car like all others....

Eric

[Silveresrty911S]

Bought mine knowing it had a bad re-spray and could see original color coming through on rear & front lid, at least he kept the original color on re-spray. I got a good deal on it knowing I would re-spray in the coming year after I bought it.

Like has been said before, "just do the re-spray right" you'll be happy and your value will stay.

Rick

[1bad914]

As long as the re-spray is done over a solid surface, it's okay. The original paint is a great base for a new paint job as long as there is no rust. Taking it down to bare metal is extreme, unless there are known problems, if the original paint lasted 16 years with no rust then it will last 16 years more under a respray. If this is an extemly rare car that is worth a ton, then take it down and do it right, if it's a daily driver, it's not worth it. I've painted both ways, they both turned out nice and still look the same!

[thrown_hammer]

My car has been brown,Purple, and red twice. I am painting it this winter. Doesn't bother me one bit.

[rcm]

Do you want to be happy w/ your car? Do it. Unless it's a rare model , I don't think it matters. I would however, spend the dough on a real good job.

[RickM]

As mentioned with an original paint job you're most likely going to know what you're getting. If the resprayed then who knows. You have to trust the owner and shop did things right. I'd rather purchase a car where I have to repaint myself as oppose to wondering if it was done properly.

Spraying over a factory finish, if properly preped, should be fine.

In closing a factory finish in good condition on any car is most desirable.

[azasadny]

I think a repaint implies to some folks that the car has been abused and the "original paint" note is made to impress those same people. My car is on it's third paint job, I just wish they would have done a better job, but I'll get it repainted in a year or two when I drop the engine and rebuild it.

[Harlan Chinn]

Nothing if the paint is done right, but it is expensive

This is what the car went through

Pazific Blue 1982 911SC



The car now finished

[smarjoram]

If I were looking at a car that had a recent respray I'd be worried about how well it was done and whether it was covering smething up that would bubble up in a year or two.

That said - I'd quite like to spruce mine up with a respray. I'd stick to the same colour and photograph all the steps - that way should I come to sell it, I can verify that it was done properly.

[targa911man]

To me, the "original paint is best value" position is a self-perpetuating myth, with facts and logic against it. Although there's no survey, just from reading and experience it seems to me that the vast majority of the top concours cars has been partially or completely repainted. Do they lack value for it? As far as the buying decision, if the car's been repainted the original color and the owner doesn't reveal it, how many of us could detect it on inspection? If it's been stripped to bare metal and repainted a different color, how many of us could detect it? And if you're going to "drive it like you stole it", which in my opinion you should, who cares?

[Hetmann]

I bought my car knowing it had been repainted. But it looked good. It is now eight years later and there are several problems with the paint coming off in spots and orange peel on the hood and sunroof. These problems were not evident when I bought the car. I believe the car was not properly prepared before the respray so now I am facing doing it right. I have been told the orange peel is from contaminents in or under the paint that become active when heated by the sun.

Also, since the paint is having problems here and there, the prep this time is all the more important (and costly). A respray may be a good thing if it was done with care, but it might be a problem down the road. Try to find out who did the respray and how much care was taken.

[Zeke]

As already mentioned a few times here: It depends on how well it was done. Glass and all weatherstrip out is a must for a decent job.

I once had a car afficionado tell me, " Two things to never allow if you can possibly help it, paint your car or have a surgeon cut on you." I have always assumed he meant that neither would ever be the same, but not necessarily worse off.

[BGCarrera32]

The stigma comes from the fact that too often the respray was done on a shoestring budget, or had poor prep work. The notion that nothing can match factory durability is b.s. too as acrylic urethanes and the like with ever improving catalysts are far more durable than what the factory baked on 20 some odd years ago.

Paint is easy. The prep work and color sanding/post detailing is what makes or breaks it.

-BG

[widebody911]

All too often people re-paint a car when they flip it. For 'normal' cars, it's a common practice to get a beat-down car cheep, re-paint it, and sell it before the paint dries, and the average mortal thinks "new paint!" is a good thing. Back when I was younger and even dumber, I bought a really nice looking VW Scirocco. When I went to put gas in it the first time, I found they hadn't even removed the tape and paper from the gas cap. That shiny paint lasted less than a year, but the lesson stays with me.

The worst hype I've seen over orignal paint has to be within the VW crowd. I see guys trying to get a premium for 'original paint' on a bus with paint so worn the primer is showin thru and the surface is rusting, but by golly it's orinal paint! I know another bus guy who will re-paint a bus, then color sand it down to make it look like it's worn original paint!

A repaint on a '02 car would be suspicious, but on a '78 SC, who cares? As long as it was done right. Generally, when people do stuff right, they're proud enough to keep records of it, maybe even take some pix of the process.

So I wonder if my '77 Targa ^H^H^H^H^H^Cab has a lower resale value because I re-sprayed it?

[RickM]

Quote:
"To me, the "original paint is best value" position is a self-perpetuating myth, with facts and logic against it. Although there's no survey, just from reading and experience it seems to me that the vast majority of the top concours cars has been partially or completely repainted."

This is news to me. Of course many concours cars have been painted but you'll rarely outscore an excellent original finish car with a repaint. And what myth or lack of logic? If you're looking at two identical "collectable" cars, one with original paint in excellent condition and one with respray of unknown history which would you select? (Well that is quite subjective)

Now when it comes to a car that is being sold at a premium because of it's "patina"....that's another story.

I'm absoulutely not against repainting a car but as mentioned you gotta know what went into it.