Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DnaProRacing
luv my lum. has a rebuilt everything. 217,000 miles and still going strong. southern car, 16 years old and no rust, anywhere. used to live in NY, all the cars I owned up there were undercoated first thing, its just something you do without thought...
|
It may be something you do without thought, but you don't do it without money.
Whether its $60 or $200+, its cash, time, and effort.
I have actually spent the last few weeks painting the bottom of this car, first using up a quart of black gloss enamel, then buying a $8 quart of John Deer Green Rust-paint, and applying it with a brush. Although a cheap solution, it is hardly an easy or fun one.
As anyone who has tried jacking up their car and spending 4-6 hours under it with a paintbrush knows, its dirty, messy, takes forever, and covers you with shite and sticky paint. I've gone through a half-dozen brushes, And the cleanup so far has taken a half-gallon paint thinner, and an extra half-hour per day.
So lets say
the true cost of undercoating is more like $20 in materials, and 20 hours in labour. I don't know how you value your time, but mine I would like to put at $50-100 /hour, when I'm doing something that requires training, brilliance, and technical knowledge.
Is it cost effective to paint the bottom of your car with a paintbrush? Yes, if you have no more disposable income to spend on this thing, like me at the moment. If I had $200 lying around, and did not foresee any future economic emergencies, I'd probably fork out for a 'proper' undercoating.
I have tried paying to
have the underside sprayed with oil (another cheap solution around here), but that had no real effect on the key places where the body rotted out (in front of the stabilizer bars) on my pontiac bonneville.
So I think there's more to it than mere undercoating.
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but
these cars are DESIGNED to rust at just the wrong place, so most people are forced to scrap them and buy new ones.