From: uniquemachine@cybcon.com
Date: Wed Apr 27 2005 - 05:27:01 PDT
I think that the paint needs a 'binder' to hold it together. I don't
know what they use, but I have heard my painter friend talk about it
before.
Jon
>
>
> Hey list,
>
> I was recently given a 1 gal can of #319 paint dated 1952. However, it is
> in a powder form!!! I followed the instructions on the can which recommends
> using gasoline or mineral spirits as the solvent several times and the paint
> after drying turns back into a powder and wipes off. Extremely frustrating
> after several attempts with different solvents and different ratios. When
> it is wet however, it gives the nice flat, darker, original WW2 look that
> I've seen in color photos and on spare NOS parts. Has anyone had
> experience with this form of #319? Am I doing something wrong? I would
> like to have this paint matched using modern formulas if only if I could get
> it to adhere right. I am a true believer that the #319 on the market is off
> on tone as well as texture.
>
> Trying to find the truth,
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick v100" <rickv100@yahoo.com>
> To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 1:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [MV] Olive Drab no. 3412 color ???
>
>
> > Wouldn't it be possible with the new photo matching
> > available at paint stores to get the right color?
> >
> > Under the data plates is a good spot for unoxidised
> > paint that would be easily transportable.
> >
> > Rick
> >
> > --- Thomas M McHugh <tmmchugh@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> >> John,
> >>
> >> Army Motors or Military Vehicles magazine had a
> >> great article about the
> >> evolution of 24087. I am well aware of the changes
> >> of color that took
> >> place over the years. It is just unfortunate that
> >> the military could not
> >> have used an alpha designation for each upgrade.
> >> During my 43 years in the
> >> military, every time we repainted trucks, they did
> >> not match.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The 24087 available now is actually lighter in tone.
> >> Worse yet ALL spray
> >> 24087 is not a match to can paint. The spray is
> >> what we called "Baby
> >> Sh**" spray since it looks more like a dirty diaper.
> >> Sure wish we could
> >> convince a supplier to make spray OD in the older
> >> color. I would buy
> >> several cases, if ever available. Many of my
> >> friends would also. How
> >> about it, paint people ???
> >>
> >> I had found gal cans of original older 24087 paint &
> >> painted my early 1952
> >> M38A1. It looks good. Now when I have to touch up
> >> a small scratch, with
> >> spray, it does not match.
> >>
> >> Thanks much.
> >>
> >> Tom McHugh, NJ
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Adams-Graf, John"
> >> <John.Adams-Graf@fwpubs.com>
> >> To: "Thomas M McHugh" <tmmchugh@msn.com>; "Military
> >> Vehicles Mailing List"
> >> <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 11:27 AM
> >> Subject: RE: Olive Drab no. 3412 color ???
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom:
> >> I realize that the study of U.S. vehicle paint
> >> colors is complex, to say the
> >> least. But, if you reread what I had written before
> >> (still pasted at the
> >> bottom of this post), OD No. 3412 is the SAME as
> >> Olive Drab No. 22, which is
> >> the same as OD No. 9 and which is the same as AN
> >> 319.
> >>
> >> SO, to simplify it, if you want OD No. 3412, buy AN
> >> 319. There should be no
> >> difference as it was all the same formulation.
> >> Incidentally, on March 1,
> >> 1956, Federal Standard 595 redesignated Olive Drab
> >> 3412 (formerly No. 22,
> >> No. 9, and 319) as "34087". Be careful here, though
> >> and read closely:
> >> FEDERAL STANDARDS EVOLVE. The number "34087"
> >> represents different things at
> >> different times since 1956.
> >>
> >> I don't know what you mean by "the older, darker
> >> 1952 era color" but I
> >> suspect you are referring to 2430, the semigloss OD?
> >> If so, 2430 and 24087
> >> were virtually identical. 24087 is available from
> >> many great dealers that
> >> you will find advertising in Military Vehicles
> >> Magazine. To recap, 202 is
> >> the same as 2430 which is the same as 24087.
> >>
> >> John A-G
> >> Iola, WI USA
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Thomas M McHugh [mailto:tmmchugh@msn.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 9:54 AM
> >> To: Military Vehicles Mailing List; Adams-Graf, John
> >> Subject: Olive Drab no. 3412 color ???
> >>
> >>
> >> Does anyone know a source for the OD No. 3412 Paint
> >> ???
> >>
> >> Does anyone know of Spray Paint for the older darker
> >> 1952 Era color ???
> >>
> >> Tom McHugh, NJ
> >> 1952 M38A1
> >> M-416 Trailer
> >> MVPA, MTA
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Adams-Graf, John"
> >> <John.Adams-Graf@fwpubs.com>
> >> To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List"
> >> <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 9:52 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [MV] color of WW2 gensets
> >>
> >>
> >> Terry:
> >> Here is the link to a good article on paint color
> >> evolution that had
> >> appeared in Military Vehicles Magazine some time ago
> >> about paint color
> >> evolution:
> >>
> > http://www.collect.com/interest/article.asp?Pub=MV&id=4600
> >>
> >> Also, there is an excellent synopsis of the
> >> evolution in the Standard
> >> Catalog of Military Vehicles, SECOND EDITION by
> >> David Doyle (pages 480-502).
> >>
> >> Incidentally, the specification for that created the
> >> number "A/N 319" was
> >> introduced in January 1943 ("A/N" meaning
> >> "Army/Navy"). It was not adopted
> >> by the Army Air Corps because it did not inhibit
> >> infrared detection. It was
> >> the same color as Olive Drab number 22--just a new
> >> designation.
> >>
> >> Olive Drab no. 22 was a designation created by the
> >> Quartermaster Corps in
> >> October 1940. The paint was to be made according to
> >> ES-474 ("Engineering
> >> Specification"). ES-474 was later replaced by
> >> ES-680.
> >>
> >> In October 1942, responsibility for paint shifted
> >> BACK to the Corps of
> >> Engineers. They referred to their own
> >> specifications, Spec 3-1. Though the
> >> color was the same as Olive Drab no. 22, the Corps
> >> of Engineers had its own
> >> name: "No. 9 Olive Drab." The spec was updated to
> >> Corps of Engineers
> >> standards and adopted as "Specification 3-1F/Color
> >> Car Supplement (Revision
> >> 1)." This was issued on April 21, 1943
> >>
> >> Before I go on...a bit of review:
> >> Outbreak of World War II: All vehicles painted in
> >> Olive Drab No. 22
> >>
> >> Olive Drab No. 22 is the same as No. 9 Olive Drab.
> >> A/N 319 Olive Drab is
> >> the same color as Olive Drab 22.
> >>
> >> End of World War II: All vehicles painted in Olive
> >> Drab No. 22 (the same as
> >> No. 9 or A/N 319. One color, three names.)
> >>
> >> SO....up until August 1, 1945, when Army Regulation
> >> 850-15 introduced a
> >> semigloss Olive Drab (for the very first time), all
> >> vehicles were painted in
> >> the same color (though the NAME of the color changed
> >> three times in four
> >> years).
> >>
> >> Bear in mind, too, that AR 850-15 stated CLEARLY
> >> that vehicles were only to
> >> be repainted in semigloss when repainting was
> >> otherwise required. the
> >> September 1945 issue of Army Motors noted that the
> >> semigloss would not be
> >> available for 60-90 days. SO, during WWII, NO
> >> semigloss was approved for
> >> use on vehicles.
> >>
> >> The rest of the story...In 1950, No. 22 Olive Drab
> >> was renamed "Olive Drab
> >> no. 3412". The semigloss specified in AR 850-15 was
> >> named "Olive Drab no.
> >> 2430". OD 2430 was the standard color of U.S.
> >> vehicles until 1956.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hope this helps
> >> John A-G
> >> Iola, Wisconsin USA
> >>
> >> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> >> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
> >> <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> >> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
> >> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> >> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Make Yahoo! your home page
> > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> >
> > ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> > To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> > To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> > To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
> >
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:42:56 PDT