Undercoating or Original Paint for 1959 Frame Off Restoration?

[DylanFan52]

I am doing a frame off restoration on a 1959 Series 62 Cadillac.  There was some rust on the floor pan and body frame but overall not too bad.  I am trying to decide whether to undercoat the bottom of the body or paint it.  The car will be a driver and I will never have it in a show for points.  I am leaning toward undercoating.  I live in Tennessee and the car will never, unless under unforeseen circumstances, be driven on winter treated roads.  Just looking for comments

Thanks!

John C

[35-709]

My thought too.

[Daddio]

Agree with undercoating in your case.
I my case, I spent hours / weeks heating and scraping that old crap off. Now I spend hours planning my route to avoid gravel roads / construction.
Unfortunately my driveway is gravel, so I sloooowly idle out, but still hear 'ting, ting' and know I'll be touching up a few stone chips tomorrow.
Too bad there isn't a good clear, transparent undercoating that will protect but still show your hard work.
You could also just undercoat the wheel wells.

[Mike Josephic CLC #3877]

As others have said, if you are SURE that you never
plan to show the car for points (such as a CLC Grand
National) then undercoat it.

However, things have a way of changing.  I started
out doing a "driver" and decided about mid stream
to make a show car.  Fortunately, the undercoating
had not been reapplied yet. It was painted in red
oxide primer as it should be.  Of course, that means
I can only drive it on a paved road avoiding any
construction zones.

Since it's such a labor intensive job to remove the
old stuff, take the time to ponder your decision. 
It's tough to go back!

Mike

[Chuck Swanson]

Since it's such a labor intensive job to remove the old stuff, take the
time to ponder your decision.  It's tough to go back!

Mike

Agree.  You can always add later so I would say no.  May also impact resale value if you ever sell, as buyer may want to change to show car, and as Mike states, pain to remove, especially if not "old" undercoating.  No need really if not driving in bad weather.  You can also use an industrial strength paint  that won't chip as easily.  PPG makes it in back or white.  Tough to buy as the PPG paint stores don't always sell, so you may need to do some digging.  The paint is excellent.

http://www.ppgindustrialcoatings.com/Home.aspx?lang=en-US

Chuck

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

My car came undercoated, I thought it was a 'plus' since I will be driving it (not daily though)
and won't be doing real shows. Always something that could be added later after serious thought.

[Dan LeBlanc]

CLC judging is now as delivered to the dealer - that means undercoat is now a deduction at a National meet.

[jdemerson]

CLC judging is now as delivered to the dealer - that means undercoat is now a deduction at a National meet.

Dan,

    The 2018 Judging Manual posted on the CLC web pages states the following:
Standard
The standard against which all automobiles in the Primary Division and the Specialty and Unique Division will be judged is that condition, appearance, and equipment as the car was originally delivered to the first owner considering authenticity, condition, operability, and cleanliness of all components. Any accessory approved by Cadillac, either installed at the factory or by a dealer, is acceptable.

It is true that the judging form specifies a deduction of a point for undercoating, and this would appear to me to be an inconsistency with the stated policy.

I have lived in Oswego County, NY and Addison County, VT, where it has always snowed a lot and where road salt was heavily used. It is doubtful that ANY new Cadillacs delivered to owners were delivered without undercoating! Yes the undercoating was applied at the dealership, but the Cadillac Motor Division supplied instructions to the dealerships for applying the undercoating. I have a copy of these instructions from Cadillac Motor Division, as do other CLC members. Should not the standard quoted above apply?

Given this, if an owner challenged a deduction for undercoating, I think a CLC Judge who had seen the Cadillac Division Instructions (or who was shown those instructions by the car owner) would be obligated to restore the point deducted! There's a little conflict here that should probably be resolved...

John Emerson
1952 Cadillac Sedan 6219X  (undercoated before delivery to original owner as far as I can tell!)

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

We're talking about one point here fellas.

Two otherwise identical cars: One with, one without undercoat.

Which one involves considerably more labor?

Which one more correctly represents the way it would have looked when it left Detroit?

Which one is worth more? 

And finally - which one would anybody in his right mind rather have today?

Under the circumstances, if ONE point is not justified here, I don't know what is.

And I say this as one whose cars do have undercoating.

[Chuck Patton]

Hello John C

Glad to read that you are improving your Cadillac.

I say drive YOUR Cadillac any way YOU desire!

[INTMD8]

I'll throw in my .02 which is probably worth nothing.

As far as points, car show judging. No offence meant but doesn't interest me in the least. I would actually go to more shows if there was no judging, just to hang out and have fun.

And yes I have owned cars that have won shows (not my Cadillac), just has no bearing on my decisions.

So, personal preference only, I much prefer painted, especially after a restoration. Undercoating is dark, has no reflection.

Painted floor highlights the restored frame and other components, I love the look.

Once spent several weeks with a propane torch, scraper, rags and kerosene removing dealer undercoat from a car to prime/sand/base/clear.  Drove it across the country to a top speed event and encountered some horrible weather.

When I got back home, sprayed it down with some cleaner, pressure wash, leaf blower to dry. Good as new.

Only other thing I would consider is painted bedliner. Saw a silver 59 posted on the Eldorado brougham forum with this and also thought it looked nice but just painted I think looks the best.

[R S Steven]

Whenever I see a nice driver with fresh undercoating on the bottom side I always wonder what they are trying to hid.  I personally would go with paint with a clear chip-gaurd coating to protest the paint. Just my 2 cents

[DylanFan52]

Thanks all taking time to reply!  Very good points on both sides.  I still do not know for sure which way I am going to go but I have a little time before I make the final decision.

Chuck Patton thanks for the encouragement!  Getting there slowly but surely, hopefully.  I would not be where I am without this group, that is for sure.  I now have good people (young) helping me but sometimes there lack of knowledge of the cars of this era is a stumbling block in the restoration.  I am glad there are people like you and other members have the passion to keep these cars going and adding new ones.

[59-in-pieces]

I'm too poor to throw in $.02 like Jim above, but I echo his approach to his car, restoration, shows, and judging.
I am hooked on the crack of restoring to OEM, including the bolt head patterns used in the assembly of the 59's, and ALL their parts - it's a for me, and for me alone thing.
Although they say the car was only OEM once - when it was originally made, and any other restoration will never match that of new.
However, red oxide primer is in my mind the only way to go - maximum flexibility going forward.
These cars once restored should be driven and enjoyed as much as the guy who bought the car brand new.
Trust me when I say, even after my restorations are finished, I still drive the car here there and everywhere, without a single concern about a rock chip to the underfloor primer.
I now step down from the soap box.
Have fun,
Steve B.

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

I am coming in late on this one, but when I was under my own '60 CDV, I noticed that the underside of the body was in Red Oxide, and that stuff was still in good condition after many years of motoring, both in USA, and here in Australia.

Not sure where the car originated, but it was completely clear of rust in the floor pan.

Bruce.

[59-in-pieces]

I really should recognize JD Emerson for supplying me a copy of the Cadillac Motor Division supplied instructions to the dealerships for applying the undercoating. - THANKS JOHN.

We had a very nice chat and concluded - he representing the NE (Vermont) and I the SW (Calif.) of the country - that cars in the NE were as a matter of SOP undercoated.  And on the other hand, cars delivered in the SW were not undercoated - though the option existed.
After all, which areas of the country are likely to have buyers who would opt for the extra expense due to snow, salt, and road conditions.
So it was an easy conclusion - scientific even - that cars delivered in different geographies would have been or would not have been delivered with undercoating.
So should end the deliberation - LOL
Have fun,
Steve B.