Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
While I am definitely NOT trying to mess with your intelligence nor belittle in any way, have you thought about reading what published research is out there (i.e.: Marco's site mentioned above) and then think this through on how you could accurately duplicate it? Try it and see what you come up with! I think it will surprise you. I actually did this a few years ago as an
experiment and the outcome will likely have surprised most judges who were critiquing undercarriages this year at French Lick.
If you are still struggling with this idea, mix up some
bituminous tar (crushed-up roofing tar?) with some home-made Japan Black and mineral spirits, ...and apply it to some structural metal. You will need to determine the proper way that it would have been applied with a sprayer, and the likely consistancy. Next, dip some brackets in a tub filled with warm water and a layer of Black alkyd enamel paint and then force dry them, --and next use some cheap Black lacquer spray paint to mimick overspraying the scratches and bare areas. What you will find interesting is how the frame coating will seem thick just by the nature of the product.
THEN, one needs to determine at "what point" the chassis is being judged (time after the chassis was initially coated). I found the tar-based coating had a different sheen when it still had the mineral spirits mixed in, ...but the sheen changed as the solvents evaporated off. I should also say that my method had no real scientific basis for knowing the original consistancy of the frame coating, nor do I know exactly how it was applied. Therefore the results of your experiment may have a totally different outcome or look, however I am of the belief that anyone who needs to form an opinion on what it originally looked like should do something similar to my experiment first to have proper visual knowledge on the paint texture and/or sheen.
.