My GT/CS is a shade off on all the urethane parts which are the rear fascia, front fascia, side louvers, side skirts...everything that makes a CS a CS. Do any of you notice this on your urethane parts? Seems like paint on urethane doesn't match paint on metal. I've noticed this on some other cars too. My car came painted from the factory.

 

Nice car!

I guess now that I look at mine the urethane parts do look slightly darker. But it's probably not really darker, just looks that way because there is slightly less shine?

 

I always notice a bit of a difference, because of the materials. But it's very noticeable on yours (though it probably wouldn't have stuck out to me if you hadn't said anything). I know there are two different shades of performance white, but it's hard to believe they accidentally used both in the factory (unless it was a Friday).

 

MustangLynda,

Yeah the paint is a little darker on the urethane parts. It's only noticeable in certain lighting conditions.

 

I just found this little bit of info while searching the web.

"The flex additive used in the paint on plastic parts often darkens the color. This is quite common, as most of the plastic parts are painted separate. A painter in a body shop will blend the paint from the bumper into adjacent panels to camouflage the change in color."

I guess if it really bugged me then I can have a body shop blend it in with the other panels. I can live with it though...I only notice it in certain conditions.

 

It's not just Mustangs .... next time your on the highway ... watch how many cars are out there where the bumper covers look slight different than the sheet metal ... I'm not saying every car is that way ... but it is not uncommon.

 

Yeah. I noticed a bit of shade difference in the white paint under low light situations when I first got CalStang. But after I got him all broken it and then pulled my very first full blown 1-2 power shift, all was forgiven!! "RC" P.S. Hah! Glad the little Mrs. does not read this TMS site.

 

That's because all the parts you're talking about, plus the door handle and rear spoiler too, are vendor supplied parts, i.e. someone else makes them and paints them, then sends them to the assembly plant for installation on your car as it's coming down the line. The variance on Mustang's really isn't all that bad generally. You should see my silver Honda Ridgeline, the bumpers are a completely different color than the car!

 

Actually, the bumper covers are made and painted at the factory.

 

I dont notice...

 

Interestingly, the front fascia on my Roush is spot-on for paint shade, but my wife's Lincoln MKX is not-- as others have noted, the fascias are just a bit darker.

 

I have noticed this On my HP as well. I think for some reason it stands out more on the Performance White than the other colored cars. It bugs me. I actually thought the rear facia had been re-painted and inquired of any accidents when I bought the car. I thought it must have been hit in the rear on the lot or on a test drive or somthing. It was that noticable.

 

It has to do with the differences between the way plastic and metal absorb the pigment. I painter can shoot color from the same gun at the same time from the bumper to the fender, and when it dries there will be a slight difference. On some colors it's more noticeable than others. I notice it on my TR, but I'm probably the only one who notices.

 

You want to see bad paint matching between the body and rear bumpers?? Next time you see a current gen Acura TL in Pearl White, look at the rear side of the car where the plastic bumper meets the rear qtr panel. I have never seen white that is more off than that. That car is in its 5th year and Honda still has not fixed the issue.

 

This is pretty common. I would just deal with it. Aftermarket paint, especially on plastic, is never as durable as the factory stuff. It'll chip like crazy.

 

Hugh? What are you using... Krylon or Duplicor?

I'm guessing you had a bad experience that you're basing this comment on. If paint has failed, 9 times out of 10 it's due to lack of proper paint prep, or other poor workmanship.

 

Hahaha.. Krylon!

No, I've used and seen a lot of different paints. PPG, Dupont, House of Kolor, R-M, etc. I have never had a "bad" experience. I agree that proper prep is the most important part of the process. But even the best paints/painters can't duplicate factory paint. Now I'm not saying you can't do a better LOOKING job, because we all know Ford isn't exactly known for the best paint jobs... But for everyday driving an aftermarket finish never stands up to "sand-blasting" and rock chips as well as the factory paint.

Take 2 new cars... repaint one of the front bumpers... drive both cars about 50k miles, and tell me the bumper with aftermarket paint looks better than the one with factory paint. It's not going to happen. (unless you paint it 3 times) This has nothing to do with the qualty of paint or quality of the paint job. It's more because humans can't duplicate the processes done by machines in the factory. You can get very close, but it's never the same.

 

Forget about the experience with other cars. I can very simply look at my factory bumper and the painted lower grille and tell you that there's more chips in any given are of the bumper than in the grille. The grille was painted within a couple hundred miles of the bumper. The paint on these cars is VERY thin. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

 

Paint on plastic SHOULD be thin. The factory does this for a reason- The thicker the paint, the more chance of cracking when the plastic flexes.

Speaking of chips... Look into the 3M Paint protection film. I put it on my car brand new. It wasn't cheap, but there are absolutely zero chips on my front end. It's also easier to clean bugs off, which is a good thing for southern summers. I don't sell the stuff or anything, but it really is one of the best products I've seen for cars. I will put it on everything I buy from now on.