Author Topic: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand  (Read 1300 times)

Offline DreamZproject

  • Registered User
  • *
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Melbourne
  • New Member
sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« on: July 20, 2012, 12:16:30 PM »
Hey guys,
So im at the stage now where i'd like to get the car sprayed soonish, but first
i have to get the car all prepped. I have two main options; take the car to get
sand blasted, or give the car a decent rub back with an orbital sander. I have
been told that my car has quite a few dents in it, so getting the car sand blasted
will involve a great deal of panel beating afterwards, which i would do myself
(mainly rebogging). But on the other hand, there is currently two layers of paint
and bog on the car, so in some areas it is up to 5mm thick.

I have been given a quote for an external sand blast (inc engine bay) and a prime
for $800, which i believe is reasonable... But is it worth all this extra time and
money, or should i just give the car a decent sand back?
« Last Edit: July 20, 2012, 12:22:23 PM by DreamZproject »

Offline KatoKid

  • Donating Member
  • Registered User
  • ***
  • Posts: 986
  • Location: South Mexico.... where the low lifes cant find me.
  • Not so New Member but not a Newbie either
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2012, 12:29:13 PM »
Choice depends on so many things but mainly comes down to money.

Blasting will reveal all evils and then you have to decide how you will deal with it and how much it will cost....and where do you stop.

If its a good car with limited rust and you have a tight budget then just give it a rub yourself, do the basic repairs, paint and enjoy driving it.

Sometimes its better not to know!
‘respect the powerslide as it may not necessarily be your friend unless you’ve become acquainted to it after a long time’

My BMW M3 powered 240Z Project: http://www.viczcar.com/forum/index.php/topic,6400.0.html

71 240Z #000728

Offline Whittie

  • Registered User
  • *
  • Posts: 549
  • Location: Perth
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2012, 02:47:20 PM »
I would avoid sand-blasting

Sand-blasting, especially if you have a lot of material, as you do, generates an enormous amount of heat. The steel used to fabricate a zed is VERY thin and small applications of heat can cause catastrophic warping of panels! Trust me, you should have seen my last bonnet - welding buckled it - and new roof, same story.

Used in the right areas (floor and other re-inforced parts of the car) sand-blasting is fine. Otherwise, get yourself outside and kitted up (breathing apparatus is a good idea, plus appropriate protective clothing) and go bonkers with some ammonia based paint-stripper :) Otherwise, just sand it, much  safer.

It's a pain, but you'll suffer in panel beating if you try and cut corners at this stage
'77 260z 2 Seater - Stock as an F22 Raptor

Build Thread --> http://www.viczcar.com/forum/index.php/topic,6991.0.html

Lots of incar videos --> http://www.youtube.com/user/whittie260

Offline Ledge

  • Donating Member
  • Registered User
  • ***
  • Posts: 700
  • Location: Mount Barker
  • RB26 Rocket
    • Custom and Classic Cars
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2012, 04:12:47 PM »
HI
I would sand blast every time
As Kato said it reveals ALL evils so you must fix everything
So a better job in the long run.

As whittie has said some blasters will destroy your panels
so you need to check that who is doing it is capable of doing
it carefully.

We get a combo done with sand everywhere except the middle
of the bonnet where the blaster uses Soda.

800 bucks with primer is cheap so make sure he isn't an idiot.

Cheers
Paul

Offline Lurch ™

  • Locky
  • Registered User
  • *
  • Posts: 4611
  • Location: In my Den of Rust & Sin
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2012, 06:31:32 PM »
WHY is everyone STILL referencing to 'Sand Blasting'!?
Sand has been outlawed as a blasting medium for the last 5+ years.
Garnet is now used, so the exposure to Silica & contracting Silicosis is removed.

Back on topic, I'm +1 for media blasting as traces of lines/spiders are guaranteed to be under the paint.

Offline Zedman240®

  • Dimitri Vazz
  • Global Moderator
  • Registered User
  • *****
  • Posts: 4893
  • Location: Way out SE Melbourne
  • I want your old SHOGUN bike! PM me now...
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2012, 06:55:22 PM »
An issue with sanding is if you leave a spec of surface rust, it will show up again a few years after you have spent your $10k on the body work.
HS30-00121 'early girl'
Have u got any old SHOGUN bikes in the shed? Under the house? ME WANT!
Breaks-Something that fails.
Brakes-Stop your car.
There-in  or  at  that  place (opposed  to  here).
Their-of, belonging to, made by, or done by them

Offline KatoKid

  • Donating Member
  • Registered User
  • ***
  • Posts: 986
  • Location: South Mexico.... where the low lifes cant find me.
  • Not so New Member but not a Newbie either
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2012, 06:59:08 PM »

800 bucks with primer is cheap so make sure he isn't an idiot.


^^^^what Paul and Whittie said....... I paid double that but the job the blaster did was brilliant...I couldn't fault their work. This is one job that you don't want done on the cheap.
‘respect the powerslide as it may not necessarily be your friend unless you’ve become acquainted to it after a long time’

My BMW M3 powered 240Z Project: http://www.viczcar.com/forum/index.php/topic,6400.0.html

71 240Z #000728

Offline Gareth. J.

  • Donating Member
  • Registered User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2303
  • Location: S.E. Melbourne, Victoria
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2012, 07:14:38 PM »
I used 'strip it discs' on the parts of my car I've done. I haven't had much rust to deal with, but plenty of paint layers and bog. I used the discs on my doors recently, going slowly it took about 30mins per door skin, which was 1 and 1/4 discs. Depends on how much need to be done and the condition of the car but these discs worked great for me.

Offline zzzzed

  • mick the zed freek
  • Registered User
  • *
  • Posts: 2287
  • Location: south australia
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2012, 09:13:24 PM »
Yeh those strip disks work great. I use a combination of stripper and the strip disk, Otherwise known as seaweed disks
You see things and you say why? I dream things that never were, and I say why not.  (Edited so lurch can understand it)


240z
260z 2 seater
Yamaha cafe racer
Gu pootrol tow car and daily driver 
More to come

Offline DreamZproject

  • Registered User
  • *
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Melbourne
  • New Member
Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2012, 07:25:42 AM »
Ah man!
I love and hate you guys. There are so many good responses here, and all posted so quickly!
But I'm still so confused!!!:p
I think I will go with the blasting, just because I want to get the project moving along...

Auszcar 240z, 260z, 280zx Forums

Re: sandblast Vs. quick orbital sand
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2012, 07:25:42 AM »