Coating bare metal Poison Spyder equipment
07-01-2016, 11:08 AM
#71
Super Moderator
Alrighty... so perhaps back off a bit. Threats of violence over powder coating... 
No need to threaten to smash anyone's face or shoot a fella. Each as their opinion (as do I)... you're entitled to that.
No need to threaten to smash anyone's face or shoot a fella. Each as their opinion (as do I)... you're entitled to that.
07-01-2016, 07:12 PM
#72
JK Enthusiast
Well at least one person gets it.....cheers, OP.
You said what I was going to continue with before I just backed out of this ridiculousness. And what I tried to illustrate with my pictures. That powdercoat MIGHT get taken down to the metal upon impact, but that it WILL NOT "scrape off" (if properly applied) the way a paint will, that is just the most ignorant thing I've read in a while. That's why I made the comment "let's not play the "I hit my jeep harder than you do" game." Because all of our rigs weigh around the same and unless you're jumping sh*t and landing on your bumpers and sliders, everyone's impacts are very comparable. What is NOT comparable is the amount of damage suffered between powdercoats and paints.
It is simply uneducated to make the argument. The fundamentals of the types of application and the types of material are what make the facts. If these two methods were equal in their protection and damage sustainability then why would powdercoat even exist? So people could have way more complicated processes for no gain? Give me a break.
I can't believe there is even an argument and because of the fact that there even IS one, in my opinion, (and I say this with the understanding it's going to go straight up someone's ass and then try to continue to defend their choices) the only logical conclusion to me is that some people just don't want others to have anything better than what they chose, which makes no sense to me with something so easily changed as a coating on bumpers and sliders and armor. It's either that, or these people are so blatantly ignorant they really believe what they're saying, and want to force that incorrect information upon others. I see this all the time in jeep forums and usually I am not logged in and just cringe at it. The way people think there's formulas to things and if they're not followed then things aren't done right or something, when most of the time it's half true info and half quality parts, and these people don't even know what they're talking about they're just reciting things they saw other half knowledgable people write online so they think it must be true or something. Just ridiculous.
At least you get it OP. I'm sure we aren't completely alone. People who read this will do their own googling, and come to the right conclusions....it's that simple.....it's not an opinion based or a "my rig vs yours/ my style vs yours/ my impacts vs yours" type thing. It's presentation of facts that are for some reason being disputed. Other than ignorance or cognitive dissonance, I cant figure out why there is any dispute.
You said what I was going to continue with before I just backed out of this ridiculousness. And what I tried to illustrate with my pictures. That powdercoat MIGHT get taken down to the metal upon impact, but that it WILL NOT "scrape off" (if properly applied) the way a paint will, that is just the most ignorant thing I've read in a while. That's why I made the comment "let's not play the "I hit my jeep harder than you do" game." Because all of our rigs weigh around the same and unless you're jumping sh*t and landing on your bumpers and sliders, everyone's impacts are very comparable. What is NOT comparable is the amount of damage suffered between powdercoats and paints.
It is simply uneducated to make the argument. The fundamentals of the types of application and the types of material are what make the facts. If these two methods were equal in their protection and damage sustainability then why would powdercoat even exist? So people could have way more complicated processes for no gain? Give me a break.
I can't believe there is even an argument and because of the fact that there even IS one, in my opinion, (and I say this with the understanding it's going to go straight up someone's ass and then try to continue to defend their choices) the only logical conclusion to me is that some people just don't want others to have anything better than what they chose, which makes no sense to me with something so easily changed as a coating on bumpers and sliders and armor. It's either that, or these people are so blatantly ignorant they really believe what they're saying, and want to force that incorrect information upon others. I see this all the time in jeep forums and usually I am not logged in and just cringe at it. The way people think there's formulas to things and if they're not followed then things aren't done right or something, when most of the time it's half true info and half quality parts, and these people don't even know what they're talking about they're just reciting things they saw other half knowledgable people write online so they think it must be true or something. Just ridiculous.
At least you get it OP. I'm sure we aren't completely alone. People who read this will do their own googling, and come to the right conclusions....it's that simple.....it's not an opinion based or a "my rig vs yours/ my style vs yours/ my impacts vs yours" type thing. It's presentation of facts that are for some reason being disputed. Other than ignorance or cognitive dissonance, I cant figure out why there is any dispute.
07-01-2016, 07:42 PM
#73
JK Enthusiast
Allow me to illustrate.
Imagine is takes 6000lbs of force to break a powdercoat.
Imagine it takes 4000lbs of force to break a paint.
(These aren't actual numbers as it varies but I'm sure they are close to reality and they will serve the purpose for this comment)
NOW
Imagine I drop my jeep on a rock/mineral of your choice along the rockers, and I generate 6000lbs of force thus breaking my coating, through multiple layers to the metal even. That is the ONLY place my powdercoat will be damaged down to the metal. Once the initial impact that generated that 6000lbs is over, there is only 4000ish pounds of pressure on my rocker from the weight of my jeep at that point, at absolute max. If I continue to drive over this obstacle, grinding along my rocker, it is going to cause cosmetic damage most likely, yes. But it WILL NOT SCRAPE OFF THE POWDERCOAT AS IT DID IN THE INITIAL IMPACT POINT. This is due to the higher tolerance of the powdercoat and due to the stronger bond on a smaller level than paint.
Can you see where this is going? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
Imagine you do the exact same thing in your jeep, with the same armor, only equipped with your $15 rattle can special. At the initial impact you will have 6000lbs of force, breaking your paint, and as you slide and grind over that obstacle, with your 4000ish pounds of force generated by the weight of your jeep, you ARE going to scrape the entire paint coating off down to the metal along the whole contact patch UNTIL you get to a point where most of your vehicle's weight is transferred from the point of contact, thus transitioning into only cosmetic damage at that point.
I say "cosmetic damage" here to differentiate between catastrophic complete loss of coating down to the metal and simple scuff type marks on the coating.
As I mentioned, these numbers are not accurate they are but examples to illustrate the point. These numbers being inaccurate does not automatically disprove this point. This is what happens in real life. It is not an arguable point, it comes down to actual hard science and fact.
I'm sorry if you didn't know these facts before you chose your method, but you don't need to try and convince yourself or others that paint is in any way comparable to powdercoat in terms of preventing rust from spreading under the coating from exposed metal, or in terms of damage sustainability.
I don't care if it's limestone or granite, or a freaking steel grate we are talking about scraping on, powdercoat will not just scrape off as one of you mentioned in this thread, in the way that rattle can or even professionally applied paint will.
These are facts. It's science. Try it out sometime.
Imagine is takes 6000lbs of force to break a powdercoat.
Imagine it takes 4000lbs of force to break a paint.
(These aren't actual numbers as it varies but I'm sure they are close to reality and they will serve the purpose for this comment)
NOW
Imagine I drop my jeep on a rock/mineral of your choice along the rockers, and I generate 6000lbs of force thus breaking my coating, through multiple layers to the metal even. That is the ONLY place my powdercoat will be damaged down to the metal. Once the initial impact that generated that 6000lbs is over, there is only 4000ish pounds of pressure on my rocker from the weight of my jeep at that point, at absolute max. If I continue to drive over this obstacle, grinding along my rocker, it is going to cause cosmetic damage most likely, yes. But it WILL NOT SCRAPE OFF THE POWDERCOAT AS IT DID IN THE INITIAL IMPACT POINT. This is due to the higher tolerance of the powdercoat and due to the stronger bond on a smaller level than paint.
Can you see where this is going? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
Imagine you do the exact same thing in your jeep, with the same armor, only equipped with your $15 rattle can special. At the initial impact you will have 6000lbs of force, breaking your paint, and as you slide and grind over that obstacle, with your 4000ish pounds of force generated by the weight of your jeep, you ARE going to scrape the entire paint coating off down to the metal along the whole contact patch UNTIL you get to a point where most of your vehicle's weight is transferred from the point of contact, thus transitioning into only cosmetic damage at that point.
I say "cosmetic damage" here to differentiate between catastrophic complete loss of coating down to the metal and simple scuff type marks on the coating.
As I mentioned, these numbers are not accurate they are but examples to illustrate the point. These numbers being inaccurate does not automatically disprove this point. This is what happens in real life. It is not an arguable point, it comes down to actual hard science and fact.
I'm sorry if you didn't know these facts before you chose your method, but you don't need to try and convince yourself or others that paint is in any way comparable to powdercoat in terms of preventing rust from spreading under the coating from exposed metal, or in terms of damage sustainability.
I don't care if it's limestone or granite, or a freaking steel grate we are talking about scraping on, powdercoat will not just scrape off as one of you mentioned in this thread, in the way that rattle can or even professionally applied paint will.
These are facts. It's science. Try it out sometime.
07-01-2016, 07:45 PM
#74
Allow me to illustrate. Imagine is takes 6000lbs of force to break a powdercoat. Imagine it takes 4000lbs of force to break a paint. (These aren't actual numbers as it varies but I'm sure they are close to reality and they will serve the purpose for this comment) NOW Imagine I drop my jeep on a rock/mineral of your choice along the rockers, and I generate 6000lbs of force thus breaking my coating, through multiple layers to the metal even. That is the ONLY place my powdercoat will be damaged down to the metal. Once the initial impact that generated that 6000lbs is over, there is only 4000ish pounds of pressure on my rocker from the weight of my jeep at that point, at absolute max. If I continue to drive over this obstacle, grinding along my rocker, it is going to cause cosmetic damage most likely, yes. But it WILL NOT SCRAPE OFF THE POWDERCOAT AS IT DID IN THE INITIAL IMPACT POINT. This is due to the higher tolerance of the powdercoat and due to the stronger bond on a smaller level than paint. Can you see where this is going? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? Imagine you do the exact same thing in your jeep, with the same armor, only equipped with your $15 rattle can special. At the initial impact you will have 6000lbs of force, breaking your paint, and as you slide and grind over that obstacle, with your 4000ish pounds of force generated by the weight of your jeep, you ARE going to scrape the entire paint coating off down to the metal along the whole contact patch UNTIL you get to a point where most of your vehicle's weight is transferred from the point of contact, thus transitioning into only cosmetic damage at that point. I say "cosmetic damage" here to differentiate between catastrophic complete loss of coating down to the metal and simple scuff type marks on the coating. As I mentioned, these numbers are not accurate they are but examples to illustrate the point. These numbers being inaccurate does not automatically disprove this point. This is what happens in real life. It is not an arguable point, it comes down to actual hard science and fact. I'm sorry if you didn't know these facts before you chose your method, but you don't need to try and convince yourself or others that paint is in any way comparable to powdercoat in terms of preventing rust from spreading under the coating from exposed metal, or in terms of damage sustainability. I don't care if it's limestone or granite, or a freaking steel grate we are talking about scraping on, powdercoat will not just scrape off as one of you mentioned in this thread, in the way that rattle can or even professionally applied paint will. These are facts. It's science. Try it out sometime.
07-01-2016, 07:59 PM
#76
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?? YOUVE LITERALLY REITERATED THE SAME THING IN EACH COMMENT! DO YOU HAVE SCHIZOPHRENIA BECAUSE YOU ARE LITERALLY ARGUING WITH YOURSELF! Not one single person throughout this entire thread said paint was more durable. You are the ONLY one who had mentioned it. I'm lost to as where you are reading this.
07-01-2016, 08:06 PM
#77
JK Enthusiast
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?? YOUVE LITERALLY REITERATED THE SAME THING IN EACH COMMENT! DO YOU HAVE SCHIZOPHRENIA BECAUSE YOU ARE LITERALLY ARGUING WITH YOURSELF! Not one single person throughout this entire thread said paint was more durable. You are the ONLY one who had mentioned it. I'm lost to as where you are reading this.
They've repeatedly made the claim and implications that they're equal, which they aren't.
Calm your tits.
07-02-2016, 06:16 AM
#78