# Painting (flat clearcoat) on Rolling stock



## coh2000 (Dec 6, 2013)

I am thinking about spray painting (flat clear coat) a USA rolling stock caboose model with something to take the 'sheen' off of the factory paint.
I suppose there may be a clear coat of some sort already on the item, but I want it to have a 'flat' finish because I'm thinking this may be more appealing.


Has anyone done this, and if so, what type of clear coat paint, etc. would be the best to use?


----------



## Doug C (Jan 14, 2008)

How about Badger ModelFlex Clear Gloss (nontoxic). Or. Krylon "preserve it" matte. (Toxic). Or simply leave outdoors for about a week for prototypical weathering!? 

Nite!


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

I dont like completely flat finishes..for the most part, they are very unrealistic.. 
in the smaller scales (N-scale, HO scale, etc) people have always seemed really hung-up on dull-coat. 
they want everything to be as flat and "dull" (no shine or gloss) as possible.. 
well, for the most part, this is very unrealistic! 
most locomotives and rolling stock are in fact a bit glossy! even when dirty. 
taking a diesel locomotive that "looks new" (not weathered) and giving it a hit of dull-coat, like this: 










is very unrealistic..because a new, un-weathered locomotive should in fact be very glossy!  
like this: 










There are a lot of modelers who dont understand the proper use of dull-coat..they think all locos and rolling stock on a model railroad are *supposed* be dull and non-glossy.. 
they are wrong.. 

Only if the model is very heavily weathered, very dirty, should dull-coat be used to any great extent.. 
I like to use Krylon "satin" clear, which is a semi-gloss finish, as the over spray for my models: 










I find it to be a good compromise between "ultra-gloss" (which is usually unrealistic) and "ultra flat, no gloss at all" (which is also unrealistic) 
IMO, going totally flat, but with no weathering, looks worse than "too glossy".. 
If you do think your car is too glossy, I would recommend a "semi-gloss" or "satin" clear coat.. 
that cuts down the gloss, but doesn't make it totally flat. 

Scot


----------



## coh2000 (Dec 6, 2013)

I guess I should say that my item is a wood Sheathed reefer and it has wood sheathed doors.


----------



## billsharron (Jan 3, 2008)

Scot makes excellent points. Try a flat finish to see if you like it, worst case is you could overcoat it with a satin product or even go back to gloss. some modelers have reported success with Krylon matte finish or satin finish it seems to be non yellowing and is UV protected. You could try them on a piece of scrap plastic and see if you like the results. The most important factor is what you like, so try some things and stick with what looks good to you!


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

New wood cars are also quite glossy: 



















Wood makes no difference, the same points apply.

Im looking at my USA Trains LV Alco PA's on the shelf next to me..I haven't weathered them, they are exactly as USA trains painted them.. 
they have a very distinct "semi-gloss" or "satin" finish to them..they are *not* "high gloss".. 
Im sure this was intentional..because model railroaders think they aren't supposed to be high gloss!  
so the manufacturers give us what we expect to see..even if we are wrong. 
and it is wrong, for new un-weathered locos and rolling stock: 











What that means, is that technically my Alco PA models are *not glossy enough*! 
they are actually too dull for brand-new unweatherd locos..I have actually considered upping the gloss a bit!
I think they will look better that way..(I might eventually give them some very light weathering..even then, they should be a bit glossier than they are)

If a modeler chooses to weather his models, he can then dull-down the gloss..but brand-new, most models should be glossier than they actually are!  
interesting.. 

here is another classic example: 










The owner of that model caboose has given it *no* weathering at all..the caboose is pristine, looks brand-new, just out of the shop. 
yet its completely dull and flat, not a hint of gloss.. 
a new caboose, with no weathering, should be much glossier: 










There is obviously a wide-range of gloss to no gloss.. 
new locos and rolling stock start out high-gloss, and gradually get less glossy as they age and weather.. 
The only locos and rolling stock that are DEAD flat, no gloss at all, look like this: 










Scot


----------



## iaviksfan (Dec 27, 2007)

How do you protect the windows when spraying?


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

Posted By iaviksfan on 07 Dec 2013 10:36 AM 
How do you protect the windows when spraying? 
I have used the blue painters Masking tape. I I put it over the windows and work it into the corners. Then I use a sharp pointed EXacto Knife and cut off the excess. That was the window is covered in all corners yet the frame is left exposed for what ever coating you are going to put on. 

I just started painting rolling stock this past summer. 



JJ


----------



## iaviksfan (Dec 27, 2007)

Thanks John, That is what I do on buildings so I wasn't sure if people go with frosted windows or not. I have used that mask stuff that you paint on the windows, then peel it off when you are done painting, works semi well, Guess one could use a q tip with paint thinner and clean them too.


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

While I agree with what most are saying.....the REAL engines look fake glossy......almost silly...IMHO.

AND the toys we buy and call models, look fake, all glossy, and look a little better, to me flat, never thought to dust with semi, but then you'd have to contend with the masking of the windows, which I don't care what anyone says, is a royal pain in the a--!

And good luck with using thinner and or laquer thinner, using that stuff to remove the unwanted overspray takes a skill to get it correct, which I always have trouble with, and usually never turns out just right......

I have been weathering for 15 years or more........and not just trains....

The answer is shoot a car with gloss, another with semi gloss and one with flat...then you'd be better to judge FOR YOURSELF as to which look...looks better to YOU. 
Always remember it is YOUR RR and you can do what you want to do, what looks good to you...all of our likes, disslikes are subjective at best.......`

I have never judged someones train because it was flat, semi, and or glossy...I look and if it looks cool, that is what I say or if I just don't care for it, I won't say much as people can get hurt feelings, and they might just like what they did, so I do not say much at all.

I have always used Dul-Cote, because I use a grunge method to weather with india ink and alcohol...just reciently I have used the Krylon semi or flat that has UV protection on buildings and signs cause they are out in the blazing summer sun more then my trains are...and have not really shot the trains with it...maybe next spring I just might have to try it out......

Again this is all IMHO.

Bubba


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I don't use unilateral oversprays. Glossy, semi-gloss, or flat; if a model is _just_ any one of those, it's going to look odd. The prototype is a mix of all three. Take Scot's LV PA photo from above. The loco is certainly glossy, but the trucks are rust and dust-covered flat finish, and the grillwork is covered in grime, etc., but you can still see some reflectivity through it as well. 

I prefer acrylic washes for my weathering. That way I can control the ultimate sheen on the model based on how heavy or light I do the wash. For certain areas (trucks, underbody, etc.) I'll use a flat paint to begin with and then weather. Then I'll apply powders, etc. if I want to. I do not seal the powders, as that would necessitate the use of some kind of overspray, which is precisely the effect I'm trying to avoid. 

It's amazing how much an unrealistically "glossy" model can look prototypically realistic with just some light weathering on the appropriate places, highlighting the appropriate details. 










This same wash technique yields vastly different results based on how heavy I apply it, and how much I wipe off. 

Heavy:


















Medium:


















Light:


















When you get into the "Medium" and "Light" categories, it's easy to see how an overspray of any sheen would ruin the overall effect. 


Later, 

K


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

I am currently in the camp of starting with the gloss or satin finishes... 

Adding normal road dirt and dust. Some wear and tear covers this gloss surface, but not in a solid pattern. 
Dirt is random... 
Hence some gloss still shows thru, under the dirt. 

So ya incorrectly from our early HO days of modeling..we use to spray a flat finish coat to seal it all. 
I think that was also done to "hide" the decal 'read' shiny edges.... 
One problem brought on another.. 
But it is also so much easier working on large scale trains to do an even better job! 

Dirk


----------



## coh2000 (Dec 6, 2013)

East Broad Top,These photos of the wood sheathed rolling stock is the effect that I would like to have.
I want to 'bring out' the vertical grooves in the wood sides. 
What else can you tell me about using (brand names, mixtures, procedures, etc) about acrylic washes?
I am wondering if I could also use one of the 'powders' that I see on Youtube for additional weathering? Do you have an opinion about those products?


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

For the most part, I use cheap craft-store acrylics that you can get for around $1 per bottle. (Folk-Art, Apple Barrel, etc.) I use mostly earth tones for my weathering; black, brown, rust, dust, and white. (Not necessarily called those names, but those colors.) 

For the washes, I have a plastic paint tray that looks something like a deviled egg tray with small round cups along the edge and a larger area in the center where I mix the colors. There's nothing particularly scientific about it. I mix the colors to get a color that works for what I'm trying to weather, mix in a little bit of water with it so to dilute it, then brush it on the model. If it's too heavy, I dip the brush in the water and add water to it to thin the paint on the model. If it's too thin, I add some more paint to the model. If you don't like it, add lots of water and it will wash off, and you can start over. Once it dries, though, it's on there. I also keep a paper towel and/or Q-tip handy to wipe off the wash where I don't want it to be. This is especially important if you're trying to preserve a glossy finish underneath the grime. Otherwise the grime leaves a dull film over everything. 

When applying washes, let gravity be your friend. Hold the model such that the wash runs down in the direction gravity would pull the water. You don't need to hold the sides perfectly vertical, but you don't want to tip it so the water runs sideways, either. 

I've just started experimenting with a thicker water-based paint for weathering, called gouache. Early tests show it to be of no particular advantage in terms of doing washes, though I love the black. It's about as jet black as you can get--easily two shades darker than the "black" acrylic paint I use. It's pretty much a very pure, very flat black as you'd find on a smokestack. I haven't used that for a wash yet, but typically when I'm doing a wash, I want more of a grimy color anyway than a pure black. On the other hand, when I'm trying to stipple soot around a smokestack or on a smokebox, my "black" isn't as dark as I'd really like, so this stuff is great for that. 

I think the gouaches will be better for dry-brush weathering and painting the cars in the first place. The paint is very heavy on the pigment so it covers in one coat. At the same time, it lays down very flat with minimal brush strokes. I want to pick up some more colors and try painting figures with it instead of the craft paints, but I've also been using it for drybrushing accents such as rust spots, wood grain, and the like. I've only been playing with these for a few weeks now, having been turned onto them by an artist friend of mine. 

In terms of powders, I like the Bragdon's powders. They cover nicely and withstand a fair amount of handling. As I stated above, I don't seal them, because that ruins the sheen I'm trying to achieve. But they're fairly stable, and even if they do wipe off over time, they're easily re-applied. Like the washes, I use the same earth tones with the powders. 

The same friend who turned me onto the gouache is going to get me some pan pastels to try. He says they--like the Bragdons powders--have a binder that sticks well to various surfaces. I'll be interested to try them. I've used pastel chalks in the past, but the ones I tried lacked any kind of binder, needing to be oversprayed in order to stick. 

This should at least get you started. The key is to experiment and keep experimenting until you get something that you like. There's no science to it. It's all just playing around. 

Later, 

K


----------



## pete (Jan 2, 2008)

Kevin you talked about gouache paints and another product pan pastels could you post a few pictures of how they look after applied. I weather all of our engines and cars using bragdon's powers and also dry brush. Pete


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

I like to use Krylon Matte Finish for rolling stock. I vary the number of coats depending on the car. If it's an older car, more coats. Less coats for a newer car.

On passenger cars I use Krylon Crystal Clear to simulate a varnished look.

I don't bother in HO scale or O scale. The main reason I do any over spray for G scale is to help protect decals from the elements.


----------



## coh2000 (Dec 6, 2013)

East Broad Top,
Thanks so much for your response to my question. 
All of the information will be helpful as this will be my 1st attempt at this.

I have read that I should spray something on the boxcar before I apply the powders.
Have you found that to be a good idea???

If you think of anything else that may be helpful for me, please post it.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I have read that I should spray something on the boxcar before I apply the powders. 
Have you found that to be a good idea??? 
If what you're reading is referring to something like a universal overspray of Dull-Coat or some kind of finish like that, then no I don't bother with that. Mostly for the reasons I mentioned above--I specifically want the contrasts in sheen between various element--but also because that would mean I've got to mask off windows and all that stuff, and that's a bloody pain. So, no... I rely on the nature of the native finish to hold the powders as well as they're able. 

Having said that, if a car has a glossy finish from the factory or from the paint I used and I want it to be matte, I'll spray or brush it with a matte finish, but that's not something designed to help the powders stick so much as correcting the base sheen I want on that particular model (or part of the model.) The powders I use have binder in them, so they stick fairly well in their own right even on moderately glossy surfaces. What I _have_ been known to do is use acrylic paints in conjunction with powders to give a stark contrast between gloss and matte, such as this rust patch on the hood of my center cab: 










Here, I brushed some flat rust-colored paint on the edge of the hood, then dabbed the rust-colored powders onto the wet paint. This did two things; first, the wet paint allowed the powder to adhere very well and not rub off. Second, it allowed me to give the rust some texture by virtue of the powders clumping up just a little bit with the wet paint. 

could you post a few pictures of how they look after applied. 

I will endeavor to do so. I'm working on a steel hopper right now. I've found the el-cheapo acrylics to be preferable for the washes, as they're not as intense. With the washes, it's a hint of color you're after, so the thinner acrylics are actually an advantage there. One little dab of the Gouache gives a far darker cover than the acrylics, so it's not quite as controllable in terms of diluting it for a wash. 

On the other hand, they're great for drybrushing. (And painting figures, I might add. On a whim, I grabbed a white resin figure (unpainted, unprimed) and brushed the jacket with the black Gouache. One coat, and it covered completely. So I definitely know what I'll be using from here on out for painting my figures and other things like cab interiors, etc. 

I just picked up the Pan Pastels today. They seem to stick very well to even fairly glossy surfaces. It will be interesting to see how they compare to the Bragdon's powders I currently use. 

Later, 

K


----------



## gswartz (Jan 9, 2008)

A word of caution when using acrylics. As East Broad Top stated, once dry, water will not take them off. BUT I have found that Windex (or other ammonia-based cleaners) WILL remove dried acrylics. I found this pretty handy as an eraser if I don't like the outcome when using acrylics. If I do like the outcome, I seal it up with an enamel or lacquer-based clear of an appropriate sheen. I have a few airbrushes used for other modeling interests so I can be pretty specific in placement.


----------



## coh2000 (Dec 6, 2013)

Does anyone know what type of paint finish is on the factory USA boxcars (American Series)?
I want to use a stain or a wash solution that contains alcohol, but I don't know how that will effect the factory paint and the decals.
I want to follow the stain or wash with powder/pigments too.
I'm asking because I read that alcohol may strip acrylic paint.
Does anyone think I should perhaps use an oil based stain? I'm trying to 'fade' the factory color.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

If you're trying to fade the base paint, you might try using artists' oils as a base: 

http://tws-rustbucket.com/thread/90/jeremys-dry-brush-technique 

While it leaves a bit of white paint piled in the cracks, a grimy wash will likewise settle in the same areas, covering the white paint with dark. 

You could also use acrylic washes. I've not a lot of alcohol-based washes or inks on my stuff. Never really saw the advantage of them--the inks never gave me that flat look I was after, and the alcohol evaporated too quickly, leaving me with a dry edge that I had to blend away somehow. I've seen some really cool stuff done with them, mind you, but I could never get the same results from them as I do the acrylics. 

Later, 

K


----------



## coh2000 (Dec 6, 2013)

Thanks to all for your comments. Looking into acrylic washes now.


----------

