Re: [CR] What do you ride? My BUD.

(Example: Events:Eroica)

From: <"brianbaylis@juno.com">
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 05:35:24 GMT
To: josephbstarck@yahoo.com
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR] What do you ride? My BUD.


Joe,

Imron is Imron. With proper application it is super durable as bicycle paints go. Wet paint can be applied electrostatically; powder coating HAS to be applied electrostatically. The powder is then melted to the metal. In the case of using wet paint electrostatically the process allows the paint to be "attracted" to the frame so that it doesn't take as many passes to completely cover the frame. It saves TIME and EFFORT, but does not add to the durability of Imron.

Brian Baylis
La Mesa, CA


---------- Original Message ----------
From: Joe Starck
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR] What do you ride? My BUD.
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:33:41 -0800



--- On Wed, 2/2/11, cwstudio@aol.com wrote:


> Today's BUD is a 1982 Trek 613, 60cm. A very nice lugged
> steel frame and fork, Reynolds 531, original and straight,
> with nice pewter metallic paint. The paint, being Imron,
> looks as good as new, except for the typical marks and small
> dings from use.

Was there anything about Trek's painting process in 1982 that made for your durable paint? That is to say, is the credit due to the "Imron" or to the company's "electrostatic" system of 1982? Regarding the term "electrostatic," is that similar to but not quite powdercoating? or is that the same process as "powdercoating?"

What was Trek's paint system in 1982?

Joe Starck Madison, Wisconsin USA

_______________________________________________

____________________________________________________________ Dermatologists Hate Her Local Mom Reveals $5 Trick to Erase Wrinkles. Shocking Results Exposed http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4d4b904facb3aecf00st05vuc