Final clear coat on passenger cars

[Larry46]

Hi all

I am painting some IC passenger cars and would like some ideas on what clear coating to use on the finish model.

Thanks
Larry

[jjb62556]

I use Future liquid floor wax.

[nickelplate759]

I use Model Master semi gloss.  Examples, but not IC:

[OldEastRR]

You want a shiny or dull lustre?

[jmlaboda - RIP]

The only dull looking cars should be head-end cars, which largely were skipped when washing was done.  They often went longer without new paint also, only adding to the weathering involved.

Depending on the era you are modeling heavyweight coaches likely would be semi-gloss but a bit heavier in weathering than diners, lounges and sleepers.  Lightweight cars would be glossy to semi-glossy depending on the date of your modeling with head-end cars having more weathering than other cars but not likely to have flat finishes due to the cars' combined ages.

Cars transferred to Maintenance-of-Way service also would have dull finishes and loads of weathering since they wouldn't be washed once transferred and may, in fact, have minimal new paint added, largely to cover the old numbers and adding the new MofW numbers in their place.

[mplsjct]

If you're trying to match the finish of Kato or Walthers, you'll probably have to use a flat finish, I have always thought that gloss finishes, used by some custom painters, are too pronounced, particularly on N scale.

It seems counter intuitive, but the flat finishes look best to my eye.

Your results may vary.

[skytop35]

I like to use a satin finish on my passenger cars.

[thomasjmdavis]

Not sure if the original poster was asking about sheen or something more specific in terms of which brand or type.  I used to advocate Krylon clear flat, but just last week had a disaster with coating over decals on some GTW locos.  Even though it was relatively humid, the finish dried before it ever got to the model, and ended up with what looked like a coat of dust over the top of everything.  On some boxcars I was working on at the same time, this was just fine- a first coat of weathering as it picked up all the high points in the wood sided cars. 

Best advice I can give is to read direction that come with the paint you are using.  Some topcoats do not work well with acrylics, for instance.  I have also noted that some topcoats change the color of the paint underneath, even though the topcoat is "clear"- either tint, anti-UV coating, chemical reaction or a change in hue between gloss and flat.  So recommend that you do some paint samples (broken car/loco shells and old cars that aren't worth the work to rehab) using the colors for your finished models, and topcoat those a couple hours before the finished models so you know for sure what the final product will look like.

As to final sheen, I think it depends on how you want to use the cars and the viewing distance and the amount of handling they are likely to get.  If you are thinking of these as entries in a contest, or intend to do close up photos, a higher gloss may be in order.  But every finger mark will show on this.  If appearance running on a layout is the primary concern, a flat or matte or eggshell finish might be most appropriate- 3' in N scale = 480'- take a look at a real train car from 480' away, and it will not look as shiny as it does close up.  The problem with gloss is that it does not "scale"- a glossy model train car at 3' viewing distance has the same reflection as a real train car at a 3' distance, it is just smaller.

[Cajonpassfan]

Interesting discussion. I agree that gloss doesn't scale right, and yet there's something about "varnish" that needs to have a little sparkle, at least on the top-of-the-line trains.  To my eye, proto cars don't have a uniform finish. Rather than doing the entire car in one finish, how about satin on most of it, with dulling on the roof and lower portions, and hitting it with a little gloss below the beltline where most of the cleaning takes place? Roofs should definitely be much flatter (and weathered), depending on the era, as should be skirts and trucks, IMHO.
Otto K.

[Nato]

                        Weathering from out on the road even with car washing like most passenger consists recieved there could be variations . I use Union Pacific as an example as I rode on and viewed alot of their trains here in Utah as I was growing up. The debate over the shade of yellow that Kato has changed on different runs, or the Gray that is way too light on MT heavyweight UP cars did exist due to sun faiding and weathering effects , especially on trains that ran in the West and used mostly smooth side painted cars. Stainless steel like the California Zephyr and Santa Fe trains was a different story. Consists always looked clean and uniform after washing. That is why I' am not afraid mix Kato UP cars from different production runs, but a whole train of MT heavyweights would look more out of place as the light gray almost silver sun faid on UP roofs were found only on selected cars in trains. I would say in closing that you can use whatever gloss or semi-gloss you want as a final coat, just not a dull flat finish. Nate Goodman (Nato).   

[thomasjmdavis]

Even on the Santa Fe, you saw variations.  A big one had to do with car makers and age- if you look at photos of Santa Fe cars from the 1950s, the older stainless cars appear to be somewhat "whiter" than new stainless steel.  And some roofs on stainless Pullman built cars appear to have a coat of "aluminum" paint, almost white.  Of course, trucks were painted frequently, in bright aluminum, but should be a different color from the stainless sides.

Complicating that on some roads was the occasional use of polished aluminum for car sides (including a few fluted cars) and roofs- which had its own aging and weathering characteristics.  The aluminum scratched more easily than stainless steel, and dust and wind would sandblast it to a dull finish quickly. 

Otto, you make a very good point about gloss as a part of the weathering process.  Certainly it was common- especially for roads that hand washed their cars- or automatic washers that did not have roof brushes, to see a distinct difference between the sides and roof.  I recall seeing some L&N cars that looked like they had a gray stripe above the letterboard, which in reality was just the edge of the gray roof that was cleaned while doing the sides, while the rest of the roof was so grimy it looked black.

[robert3985]

I also agree that "clear coating" doesn't scale down well, unless applied very expertly with an airbrush.

However, gloss primary paints scale down well, particularly Scalecoat I and Scalecoat II.  True Color might also, but I haven't painted any passenger cars with that brand yet.

Having the primary colors be glossy gets rid of the extra, detail-hiding finish coat except for where your decals go....and frankly, I usually end up not putting a gloss coat over them, although I suppose I should.

Whatever weathering you do then goes on like the prototype weathering as a dull coat over gloss.

I agree with Nate ( @Nato ) that unless you're doing MOW cars, a flat finish is NOT the way to go for a prototypical "look" as most prototype paint jobs on both cars and engines almost always have some gloss to be found on them that the dirt hasn't got to yet.  Yes, for some reason a flat finish "looks good"  to many modelers' eyes, but...and this is a big BUT...it ain't prototypical, especially for well maintained passenger equipment or new engines/freight cars.

I totally disagree with any logic based on a "3 foot viewing distance" or "3 foot rule".  If your gloss coat looks too thick, it's because it IS too thick.  Model paints, when properly applied, don't look thick, but it takes a bit of practice to get the right combination of air pressure, flow and paint consistency.  An excellent example of properly applied gloss is the first run of Kato FEF-3's.  Since I'm not painting every day, or every month...I prefer to apply glossy primary paint rather than take a chance with applying a gloss coat over everything.  Flat and semi-gloss finishes, on the other hand, seem to be more forgiving for some reason.

If it's been a while since you've used your airbrush, take Peter's ( @peteski ) sage advice and practice on some plastic spoons until you've got everything adjusted properly. It's what I do.

Otto's ( @Cajonpassfan ) observances about different textures for different zones on prototype passenger cars is spot-on, except I would do the weathering over gloss primary paint rather than adding a gloss coat.

In any case, good luck!...post photos of your finished models please..

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[peteski]

I'm in total agreement with Bob. Thin paint coat is very important in making models look realistic.   This applies to both, modelers who custom-paint models, and even to the model manufacturing companies.  Yes, even some manufacturers are guilty of applying paint in very tick coats which takes away from the realistic appearance of those models.