More accurate Sterling/E-11 paint finish

[gazmosis[501st]]

With so many blaster builds going on and planned, I thought it was about time I shared this little gem.  One thing that strikes fear in a lot of blaster builds is the final paint scheme. We all know that a build holds little credit if it doesn't look good in the end. We also know that the original British Sterling was not smooth and shiny in its original form.Whatever the real reason for the finish (better grip, glare reduction, cooling properties) the finish on many guns was a wrinkled finish seen best in this pic. This is a demilled that was welded back together. You can clearly see the finish above the trigger under the ejection port.Up til now, people have opted for the hammered paints to achieve a "not so smooth" finish. To me, the hammered finishes always looked a little globby, but that's all we had.......until now. I stumbled across this on a military website where a guy wanted to replicate a WWII zippo lighter. Only one thing lept into my mind; Blaster finish!!!!  

I bought this at Advanced Auto parts for $10. It needs to be applied exactly as the directions tell. 3 "wet" coats, 5 minutes apart, each coat sprayed in the opposite direction of the previous coat. This takes several hours for the full curing and wrinkling process to happen so don;t think you will stand there and watch the magic. But after all is said and done, the finish comes damn close to the original wrinkle finish.I know, I know. It's really shiny. You can top coat it with a matt clear or in my case, I will paint over this with a different color all together seeing as the original Sterlings were not jet black but dark, gunmetal gray.  A little thought needs to be figured in here. There were parts that definitely did NOT receive this finish. But that's what reference pics are for. 

[The5thHorseman[501st]]

Damn it Steve!! You are amazing! That's exactly what i wish i would have used on my blaster 

[Cantina Security[501st]]

Nice, post duly noted.

[DarthChridan[TK]]

This looks really damn close ....really interesting. Thanks for sharing, Steve.

[usaeatt2]

May not be 100% accurate, but I plan to use one of the following products on my blaster:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Both of these also offer the advantage of matte or satin finish from the can.

I can't see striving for fine details, then covering it with thick layers of paint.

I've seen some blasters that look like they were dipped in mud before painting.

 

For wrinkle finishes, a heat lamp will speed the wrinkling process, but BE CAREFUL!

Test panels are probably a good idea...

 

[gazmosis[501st]]

Those are nice, too!!

[I'm Batman[501st]]

 

 

Both of these also offer the advantage of matte or satin finish from the can.

I can't see striving for fine details, then covering it with thick layers of paint.

I've seen some blasters that look like they were dipped in mud before painting.

 

 

Good point, I wonder how much detail you'd lose, with a couple of coats of primer, 3 coats of the VHT Wrinkle, and 2 or 3 coats of final colour. How thick are those 3 coast Steve?

[gazmosis[501st]]

I thought about that , too. I will run a test and post the results with pics. I will etch some PVC with a dremmel, do the wrinkle finish and see how well it can be read.

[gazmosis[501st]]

test results are in. You be the judge.

Plain PVC with details

1 coat of self etching primerstill wet

3 coats of the wrinkle paint. I am going to run a test tomorrow to see if the wrinkle finish can still be achieved with two rather than three coats.

[usaeatt2]

I'm interested to know if the paint will still wrinkle with only two coats and to see how it looks with a coating of matte clear over the top.  I got my Sterling parts set from Apex tonight, so I have something to examine up close...there's no denying that wrinkle pattern is a dead on match!

[gazmosis[501st]]

2 coats

[usaeatt2]

Maybe it's just the glare/lighting, but 2 coat wrinkle doesn't look as good/accurate as 3 coat wrinkle...

[gazmosis[501st]]

You are right. The wrinkling just is not as prominent with two coats as it is with three

[usaeatt2]

I'm guessing wrinkle paint is formulated to quickly develop a surface "skin", then as trapped solvent slowly evaporates, the skin shrinks, causing wrinkles.  There's probably not enough solvent trapped under 2 coatings, so the shrinkage is less.  I guess VHT knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote the instructions, but you just proved it!  Product testing for real people - Thanks, Steve!

[I'm Batman[501st]]

test results are in. You be the judge.

Plain PVC with details

1 coat of self etching primerstill wet

3 coats of the wrinkle paint. I am going to run a test tomorrow to see if the wrinkle finish can still be achieved with two rather than three coats.

Looks good. And I doubt 1 or 2 coats of thin Dark Gunmetal regular paint would make that any worse.

[Dark PWF[Staff]]

Beauty of a find, Steve!

 

As luck would have it, the first thing on the right outside the main gate here is an Advance Auto - and they've got it in stock. Just in time for planning to paint the E-11!

 

I'm going to be all over it.

 

Did you do any testing with the Gunmetal over it yet?

Edited March 7, 2014 by Dark CMF

[gazmosis[501st]]

No I haven't, Tim. I didn;t feel a need to seeing as the gunmetal is merely going to change the surface color slightly and will be so thin because it will be diluted and coming through my airbrush that it won't really change anything or add any thickness to the final surface.

[The5thHorseman[501st]]

As luck would have it, the first thing on the right outside the main gate here is an Advance Auto - and they've got it in stock. Just in time for planning to paint the E-11!

 

Lucky devil ! I can't wait to see it painted

[Dark PWF[Staff]]

No I haven't, Tim. I didn;t feel a need to seeing as the gunmetal is merely going to change the surface color slightly and will be so thin because it will be diluted and coming through my airbrush that it won't really change anything or add any thickness to the final surface.

Makes sense, Steve.  I just have no airbrush experience.  LoL.  I'm thinking I may have some soon though.

 

Getting there, Germain...  Getting there slowly but surely!!  Thanks    I can't wait either - but I'm going to!

Edited March 7, 2014 by Dark CMF

[TK bondservnt[501st]]

the blasters in star wars were british issue sterlings painted with surcote.  then painted flat black.

on a real surcote paintjob the magazine well does not have a crinkle finish.

 

the photo you are using is a police issue sterling which has the more modern crinkle type finish!

only the crinkle coat finishes were used in the american promo shots using a resin scope.

 

look at the flat black paint as seen in the film!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sad to say crinkle paint is not on my 1960's sterling... but it's not smooth either?

 

then we have the promo photos in contrast.  which used prop guns that did not fire and were more modern

police issue crinkle jobs.

 

none of the props were left with the original sterling paint period!

lee malone owns a bapty screen used blaster and the magwell is not crinkle painted.

only the body of the gun is wavy and bumpy.

 

lee malone's screen used bapty!

 

note the bumpy but not crinkle coat?

aluminum billet at rear

aluminum grip riveted in

aluminum strip trigger guard with no trigger

solid cocking channel with rod for charging handle

wooden dowel inner front barrel

missing T Track hole on side shows location of retaining wood block in front of aluminum pipe bolt

(don't go making your blasters with missing T Track holes on them!  this is the only one made that way!)

 

dont use just any sterling photos for paint referances!

use actual screen shots or screen used blasters for referance...

Edited March 7, 2014 by TK Bondservnt 2392

[TK bondservnt[501st]]

 

the small lines on this look a lot like my sterling finish.  just hit it with sandpaper to make it more uneven.  knock off the shine...

the magazine well/ clip and T Tracks and sightrail are all smooth flat black.

[DarthChridan[TK]]

Well Vern...I think it's more about the optics of the surface of the blaster to replicate the browning of the sterling.....not the color per se.

[TK bondservnt[501st]]

the way I see it... every aspect matters? color, texture,

 

compare the FX helmet to the RS helmet.  then apply those concepts to e-11's

 

i'm a bit confused about your terms such as browning?

 

I know for a fact that e-11 blasters are flat black, not gunmetal grey. and I know for a fact that

they are not shiny or smooth.

 

I've done years of research to come to these concepts.

 

the lee malone bapty is like finding the holy grail of blasters.

I've spoken to lee on the phone several times, and he supplied the photo in this thread.so the entire goal is to understand that the e-11

from every complete aspect.

 

so let's hear more dan... i'm looking to hear more!

[gazmosis[501st]]

I think what is the feeling here is that although the parts need to be present and accurate, the final finish/color of the blaster can be left to certain "creative interpretations". I agree. Your blaster should not be fluorescent red. But some folks, as myself, want my blaster to be mistaken for a real weapon up close. If that means I am going for a slight color variance, so be it. The blasters are not as closely scrutinized here as the armor is.

 

From a DO point of view, I am looking for all the physical parts ("D" ring, t-tracks, parts that look like Sterling parts) I don't want it to get that level where each aspect is being nit picked to death. Look at the Sci-Fires. The Pistol grip is not gloss black, you can't see through and under the scope rail, the folding stock is solid underneath, the barrel end is not a hole........OMG!!!!!! There are some that hold the passion for absolute accuracy close to their hearts and good for them. But our group needs to know we can be accurate and still have some fun and be creative with certain things.

[Locitus[Admin]]

There is plenty of information about the paint finish here: http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=29520&s=ffb9a8e365a250f97339fad40c92de1e