Colour Choice - Paint Thickness

[Barnfather]

I've seen a lot of talk about thin paint on the Outlander and it seems to be a problem on most mainstream Japanese cars.

I'm considering colour options before ordering and I thought I'd ask on here a couple of questions...

Assuming that the FY16 cars have no better paint finishes than the outgoing version, are there any paint options which appear more resilient to stone chipping/scratches than others?

I am tempted to avoid white as my last two cars have been white and fancy a change. I generally love metallic red colour so thats an option but I'm also drawn (on paper at least) to the Ruby Black Pearlescent. Are there different processes the car goes through depending on the finish being solid/metallic/pearl that could influence overall quality?

I note that Mitsubishi call Ruby Black a 'Premium Pearlescent' as opposed to the other Pearlescent colours. What do they mean by 'Premium' in this context?

Finally, are touch-up's more of a pain with Pearl colours? I have a Pearlescent White finish on my current car, but its a Lexus and I can't see a single chip to have it be a worry...

Thanks

 

[Neverfuel]

Good questions,

We will have to wait and see about the difference between the old and the new model. I know that Mitsubishi have made some changes to overall quality.

Pearlescent / metallic paint is always more difficult to patch due to the lacquer coat and curing process - but nothing to worry about in a Mitsubishi repair centre. I have pearlescent white and have done almost 5000 miles - I have 1 stone chip on the bonnet but it has not gone down to the metal (and you can only see it when getting anal and giving it a proper polish!). I would not worry too much about the paint quality if i were you.

 

[greendwarf]

Pearlescent / metallic paint is always more difficult to patch due to the lacquer coat and curing process - but nothing to worry about in a Mitsubishi repair centre.

Hah bloody Hah :twisted: . - Just got mine back from the dealer after repair, no probs with repair or respray where damaged but overspray over rest of car including the INSIDE :twisted: :twisted:

Back to topic - I was also told that matching paint on metallic etc. is more difficult (i.e. expensive) than solid colour.

 

[westdevon]

You can't touch in metallic or pearlescant paint with a brush/pen and get a decent finish. There are metal flakes in the paint that only lay correctly if you spray.

I'm not sure about the idea of "thin" paint. My Frost white Outlander is 7 months old and unmarked. Not long I know, but I do live in the sticks with very bad narrow roads not much better than farm tracks.

 

[Barnfather]

I suppose when you read forum's you see the complaints and assume that is the norm...

Years ago I bought a new Honda Civic, and the Honda forums said the same thing about stone chips and thin paint. I took it back to the dealer as I had a stone chip driving it the first 3 miles and I was panicking. Kept the car for 3yrs and can't remember noticing any massive stone chip problems again!

It will be interesting to see what the owners of the face-lift version report for colours like the metallic red or ruby black, but I may have to make my decision before enough time has elapsed for problems to show up...

 

[westdevon]

6 years ago I bought a black Santa fe. It looked great in the showroom, but never looked like that again unless I spent a few hours polishing it. 3 years ago I traded it for another Santa. I couldn't get the silver I wanted so opted for grey without seeing it.

When it arrived it was such a dark grey it might as well have been black. DOH!

I'd go for red if I were you