Maverick Factory Paint Research & Deep Dive Discussions (for nerds only)

Curious about statements that the Mav has “thin paint,” I started reading about automotive paint in general, and found a few things I thought might interest some of you.

Ford had a new paint facility completed in Hermosillo in Aug/Sept. of 2021:

https://www.pfonline.com/news/durr-completes-highly-automated-paint-shop-for-ford

I don’t know if they’re using it for the Mav, the article indicates it’s for the anticipated C2 platform Transit Connect. But that’s about the time they started Mav production.

This (long) research article:

https://www.mdpi.com/2079-6412/6/2/24/htm

…delves into the history and modern (up to 2016) processes in automotive coatings.

It says “…up to 70% of the total energy costs in assembly plants is within the painting operations.” And “…automobile paint shops are still a major energy-consuming area and the most expensive operational aspect of an automobile assembly plant, consuming 30%–50% of the total costs of the manufacturing of automobiles.”

It mentions the weight of the paint: “…with the ability to apply even coatings with thicknesses near 100–140 μm; this thickness implies an average of 9–16 kg of paint used per automobile.” Not sure if that’s before or after drying.

An auto detailer recently posted on here that the average coating thickness on his Mav was 3.15 mils, which (I think ) is 80 micrometers, which would put the Mav coating at 7.2 to 11.2 kg. Maybe towards the higher number, as it’s a little longer than average and the bed probably takes quite a bit of coating.

I’ve barely started into this research article, but I wanted to put some of this out there for comment.

Very interesting piece. The entire process is complex and expensive.

Sounds like my measurements of 4 to 5 mils total coating thickness (100-125 microns) is right where they should be.

Total guess here, but the high energy usage for the painting process could simply be because of heated drying. I would have thought welding machines would also be large power hogs but I suppose a spot weld is a very short burst.

Yeah, the energy use is mainly in environmental controls. Temperature, humidity, pressure, filtration and circulation. I think they also apply a charge to the body for paint attraction.

I noticed the paint robotics equipment they referred to at the Hermosillo plant is made by the German company "Durr" My son works in the paint department at the Tesla plant in Fremont Ca and that's the same robotic equipment Tesla uses . According to my son who works in the paint department Tesla has high standards when it comes to their paint - so the Mavs paint can't be that bad - especially at the $20k starting price point !

Calmate' said:

I noticed the paint robotics equipment they referred to at the Hermosillo plant is made by the German company "Durr" My son works in the paint department at the Tesla plant in Fremont Ca and that's the same robotic equipment Tesla uses . According to my son who works in the paint department Tesla has high standards when it comes to their paint - so the Mavs paint can't be that bad - especially at the $20k starting price point !

Click to expand...

I was hoping to determine if there was a lower quality paint on the Mav, due to its low price. I would imagine they use the same facility for the Bronco Sport, which isn’t a low-end vehicle. They could use the same shop, but just dial down the thickness. Painting is expensive, it probably pays to use the most advanced technology for maximum efficiency.

Just because the paint appears thin is not necessarily a bad thing. Newer high tech paint is better than the stuff on your 1950s Chevy. A lighter, tougher coating benefits the consumer in some ways - and if it brings down the costs to keep the Maverick below 20K I call that a win. On the flip side it could mean Ford is being Cheap and the truck will rust through more quickly. But my point is to NOT jump to that conclusion at first. Will need some more research and more time to see how this plays out.

Thin or not I don't think it's stuck to the metal very well. I had something rub in the bed the other day and paint didn't scratch it just flaked off in one spot. Never saw that in my old 79 Chevy truck or my 94 Ranger.

Mikknj said:

Just because the paint appears thin is not necessarily a bad thing. Newer high tech paint is better than the stuff on your 1950s Chevy. A lighter, tougher coating benefits the consumer in some ways - and if it brings down the costs to keep the Maverick below 20K I call that a win. On the flip side it could mean Ford is being Cheap and the truck will rust through more quickly. But my point is to NOT jump to that conclusion at first. Will need some more research and more time to see how this plays out.

Click to expand...

Yes, I’m curious about two things:
1. Is the new Durr paint line being used for Maverick?
2. What are the processes being used?

Big Kahuna said:

Thin or not I don't think it's stuck to the metal very well. I had something rub in the bed the other day and paint didn't scratch it just flaked off in one spot. Never saw that in my old 79 Chevy truck or my 94 Ranger.

Click to expand...

I’m also curious about the full time to cure for the paint process used for these trucks.

How long had you had the truck when this abrasion occurred?

Paint seems great on my Maverick. Paint peeled off both front fenders inside the edge under hood on my 2015 Colorado.

This press release from Durr <https://www.durr.com/en/media/news/...utomation-paint-shop-for-ford-in-mexico-81681> says:

”The approx. 2.5 meter long interior cargo areas are base-coated with…”

And it mentions commercial vehicles, so it continues to look like the new paint shop is for the Transit Connect, although I don’t know if there’s an older shop being used for the BS and Mav.

New setup is a three wet process, whick eliminates one or more oven visits per vehicle, which saves a lot of time and energy.

The research paper I read said that 40 to 50% of paint is wasted. Powder coating overspray is recoverable and reusable.

Todays paints are very low VOC's (Volatile Organic Compounds). They are water based and not nearly as tough as the old enamel or acrylic based compound paints of our youth. This is why there is such a rise in popularity of nano ceramic coatings to help strengthen today's paint jobs.
There is usually 2-3 coats of base and about the same amount of clear coats on top of that applied at the factory. . Most manufacturers are also applying a couple of anti-corrosive coats to the metal before they apply the color and clear.

Big Kahuna said:

Thin or not I don't think it's stuck to the metal very well. I had something rub in the bed the other day and paint didn't scratch it just flaked off in one spot. Never saw that in my old 79 Chevy truck or my 94 Ranger.

Click to expand...

I have a 2017 Ford Escape White and the paint is pealing around the windshield posts and I am in the process of dealing with Ford on it . They say its off the warranty . Paint should last longer than 4 1/2 years . I am a bit nervous after reading these posts with a XLT on order .