Topic: CB 750 K0 chassis paint/powder coating

[major domo]

Just like to know if all the chassis parts (center & side stand, footpeg brackets, engine mount plates) are in gloss black like the frame, or are some a semi-gloss black?

Also, how much a detriment to the value of a 1970 CB 750 KO would it be to powder coat frame and said parts, as opposed to a urethane coating, being that powder coating is much more durable?

Thanks in advance!

[lrutt]

It will look over-restored IMO. The original black was more semi-gloss. PC tends to look heavy. All parts were the same type of black, but some looked shinier due to surface prep, ie the fork triples.

IMO, to keep to the original look, and for total ease of touch up. Just stick with enamel. Actually good rattle can enamel. Has the right gloss, Rustoleum is very tough, never ever ever had a problem with it on dozens of bikes. And you can't beat the price.

[ekpent]

These powdercoat/paint debates can be interesting but in this case I am in Irutt's camp for a stock K0 resto. Cafe racer or custom the powder would look great.

[calj737]

A professionally applied satin black looks damn near original actually. And it's incredibly chip resistant and durable (despite rumors to the contrary).

[greenjeans]

If done well, you can't tell the difference between powder or paint.  Powder that looks heavy, is, heavy.
As long as either method looks the part, it will be fine.  It's usually the other details that really determine the value - chrome, bolts, gauges, paint etc.

I've always thought that the frame was somewhere between a gloss and a satin.  It definitely has a gloss to it, but if you put it against a high gloss it looks satin.  If you put it up against a true satin, it looks gloss.  Who knew there were so many shades of black.

I do agree about the Rustoleum.   It looks very close original.

[major domo]

Thanks for all the imput!

[chewbacca5000]

I am all about the powder is a superior coating IMO.  80% gloss will duplicate factory to a T.