# Paint Thickness Gauge



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

Sorry to start another thread guys.....

Could do with a PTG soon, and had been thinking about a Paint Detective. However, I'm sure they used to be about £150, but they've not gone up to about £198....

So just checked eBay, and found these two,....

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Digital-Coati...t_ET?hash=item35a30a4902&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/COATING-AND-P...aint?hash=item23028ee75a&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

I would like opinions please.... cheers


----------



## MidlandsCarCare (Feb 18, 2006)

http://www.paintdetective.com/detailingworld_offer.html


----------



## pdv40 (Sep 11, 2008)

Lol I was just about to post that link, a bit cheaper than £198 :thumb:


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

sweet.... didn't see that link on their site.... guess it'd "hidden", and was only posted here 

Cheers

Best see what funds I can get


----------



## Planet Man (Apr 12, 2008)

RussZS said:


> http://www.paintdetective.com/detailingworld_offer.html


Cheers Russ you are a star:thumb: Next thing on my shopping list


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

what's the difference betweed the PD8 and PD7?


----------



## Car Key (Mar 20, 2007)

There are cheaper options:
TMT-900 TMT-902

Jesse, a pro on here, uses and recommends them:



Clever Nickname said:


>


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

seen them, and i thought neither were highly rates..... plus none of them are the one shown in the pic... what's the point of posting the picture?


----------



## Car Key (Mar 20, 2007)

-Mat- said:


> seen them, and i thought neither were highly rates..... plus none of them are the one shown in the pic... what's the point of posting the picture?


Who said they weren't rated? The PTG in my eBay link and the PTG in my photo are one of the same  The eBay pics don't give you a good view of the readout, which is another reason for posting the pic.


----------



## Car Key (Mar 20, 2007)

-Mat- said:


> what's the difference betweed the PD8 and PD7?


Maybe someone in the know can explain the relevance of the differences marked in blue.

*Schichtdickenmessgerat TMT-902	£89.99 + £9.90*
Measuring range:	0 - 1000 µm (0 - 40 mils)
Accuracy	± 3% + 4 Digits
Resolution:	1 µm (0,1 mil)
Power supply:	Batterie 9V
Dimension:	42 x 148 x 105 mm
Weight:	260g
Temperatur Kompensation	5°C - 50° ATC
Conformity:	CE EN 50081-1 und EN 50082-1
Manual:	deutsch & english
Warranty	2 years
F-probe	Non destructive measurement of non-magnetic layers (lacquer, dye films, powder coatings, aluminum, chrome, copper, enamel, paper, rubber, ...) on magnetic metals such as steel, Iron, alloys...

NF-probe	Non destructive measurement of non-magnetic layers (lacquer, dye films, powder coatings, aluminum, chrome, copper, enamel, paper, rubber, ...) on magnetic (see above) and non-magnetic metals (zinc, sheet metal, tin, brass, high-grade steel non-magnetic steel etc.....) or eloxal on aluminum.

*Schichtdickenmessgerat TMT-900	£74.99 + £9.90*
Measuring range:	0 - 1000 µm (0 - 40 mils)
Accuracy	± 3% + 4 Digits
Resolution:	1 µm (0,1 mil)
Power supply:	Battery 9V
Dimension:	42 x 148 x 105 mm
Weight:	260g
Temperatur Kompensation	
Conformity:	CE EN 50081-1 and EN 50082-1
Manual:	english, french,dutch,german
Warranty	2 years
F-probe	Non destructive measurement of non-magnetic layers (lacquer, dye films, powder coatings, aluminum, chrome, copper, enamel, paper, rubber, ...) on magnetic metals such as steel, Iron, alloys...

*PD7/CM8801FN	£179*
Measuring Range	0-1999µm (0-2mm) or 0-80mil
Accuracy	±2µm + 3% or ±0.1mil + 3% of readings
Resolution	2µm (0.1mil)
Power Supply	1 x 1.5V AAA Battery
Minimum Measurement Area	F type-?7mm, N type-?5mm
Minimum Sample Thickness	0.5mm
Operating Conditions Temp: 0 - 40ºC Humidity: 20%~80%RH,Non Magnetic Field
Operating Conditions	Storage Temp: -10ºC - 60ºC Operation Temp 0ºC - 60ºC
Weight	70g (including batteries)
Dimensions	110 x 45 x 23mm
Conformity	?
Units of Measurement (Microns & Mils)	Metric Measurement:-
Micrometre (µm) - also known as Micron
1 µm = 1/1000mm
Imperial Measurement:-
Mil - also known as Thou
1 Mil = 1/1000 Inch
Conversion:-
1 Mil / Thou = 25.4 Microns / Micrometre (µm)
Additional Functionality	Gauge auto adjusts between Ferrous (Steel) and Non-
Ferrous (Aluminium etc) Modes, Metric (Microns µm) or
Imperial (Mils) measurement settings, Auto Power On
and Off, Easy Reset to Factory Settings, Stores last 10
measurements in a Memory.

*PD8 £165*
Measuring Range	0-1250µm (0-1.25mm) or 0-50mil
Accuracy	±1-3% (±2.5µm or 0.1mil - whichever the greater)
Resolution	0.1µm (0-99.9 µm) and 1µm (over 100 µm)
Power Supply	4 x 1.5V AAA Batteries
Minimum Measurement Area	6mm
Minimum Sample Thickness	0.3mm
Operating Conditions Temp: 0 - 50ºC and Humidity: < 80%
Operating Conditions	
Weight	81g (not including batteries)
Dimensions	126 x 65 x 27mm
Conformity	ISO-2178, ISO-2360, DIN, ASTM & BS
Units of Measurement (Microns & Mils)	Metric Measurement:-
Micrometre (µm) - also known as Micron
1 µm = 1/1000mm
Imperial Measurement:-
Mil - also known as Thou
1 Mil = 1/1000 Inch
Conversion:-
1 Mil / Thou = 25.4 Microns / Micrometre (µm)
Additional Functionality


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

Car Key said:


> Who said they weren't rated? The PTG in my eBay link and the PTG in my photo are one of the same  The eBay pics don't give you a good view of the readout, which is another reason for posting the pic.


ah, didn't realise... guess your hand is "hiding" the handle LOL


----------



## Car Key (Mar 20, 2007)

-Mat- said:


> ah, didn't realise... guess your hand is "hiding" the handle LOL


 That's Jesse's hand, not mine :thumb: But yes, it looks a lot bigger/different photographed with a wide angled lens.


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

Anyone else used or got opinions on the one Car Key has posted? I do remember seeing them used in a couple of threads......

Is it worth spending £160+ on a PD PTG when the one he posted appears to do the same


----------



## mattsbmw (Jul 20, 2008)

I too am interested in the response to this as £80 is much easier to justify then over double that


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

exactly

In the mean time, does anyone near Chesterfield have one I could borrow? Would probably need one for a week on sunday

TIA,

Mat


----------



## gttjames (Jul 23, 2009)

Those £80 ones are tempting... only just geting into this is it worth the money everyone?

whats the difference between tmt 900 and tmt 902?


----------



## Car Key (Mar 20, 2007)

gttjames said:


> whats the difference between tmt 900 and tmt 902?


 The main difference appears to be that the 902 measures on ferrous and non-ferrous metals, where as the 900 is ferrous only.


----------



## gttjames (Jul 23, 2009)

Car Key said:


> The main difference appears to be that the 902 measures on ferrous and non-ferrous metals, where as the 900 is ferrous only.


Oh dear, newb! that means nothing to me im afraid?:newbie:


----------



## SamurI (Dec 29, 2006)

gttjames said:


> Oh dear, newb! that means nothing to me im afraid?:newbie:


From the advert:

"F-probe
Non destructive measurement of non-magnetic layers (lacquer, dye films, powder coatings, aluminum, chrome, copper, enamel, paper, rubber, ...) on magnetic metals such as steel, Iron, alloys...

NF-probe
Non destructive measurement of non-magnetic layers (lacquer, dye films, powder coatings, aluminum, chrome, copper, enamel, paper, rubber, ...) on magnetic (see above) and non-magnetic metals (zinc, sheet metal, tin, brass, high-grade steel non-magnetic steel etc.....) or eloxal on aluminum."

Basically if your measuring a car with both steel body panels and say an alloy bonnet/boot then you'll need the one with both types of head.

For the extra few quid worth having both just in case.

Very interested in the 902 posted above....:thumb:


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Ferrous - steel
Non Ferrous - aluminium

Audi (and others) make panels from aluminium, so a dual substrate gauge is handy if you'll be working on those types of cars, whereas most are still steel, so a Ferrous only one would limit you to those.


----------



## gttjames (Jul 23, 2009)

argh i see, thanks guys!


----------



## alexf (May 23, 2009)

is £80 basically the cheapest you can get a PTG for?


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

PJS said:


> Ferrous - steel
> Non Ferrous - aluminium
> 
> Audi (and others) make panels from aluminium, so a dual substrate gauge is handy if you'll be working on those types of cars, whereas most are still steel, so a Ferrous only one would limit you to those.


so those "cheaper" ones kinda do "one or the other" and I guess the PD one will do both?


----------



## Planet Man (Apr 12, 2008)

I think for detailers/bodyshops etc, the Gun shape type will be is fine at that price as you can pull it out of your kit bag when required. If you were at an auction or maybe a car dealer who needed to check multiple cars the PD7 & PD8 are more convenient as they are a lot smaller.

I do like the PD products though as you see a lot of DW members use them.

Been playing on my mind for ages - which one shall I go for


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

alexf said:


> is £80 basically the cheapest you can get a PTG for?


Yes - at least one that's worth a toss.
Anything lesser will have the accuracy of ± half a brick!



-Mat- said:


> so those "cheaper" ones kinda do "one or the other" and I guess the PD one will do both?


Strictly speaking, no.
If the gauge is suffixed with FnF, Fe/nFe, or some other permutation, then it's designed to work with both substrates.


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

PJS said:


> Strictly speaking, no.
> If the gauge is suffixed with FnF, Fe/nFe, or some other permutation, then it's designed to work with both substrates.


Kinda what I thought.... Doesn't the PD test on all/most surfaces? As said, it seems to be a common choice, and there must be a reason for that


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Yes, the PD ones are auto dual substrate recognising.


----------



## richard_h (Jul 26, 2009)

So are we saying that that 902 will do the job but the PD7 if you have the cash is worth the extra ?

Rich


----------



## Trig (Jun 9, 2008)

possibly a spanner for the works:

Plastic? Do any of those work on plastic wings/bumpers?


----------



## adam87 (Dec 11, 2008)

Trig said:


> possibly a spanner for the works:
> 
> Plastic? Do any of those work on plastic wings/bumpers?


The gauge that measures plastic is close to £2k...


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

wasn't there a "trick" to measuring plastics? hold a sheet/piece of metal behind the plastic or something?


----------



## richard_h (Jul 26, 2009)

Even doing that you would need a bit that has no paint so you could take the plastic reading away from it all 

Rich


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

that's what I thought


----------



## richard_h (Jul 26, 2009)

With the PD ones is the PD7 better then the PD8 ?

Rich


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

7 imo


----------



## alxg (May 3, 2009)

Why so?


----------



## extreme-detail (Nov 7, 2005)

ebay number 170386451069


----------



## jus (Aug 8, 2009)

good thread, but which gauge is the most popular amongst detailers?


----------



## Brian. (Sep 21, 2009)

The only differences between those machines are the accuracy and the how deep they can measure paint? 40mm/0 - 1000 µmm is surely more than plenty for any detailer on here unless they plan on measuring the paint thicknesses on some form of submarine at 80mm thick! 

As far as i can see they all have a fairly similar tolerance. And not even the best machine will have a zero tolerance! They will all be in-accurate and surely the differences with inaccuracy between PTG's themselves will be somewhere in the region of ±2µm. Which is naff all considering the average paint thickness might be 120µm unless you're really biting at the bones of the paint and the read-outs are telling you that the paint is 85µm and take into account the ±2µm between the German one and other PTG's then you'd be using minimal product/finishing pads anyway regardless in that range!

Another approach would be if it was possible to measure the paint thickness on the exact same panel at precisely the same point to try and gauge the accuracies of each device. This would be a tricky process/test!


----------



## dooka (Aug 1, 2006)

but you need to know how many layers of paint are on the car. I was looking at one of these, but after speaking to many bodyshops (ex painter myself) I decided against it. They are worth while if you are buying a car, so you can see if it has been repainted or got any filler, but for polishing, I don't really see how they help, ok so you can see how much paint is on the car, but how much primer, base coat and clear coat, it wont tell you, you paint may be thick, but it could be a few layers of basecoat, but one layer of clearcoat.

Just my 2pence worth..


----------



## DreamScape (Dec 16, 2006)

qstix said:


> but you need to know how many layers of paint are on the car. I was looking at one of these, but after speaking to many bodyshops (ex painter myself) I decided against it. They are worth while if you are buying a car, so you can see if it has been repainted or got any filler, but for polishing, I don't really see how they help, ok so you can see how much paint is on the car, but how much primer, base coat and clear coat, it wont tell you, you paint may be thick, but it could be a few layers of basecoat, but one layer of clearcoat.
> 
> Just my 2pence worth..


A good point this qstix, I was thinking the same.
Say if the reading was 130, how do you know how think the clear coat is?
Could be 5 or 10 or less or more? SO how do we know how much clear coat is left till a strike through?
I'm looking into getting one of these so had a search and was thinking the same as qstix.
Surely its better to know how thick the clearcoat is, or the base coat on single paint, not the overall thickness of all layers together???

Could someone please enlighten me :thumb:


----------



## KennyC (Aug 11, 2008)

DreamScape said:


> A good point this qstix, I was thinking the same.
> Say if the reading was 130, how do you know how think the clear coat is?
> Could be 5 or 10 or less or more? SO how do we know how much clear coat is left till a strike through?
> I'm looking into getting one of these so had a search and was thinking the same as qstix.
> ...


Only the really expensive ultrasound ptg's will tell you how thick the clear coat is, a basic rule is that 50% of a cars paint is clear coat. A normal ptg simply gives you an idea of paint removal with your chosen technique and also identifys areas of really low/ high levels and you will have to go for a less aggressive technique on these. I can honestly say that mine has saved my bacon a few times on cars which have really low readings on the lower parts of the doors.


----------



## SamurI (Dec 29, 2006)

DreamScape said:


> A good point this qstix, I was thinking the same.
> Say if the reading was 130, how do you know how think the clear coat is?
> Could be 5 or 10 or less or more? SO how do we know how much clear coat is left till a strike through?
> I'm looking into getting one of these so had a search and was thinking the same as qstix.
> ...


In a straight answer....you don't know for sure how much base or clear-coat you have using PTG's at these price points. As you've said it just gives a measurement and you have to make assumptions on the thickness of each layer based on experience and knowledge.

Also these only measure over metals and not and plastics or composites.

Stepping up the ladder and using one such as the PosiTector 200, like the one Polished Bliss use, can measure over more materials and show up to 3 'layers', however this again should be used as a guide and not gospel. the cost of these bad boys though is up to £2K.

If you want to know exactly the number of layers and the exact thickness then start looking upwards of £20K+ for the sort of machines Aston Martin use (there was a thread where this was mentioned).

Dave KG has mentioned in his write-ups and guides about the make-up of paint and 'rule of thumb' in the measurements.

Sorry theres no ********** answer but i hope I've helped to enlighten a bit.


----------



## DreamScape (Dec 16, 2006)

Just found this thread which has answered a lot for me, Thanks :thumb:
http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=104869&highlight=paint+depth+gauge


----------



## DreamScape (Dec 16, 2006)

Thanks KennyC and SamurI :thumb:


----------

