Got my white ink samples I've been waiting for. FINALLY. They went back to Atlanta, and then made another trip back to my post office and this time they decided to deliver them.
I stamped different inks on black paper and some did well and other sucked. I really like this ink I finally settled on for the actual hose testing. It covers pretty well on black, IMO. And it kinda looks right. It's only experimenatation at this point, but if it works out...
I'm surprised nobody has bothered to do any hose stamps for our cars. Working on the lower hose stampings too. Granted, I made them for late 84 and 85-88 (there's at LEAST 2 different styles, but I've seen a few more out there as well. Just depends on when the hose was made.
The test stamps were made on an old lower hose I had I found in the shop. Why ruin a good, new hose, right?
Here's the early version that's offset. Original first, then my repro stamp. I don't have the exact fonts and could only get them close. This is one of those deals where, if anyone notices they're not exact, they're likely judging the car.
And the later version that's aligned better and a different arrow. There's a 3rd type I've seen that has straight alignment with the skinny arrow.
Original 86-88 first, then the repro.
Perfection? Hardly. But I need to check the durability of the inks. These are pigment inks and supposed to be ok to use on rubber and porous and non-porous surfaces, and once dry (not alcohol based so it takes them a good while to dry) I'm going to see if they're waterproof as they say, or if they would likely hold up under the hood with light soap/water cleaning, etc.
I briefly thought about re-tweaking them to get them more correct, but after looking at them...unless they're next to a genuine GM hose, I doubt if general Joe Public would even notice.
I do not know what they used on the original hoses. I imagine some sort of marking ink, but I don't know what it was. Nobody else seems to know for sure.
I stamped different inks on black paper and some did well and other sucked. I really like this ink I finally settled on for the actual hose testing. It covers pretty well on black, IMO. And it kinda looks right. It's only experimenatation at this point, but if it works out...
I'm surprised nobody has bothered to do any hose stamps for our cars. Working on the lower hose stampings too. Granted, I made them for late 84 and 85-88 (there's at LEAST 2 different styles, but I've seen a few more out there as well. Just depends on when the hose was made.
The test stamps were made on an old lower hose I had I found in the shop. Why ruin a good, new hose, right?
Here's the early version that's offset. Original first, then my repro stamp. I don't have the exact fonts and could only get them close. This is one of those deals where, if anyone notices they're not exact, they're likely judging the car.
And the later version that's aligned better and a different arrow. There's a 3rd type I've seen that has straight alignment with the skinny arrow.
Original 86-88 first, then the repro.
Perfection? Hardly. But I need to check the durability of the inks. These are pigment inks and supposed to be ok to use on rubber and porous and non-porous surfaces, and once dry (not alcohol based so it takes them a good while to dry) I'm going to see if they're waterproof as they say, or if they would likely hold up under the hood with light soap/water cleaning, etc.
I briefly thought about re-tweaking them to get them more correct, but after looking at them...unless they're next to a genuine GM hose, I doubt if general Joe Public would even notice.
I do not know what they used on the original hoses. I imagine some sort of marking ink, but I don't know what it was. Nobody else seems to know for sure.