Originally Posted by the_dog
And I hardly believe the differences in paint thickness is visible to the human eye. And how would paint "feel" thicker?
I agree that one can "feel" that the paint on cars is thinner, albeit not necessarily in the tactile sense of "feel". Maybe it's from already knowing that cheapskate robo-painters are applying the paint, or maybe there is some "reveal" on the part of a thinner, cheaper paint-job that I can't put into words, but since the mid-90's paint just looks and "feels" thinner. Or maybe it's just the aesthetic nature of the water-based paints to look a certain way some of us unconsciously call thinner. I only chime in because I agree that the Impreza's paint feels thinner (admitting it could be other attributes of the paint process giving that impression), and I agree with you that it is an industry-wide problem. Still: high-end luxury cars don't give off this aesthetic, so maybe there is a factory solution to cheap paint jobs. Or else I'm dazzled by the BMW logos (lol). I want to get that full Xpel treatment. It's the clear-coat the factory should have put on. I just wandered my neighborhood this morning, and observed that the 2010-2011 Outbacks and Forresters all over my 'hood have significant (ie. notable) traces of road rash on the front clip, compared to other brands (but they have it too), so maybe Subaru's robots are extra stingy (or extra efficient, depending on point of view)