My god people, it's "repro" not "repo"!

I don't understand why anybody would re-clear a CPR playfield. You can "perfect it" yourself following the instructions on CPR's site. The equipment and supplies more than pay for themselves. And why would you add more clear for a game that will be HUO? Wax it once a year, done.

The last 2 playfields I got from CPR were great. I know that it took them some time to get to this level of quality, but I'm thrilled with Whirlwind and Medusa.

IMG_6301_(resized).JPG

IMG_6302_(resized).JPG

IMG_6304_(resized).JPG

IMG_6388_(resized).JPG

Medusa, straight out of the box - I have not buffed it out yet.

image_(resized).jpeg
image_(resized).jpeg
image_(resized).jpeg
image_(resized).jpeg
image_(resized).jpeg

I don't believe you. There's no such thing as a playfield that doesn't dimple. I had Chad Keller clearcoat a CSI for me, and after a few hundred plays it was dimpled as much as any of my games. This is physics: steel ball vs. flexible coating on wood. It's been discussed multiple times on Pinside.

If you're really worried about dimpling, spend $100-150 on a playfield protector (IMO). Much more effective against dimples than more clearcoat.

Why not buy them uncleared? Serious question. I thought CPR had that option at one point.

I'm neither a hater or a fan, Ron. I'm just saying that CPR's clearcoat is more than adequate for me. I don't need my playfield to look like a sheet of glass; that doesn't make me a bad person.

Saying that I don't understand the value proposition is not "bad mouthing". It's not even really criticism; I honestly don't understand.

If someone can post pics of a playfield with 1000 or more real plays on it and no dimples, I'll reconsider my opinion on steel balls and clearcoat.

I suspect there are more RK playfields hanging on walls than installed in games. I respect that too - some of these playfields really are works of art (especially early Bally). If I had a perfect piece of art, the last thing I'd do is put it in a game.

I don't want to sound negative. I have PDI glass on most of my games, and plenty of people would say that's a waste of money (I disagree). So, I definitely respect that RK can make a playfield look fantastic. The pictures alone show this. But I'm still skeptical (if that's allowed) that there's a difference in long-term wear. My perceptions about playfield dimpling come from Vid's excellent thread. His post here sums it up much better than I can:

https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/playfield-dimple-reality-check/page/2#post-1630082

If there's a way to use auto CC that doesn't dimple with regular use, I think that's something we'd all like to know about. My gut feeling is that if you played 1,000 games on both a CPR and RK-enhanced playfield, they'd look pretty much alike.

Has anyone put 500 or 1000 plays on a high-end restored playfield? I'd love to see pics. What is it that prevents dimpling? Better quality CC, longer cure times for individual coats, or more coats? Or all of the above?

But do these playfields get played on?

I'm actually thinking of taking the shine down on my Medusa playfield, to make it look a little more original.