The "blend within panel" procedure is used extensively when a small dent is repaired in a panel. Blending is a process applied to a non-repaired, undamaged panel to avoid any color variations between a refinished panel and the existing paint on adjacent panels.
The common blending procedure showing up on insurance estimates is on bumpers and doors. Insurers pay half the refinish time and then allow full clear, effectively reducing the refinishing time by about an hour per repair.
The repaired area still needs to be brought up to refinish standards from a 320-grit finished repaired area. So not only has a portion of the refinish time been lost, but there are additional processes needed to bring the panel to a new, undamaged panel surface. Most estimating P pages provide refinish schedules for new undamaged panels, not those needing preparation.
As an example, let us use a one-hour dent in the center of a door. Since it is a small dent, the insurance estimate directs you to "blend within panel." Once the dent has been straightened using the appropriate process, body filler has been spread and the repaired area has been sanded to 150-grit, the next step is to prime the panel and feather edge with 320-grit sandpaper. To begin the refinish process, this area is then primed and blocked, prior to final sanding with 1000-grit sandpaper.
It's apparent that the "blend within panel" process attacks paint labor and material profits. So you need to ask: How much extra sandpaper and other materials are being used to get a repaired panel to a proper refinish surface versus a blend panel? The industry standard for repair process takes the repaired area up to 320 grit. To "blend" a repaired panel you now must work the repaired area up to 1000-grit to present a proper refinishing surface. Blending requires only 1000-grit paper and a Scotch-Brite pad. The repaired panel also requires primer, sealer and several masking procedures.
Let's calculate the difference between the costs of refinishing a repaired panel versus starting with an undamaged panel. A 2006 Cobalt pays 2.0 refinish hours and .8 clear. The same door using the "blend within panel" theory pays 1.0 refinish hour and .8 clear. Using general material reimbursement rates, the difference is approximately $26.
That might not seem like much money, but look over some estimates in your shop and I bet you will be surprised that quite a number have some type of "blend within panel" adjustment. Simple math reveals that the $26 in materials loss grows rapidly, and then you realize you not only lost the paint materials, the labor reimbursement is lost as well adding a minimum of $42 to the deficit. This shows the money you lost in the labor adjustment, now what did you spend to repair the panel properly? I suggest the following supplement itemization to identify what you spend to complete the repair process when you are faced with a blend within panel reduction: Restore repair to 1000 grit from 320, .6; Finish prime restored area, .3; Final sand restored area, .4; Seal coat restored area, .3; Additional sandpaper, $2.90; Additional primer, $7.80; and Additional sealer, $7.80.
This itemization illustrates the difference in both labor and materials when repairing and refinishing a repaired panel according to industry standards and attempting to complete a repair by "blending within panel." To restore a repaired panel you spent $67.20 in labor and $18.50 in materials totaling $85.70. Now to really set the stage, add the $58 you lost in the blend within panel adjustment to the $85.70 you spent to restore the panel and you will find you spent, er, lost $143.70!
Quality repair facilities are doing the extra steps to maintain their standards and ensure high customer satisfaction indexes without reimbursement. The insurance companies know this and are allowing their "partners" to absorb the expense of returning a damaged vehicle to pre-accident condition.
Clearly, an insurer-developed procedure is being forced on the collision repair industry with the hope that it passes through the checks-and-balances procedures unnoticed. Only the insurance companies benefit. You lose and so does the customer.
