Blend Time: Why the 50% Default Is Wrong, and How to Back the Right Number

Blend time is the clearest example of the gap between what the data supports and what the default pays. The platforms assume one number, the research shows another, and the difference comes straight out of your refinish department.

What the default pays, and what the research found

All three estimating systems, CCC, Audatex, and Mitchell, calculate blend at 50% of a full refinish. The SCRS blend study found close to the opposite. Once you account for the operations a blend actually requires, blending takes 31.59% more time than a full refinish, not less. The information providers responded by letting estimators override the default, but 50% is still what the systems assume out of the box. So the number you have to fight for is the one the industry's own study supports.

Why the correct number gets flagged

When you raise blend time above the 50% default to reflect the real work, automated review reads the increase as a deviation and flags it. The default is the baseline the system checks against, even though the platform itself lets you change it and the study contradicts it. That's the gap you're documenting, and it's time the finish genuinely takes.

What the default treats as included, but isn't

A blend is more than spraying color on part of a panel. It includes operations the 50% default quietly absorbs:

• De-nib and finish sand
• Buff and polish
• Color sand
• Protective coating removal

The platform's own not-included language confirms these are separate operations. When they get folded into the base blend, that's money left on the panel.

The documents that back it

Two sources close this argument:

1. The SCRS blend study, with its 31.59% finding.
2. The platform's current methodology and not-included language for the operations above.

Reference the specific page or database entry. The supplement reads as a documented correction, with the platform's own rules on your side.

How to write the blend supplement

1. List the panels and the blend operations performed.
2. State the corrected blend time and cite the SCRS study.
3. Call out each not-included operation (de-nib, color sand, and so on) with the platform reference.
4. Attach both sources.

Common pushbacks, and how to answer them

• "Blend is half a refinish, that's the formula." It's the default formula, and the platform itself lets you override it because the SCRS study showed it's low. Cite the study.
• "De-nib and buff are part of the blend." The platform's not-included language says otherwise. Attach the page.
• "Show me where it says more than 50%." The SCRS blend study, which the information providers used to update their guidance. Send it with the supplement.

Let the documentation travel with the estimate

Pulling the SCRS study and the platform's not-included language for every blend is the kind of thing that gets skipped under deadline. That's the gap GuideCoat closes. It flags blend operations figured at the old default and pulls the documentation that supports the real number. See how it works

This is one of the four areas where shops leave the most money. For the full picture, start with the collision supplement playbook.

Frequently asked questions

Is blend time really more than a full refinish? Per the SCRS blend study, yes. Once you count the operations a blend requires to match color and texture, it runs 31.59% more time than a full refinish.

Why does the estimate still default to 50%? The information providers kept 50% as the out-of-the-box default and added the ability to override it. The burden is on the estimator to raise it and document why.

What operations are not included in base blend time? Commonly de-nib, finish sand, buff, color sand, and protective coating removal. Confirm against your platform's current not-included language.