Several in the old Flying Eagles of KCK used to do this.  When they were satisfied the plane was worth it, it was thoroughly cleaned with alcohol, then finished.  DOC Holliday

Have some confidence in your building abilities.

Other wise finish with plastic films untill you do.

That's a little harsh. Bob Hunt told me he likes to test his planes before he finishes them and I still have a lot of respect for his designing, building, finishing, and flying abilities.

My last project was a new electric power design. These have balance  and inertia issues and behave differently. Even though I did test it before I finished it, I still had to perform surgery on it afterwards. Sometimes, things just work out that way.

Ron

Unless it's some oddball experimental design, this is a very, very strange idea. You aren't going to tell much about the airplane in silver or clear that will usefully translate to the same airplane 4-10 oz. heavier. And not only is it abnormally light, it's also abnormally flexible. Paint adds significant rigidity, and that will very signficantly change the characteristics.

 Also presumably, you aren't going to fly it for long with clear or silver and then be able to finish it. You'll get a lot of oil and that will screw up the paint. So, you can only fly it for a little while, and that means the chances of finding something subtle is negligible. If it's a gross problem you should be able to find it by inspection - shouldn't have to fly it to find it. I have seen airplanes that took the better part of a decade to diagnose.

   And, the entire concept is based on the idea that you don't want to find something and have to cut into the paint job later to fix it. I hardly see an advantage to cutting into 3/4 of a paint job (i.e tissue, clear, silver) over a full paint job.

   I'd be very curious to know if 1, someone actually did this and 2, found something, how much time or effort they think it saved. And how *often* this works out positively.

    Brett

  I am not proposing anyone do this, I just asked, does anyone "still do this?"   I fully understand all the arguments,both pro and con.   Now, Brett, I am sorry I even asked. sheesh.

   What's the problem?   I just thought it was a very strange idea with a very high cost/benefit ratio.

      Brett

For what its worth Ty, I don't think Brett was trying to light you up with his comment.  Oddly enough, back in the day, finishing to clear and then test flying must have been somewhat common.  One of my flying partners always does this.  If anything, I think its a holdover from the days of building a Nobler,etc, on the kitchen table-some of them might have flown good, and some might have been disasters.  If the plane was a dud in clear, it went into the bonfire and a new one constructed.  An outdated practice by today's standards, and the benefits might certainly be arguable, but some people still do it.