Traditionally before the catalyzed acrylic enamel paints became available, it was very tricky spraying enamel because it was almost impossible to lay it on smoothly without orange peel. The depth just wasn't there, either. But it was durable. Lacquer's advantages included an easy spray job that even an amateur could successfully perform and a cheap price. The lacquer that Ford used in the 1920's and 1930's must have been different than what paint stores sold in the 1960's because I don't think I ever saw an original factory paint job on a Model A that had cracked. And that paint was HARD to remove!!!
The major lacquer advantage perceived by restorers for years was the deep gloss that resulted from 17 coats, hand sanded and rubbed out. A ton of work, but the depth and sheen were impressive. Then along came the catalyzed acrylic enamels that could be color sanded and buffed - and suddenly lacquer wasn't such a good choice. And these acrylics did not crack over time. Lest one think even today that lacquer gives a better shine and depth, take a gander at these three photos of paint jobs I did with PPG's Concept catalyzed enamels. I have posted these before, but this topic bears showing them again.
If the OP changes his mind and goes for an acrylic enamel or equivalent, keep four things in mind in addition to the usual painting precautions: (1) spray gun nozzle size to match the paint selected; (2) sufficient air pressure to minimize orange peel; (3) correct mixing proportions, not too thick, not too thin; (4) and use the appropriate reducer to match ambient temperature. The last item is critical to avoid paint drying too quickly = rough texture, or drying too slowly = runs developing.
Marshall