never used it, anyone have any good or bad things to say about it? i like going for the “feel the wood, not plastic” finish.
Discussion Forum
Get It All!
UNLIMITED Membership is like taking a master class in woodworking for less than $10 a month.
Start Your Free TrialCategories
Discussion Forum
Digital Plans Library
Member exclusive! – Plans for everyone – from beginners to experts – right at your fingertips.
Highlights
-
Shape Your Skills
when you sign up for our emails
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. -
Shop Talk Live Podcast -
Our favorite articles and videos -
E-Learning Courses from Fine Woodworking
-
-
Replies
benefits of poly without the frustration of brushing it. Does take a lot of coats to build up. too easy to sand through layers. Make your own with can of reg poly + thinner.
I have used it a lot and still do. I like the ease of application (non textured paper towel like Viva), the quick drying (reapply in four hours), and the control. I can control the buildup of the finish to a fine degree because each coat is very thin. So, I can stop when I achieve the amount of finish that I want. Usually that means about 4 to 6 coats which results in a modest build, somewhere between the oil/varnish finishes and regular varnish. My brand preference is MinWax in gloss sheen.
I am sure you will get a lot of contrasting opinions. When in doubt, experiment with scraps.
Good luck, Tom.
If you want the "feel the wood and not the plastic", don't use poly in the wipe on. Use a NON-POLY varnish, diluted half and half with mineral spirits. Great finish. Do 6-8 applications for your final finish.
Good advice Gretchen. I do this and really like the results. I buy the very best marine varnish and it works really well.
I have also used Minwax wipe-on poly gloss and was not very happy with the result. The finish was just not very durable, and it did not look very natural.
Spray-can polyurethane gives much better results than the wipe-on (in my opinion) with very little effort, leaving a natural looking finish that is very resistant to moisture and alcohol. The trick to having it look good is to apply only 2 coats (maybe 3 on a table top). After that it looks like a plastic coating.
The reason that the spray-can polyurethane works so well is that there is a lot of thinner in the mix so it has a tendency to soak into the wood well to give a nice look, plus the resulting finish is not too thick.
Hal
http://www.rivercitywoodworks.com
The reason that the spray-can polyurethane works so well is that there is a lot of thinner in the mix so it has a tendency to soak into the wood well to give a nice look, plus the resulting finish is not too thick.
Hal
You know, that is probably a VERY good observation. Thank you. I NEVER use poly, but I might be tempted by this for a "make do". Again, thanks.Gretchen
Gretchen,
Have you ever done shellac?
Not really, but it will also do the "in the wood look" to a T, when it is in the right place. No doubt. I suggested that because he asked about poly.Gretchen
Gretchen
Not to pry but another thread has caused me to ask this.. why haven't you ever used shellac?
I'll understand if you choose not to share, I am after all prying into your business.
My contention is that shellac tends to seem a bit daunting. If so I'd really appreciate knowing. However like I said you certainly it's up to you if you choose not to share your reasons.
I just do personal refinishing and most of my "jobs" seem to call for varnish--and I find it easy. I love the way shellac looks. I do tend toward satin finishes.Gretchen
Gretchen,
When you varnish over other finishes and select satin can you explain why?
If I'm making a piece and I varnish it I go for high gloss.. time weather and age quickly turns the piece into satin and then replacement. Interior wise I use shellac because it's so durable and so easy to do.. plus if I want to I can polish it to a deep gloss or leave it more natural which minimises the gloss while maintianing the shine..
Do you believe that varnish is more durable for inside pieces?
I'm not suggesting that you are wrong to use varnish, simply that I'm trying to find out your perceptions of shellac.
amishness,
Have you ever done a shellac finish?
Extremely easy to do, dries really fast (15 minutes later you can sand) safe, drug companies us it to coat pills with candy companies use it to coat candy with.
It's used by antique restorers for the finest finishes. real depth of finish is possible. Darn near impossible to screw up, can be fixed easily if ever damaged,inexpensive.
If you want, I'll talk you through it.
i have used a pre mixed shellac, called french polish, on the insides of a case and drawer(mixed it wth some apple cinnimon oil so it smells nice and spicy!) and i got hardcore swirl marks in the finish. im right out of a woodworking school so im still playing around with different finishes to see what i like. i did finish the project with the thinned varnish, wet sanding with each coat. i put on 4 coats...if i were to do it again id put 6 coats wet sanding with 1000 as the final coat, then doing the whole wax/polish. and yes, i would love a shellac walkthrough!!
Amishness,
Well rich 14 is the guy to talk you thru the proper french polish techniques. I did it exactly once and that was enough work for me. I doubted I'd ever finish that little damn box..
The trick I've found is to over thin the shellac..
I'm a lousy painter. so you may not need to do this and trust me there are plenty of people who will tell you to do it this way or that way.
I like simple and easy something that can't be screwed up..
I buy it premixed from zinssers.. It's a 3# cut in the can and that means I add about two gallons (or quarts) of denatured alcohol to one gallon (or quart) of shellac.
Make sure it's denatured alcohol and not paint thinner or any other solvent..
I stir it quickly to mix the solids that normally settle out. about a minute. (30 seconds if I'm lazy)
Others state they use a coat of seal coat first, I go right for the gold (bullseye) and never have been disappointed..
I flood it on.. I mean really slop it on because I know that it's gonna run. Hey it's what it does best. But if I quickly cover everything no runs ever show up..
I've found the trick to getting a nice finish isn't in your brushing technique, it's getting everything covered really fast. Shellac dries really fast so if you try to carefully apply it you'll wind up with a mess.. Never retouch shellac that is in the drying process.. start at the top and flood everything. Do it once, don't go back and do it fast!
If you miss something don't get your undies in a bunch, the next coat will melt right into the first coat and make an invisable repair.
After the first coat is on it will take 15 minutes to dry.. if it takes longer you didn't thin it enough.. Now sand it.. just a hit and a lick. use 220 paper or one of those 3M sanding sponges, the yellow 220 grit ones. I calculate about a second to a second and a half per sq ft. Real lick and a promise stuff. feel if you've gotten all the nubs off. smooth is what you are aiming for, don't try to sand to perfection (at this point)
Give it the second coat just as fast! Really flood it on because it will run and you don't want the runs to get ahead of you and dry.. this coat will melt right into the first coat
It will now take you a half an hour to dry.. once dry feel for any nubs that have been raised and sand them off.. if you did a good job with the first sanding there shouldn't be too many
Go ahead and give it it's third and final coat, same fast application as before. Again this coat melts right into the first two coats..
Now you are at the cross roads..
It's a pretty respectable finish isn't it?
Do you want to go for better? Wanna do some work (but much less than french polishing I promise) You can improve the finish if you want to but it's a lot of work for a relatively modest improvement.. It's called color sanding and it's what you do for all really fine furniture.
Ask and I'll tell you,, or maybe Rich will chime in ...
It's gonna take an hour to dry now..
go on! whats this color sanding business all about!
amishness,
color sanding is simply the process of adding depth by making the surface smoother..
You do it by using finer and finer grit sand paper to remove the scratches produced by the previous grit sand paper..
The process is simple.. go to the hardware store and buy one sheet of each grit sand paper starting at 320 and stopping at 4000 grit..
using a block (sanding block) to prevent the transfer of finger marks sand the shellac (or just about any fine finish like lacquer etc.) untill you get a uniform mat like or satin finish..
It will happen very quickly so don't grind thru the finish to bare wood. If you do you'll need to put three more layers back on. Sorry, but it's easy isn't it? Be extremely careful around edges and corners. Those are most vulnerable.
Once you have that satin or mat finish take your next grit and sand the suface extremly lightly, all you are doing is removing the high points left by the sanding.. you don't want to sand thru to bare wood again..
Think of it this way, 320 produces 10,000 foot mountins and valleys, 400 grit produces 5,000 foot mountains and the same valleys 600 grit produces 3,000 ft mountians and the same valleys etc. untill you get to 4000 grit which makes mountins a nano spec higher than the valleys..
You can polish that nano spec height out if you want to, or just wax it and use the wax to fill in the nano spec differance. I've actaully gone much further in color sanding but seldom gained and noteable improvement .Oh it's there if you look under a microscope but to anybody looking at your work under a microscope I hereby give you permission to smack them up side the head. ;-)
Edited 3/12/2007 9:24 pm ET by frenchy
hah ill be sure to try that out! thanks alot frenchy! http://www.taunton.com/finewoodworking/SkillsAndTechniques/SkillsAndTechniquesPDF.aspx?id=26868 i came across this article, looks pretty fool proof, i like fool proof.
Edited 3/12/2007 9:47 pm ET by amishness
amishness,
well good for you..
I like pure shellac simply because it's so fast to do and so easy. The fact that shellac has been used for thousands of years and things done with shellac last longer than any oil based finish is capable of lasting..
Amishness,
I would suggest that you don't mix apple-cinammon oil or anything like it into your shellac in the future. It could very well be the cause of the hardcore swirl marks. ;-)
Rob
haha it could! thats what i get for trying to be different ;). i do enjoy the idea of scented drawers and interiors, what SHOULD i have done? well anyways this is pretty much my first piece of real furniture i built.
not sure if i embedded the picture correctly, im still not sure how this forum works!
Edited 3/12/2007 7:35 pm ET by amishness View Image
Edited 3/12/2007 7:36 pm ET by amishness
Edited 3/12/2007 7:38 pm ET by amishness
If you do want to impart a bit of an interesting odor to shellac you can add a small amount of tincture of benzoin, called in old formulas benjamin. It did figure in old spirit varnish formulas.
Strangely enough, it is still used by surgeons as a waterproof adhesive to adhere bandage strips. (At least that was how it was used on me. A bottle was ready and available in his office.)
I suspect it will be much cheaper to acquire at Olde Mill Cabinet Shoppe, or Kremer Pigments than through medical supply channels.
Rob,
To second what Steve told you,; gum benzoin will impart a light vanilla scent. It is soluble in alcohol and in England it was used alone at times and called "glaze"
It was used to put a very quick polish to an object. Not durable but quick.
Another trick is to put a drop of vanilla into a shellac solution.
Peter
A newbie's question. What is a good finish for a plywood table top? It's a work table, and I'd like to strengthen it. Looks are not important. Poly? Marine varnish?
Chris,
You can't "strengthen" a plywood surface with finish. For a work table, you can improve the plywood surface with finish for the purpose of preventing various substances from soaking right into the wood. Almost anything that seals the wood and is easy to repair and doesn't render the surface slippery is a benefit. Don't overthink this. It's a work table top.
Wipe on 2 coats of any varnish, poly, standard, anything, thinned 50% with mineral spirits. Scuff sand the first coat lightly, apply the second coat, let it harden for a few days, and use the top. Don't worry about it too much. Don't abuse it, but don't baby it. When it needs a touch up, scrape it or sand it a bit and rub on another coat.
Rich
Edited 3/13/2007 11:39 am ET by Rich14
Thank you, Rich, for the advice. I appreciate it.c
If anyone had asked me a week ago I would have said that I loved wipe on poly until my last client called me up saying that they spilled something on the cabinets and they wiped it up and there is a water stain. So I called Minwax to ask them what happened. Two different customer service reps told me that the wipe on poly offers almost no water resistence. So I asked what is the point of selling it if it doesn't do anything. There solution was to put on a couple coats of Heilsman Ext Varnish. After getting totally frustrated I gave up with them. My next call was to my local Target Coatings dealer(http://www.targetcoatings.com). All there finishes are water based. They have a lacquer, conversion varnish, hybrid varnish, stains and polys`. They are all really easy to apply by spraying and you can pick up an inexpensive spray system from Woodworkers Supply (http://www.woodworker.com) and build yourself an easy spray booth. That is what I would totally recommend. So go to Target Coating and find a rep in your area.
JKB Wood
Polyurethane varnish doesn't offer water resistance? That's a new one on me. I'm no varnish expert, but I've never found a varnish I couldn't thin with an equal amount of solvent, wipe it on and not have to worry about it. As a wipe-on, a few dilute coats and done. Pretty waterproof. I don't know about the Minwax product though. Strange.Rich
I think part of the problem is that with the wipe on it is pretty easy to think that 3 coats is a lot. But that's about the same amount of finish, left on the wood after the thinner evaporates, as one thin coat of full strength, brushed-on varnish. That may give an attractive look and work well in many situations, but for protective properties thickness counts.
That's the same reason I don't use it. I've had the same experience. It also is not very abrasion resistant.
Hal
http://www.rivercitywoodworks.com
FWW had very good things to say about one of the Minwax products. I think it was about a year ago and it was either oil/varnish or wipe on varnish. I'll have to look up the issue.
JKWOOD,
I'm not at all surprised that Minwax didn't stand behind their products. They are the low end of consumer grade finishes, made as cheaply as possible to sell to weekend warriors who can't get anything better at the local HD. I would encourage all woodworkers regardless of skill level to stay away from Minwax products. You can't get a good finish from a bad product, especially if you aren't highly skilled. If you don't believe it try to get a decent finish from a can of polyshades following the manufacturers directions. I don't believe it can be done.
Target coatings seem to be pretty decent but I would encourage you to test their resistance to cleaning products that contain ammonia and steam from a dishwasher or pot of water boiling on a stove. It sounds like you are a cabinet maker and those types of hazards are pretty common in the average kitchen. They are also pretty common ways to get a waterborne finish to fail and no one wants call backs.
Rob
Rob A. I am a cabinetmaker and all of those hazards do exist. The products I have been using from Target Coatings do of protection from all the things you had mentioned. That is why I have started using them.
JK Wood
This forum certainly has a life. A few years ago the most outspoken here (fastest typists?) were strong advocates for poly finishes of all types. Now ya can't give the stuff away. Funny. I have to wonder what the finish de rigeur will be a couple of years hence.
If anyone had asked me a week ago I would have said that I loved wipe on poly until my last client called me up saying that they spilled something on the cabinets and they wiped it up and there is a water stain.
Steve has commented further down about the need for multiple coats of wipe on finishes. The poly WILL be water resistant IF there is enough of a film finish. I usually do at least 8 wipeon coats of NON-poly varnish for table tops or tops of furniture that may have something put on it. I don't get water rings.Gretchen
Amishness,
Unless you are going to walk on your furniture their is no reason to put up with the numerous downsides of a poly finish. Make your wiping varnish with an alkyd or phenolic resin varnish mixed 50/50 with Mineral spirits and leave the poly to floor finishers and the people who don't know any better.
Rob
"...and leave the poly to floor finishers and the people who don't know any better."
Wow! That's quite a statement you have thrown out there. Do you know me?
I will gladly accept your apology, knowing that your statement is probably a reflection of your personal finishing issues, and in reality has nothing at all to do with the quality and durability of a well applied varnish finish, or the people out here that have the ability to do it right.
Some things are easy to do. Some things are harder. Easier is seldom better.
Hal
http://www.rivercitywoodworks.com
Hal, I just opened your website. That's some seriously nice looking work! That Bar/reception thing on the top of your index page is gorgeous!
West Linn, huh? I live in Forest Grove and work on the east side of Portland.
Thanks Kevin,
Nice to meet you! Maybe we will actually shake hands one day. What sort of work do you do?
Your commute reminds me of a friend (siding applicator) who lived in Mollala for years and constantly was working out in the Sunset Hwy area. So he moved to Banks and his next job was in Mollala, the first work he ever did there.
Hal
Well heck, if you've been to his new place then you know where Forest Grove is. We're just a hop, skip and a jump away from Banks. We're quite a bit larger, but this is Banks we're talking about. It doesn't take much to be larger than Banks, Oregon. ;-)
I'm the Paint Shop Manager for an exhibit house here in SE Portland. If you don't know what an exhibit house is, don't feel bad. I didn't either until I got a job in one. It's very much an "out of sight, out of mind" industry.
We design and fabricate tradeshow, interpretive and museum exhibits and also dabble in corporate lobbies, bank interiors, upscale restaurants and other architectural environments. It used to be that tradeshow exhibits were our bread and butter and everything else was a sideline to that. But post-9/11 the tradeshow scene really has dropped off dramatically and now days we're pretty much just corporate whores willing to do anything for money. http://www.ppinc.com
Cool! I once had a neighbor that did this same thing. I'm not sure but I think the name of the company was Western Exhibits, or something like that.
Hal
All West Display perhaps? I used to work there, shortly after they'd been bought out by Exhibit Group/Giltspur out of Chicago. That's where I first stumbled across this line of work. There used to be half a dozen or so exhibit houses in and around Portland. Only three of us survived the Bush recession as far as I know.
Cheers!
I think that's it. The guy's name is Jeff Shuett. I think his wife worked there too, in the art department.
I wonder if he is still around. He does really impressive laminate work.
I couldn't believe it when I was there once and saw that they used giant Earth Stoves to burn scraps and for heat. The stoves were all warped from being way too hot.
Hal
Hi Hal,
I was just poking through some of the give and take between you and Rob. You guys aren't having an argument. Go over to the 1880 row house thread if you want to see an argument. We had you beat. :)
I got frenchy all worked up because I thought a lot of what he said was way off course. Talk about getting your knickers in a twist!
Just a light hearted 2 cents.
PG
Hal,
Lets first make sure we are on the same page. I don't have anything against a varnish finish. I do however often wonder why anyone would apply polyurethane varnish to anything they don't plan to walk on when there are alkyd and phenolic resin varnishes available that are superior to poly in every way except a slight drop in abrasion resistance.
Are you of the opinion that poly doesn't give up clarity, uv resistance and adhesion properties to varnishes made with other resins?
Rob
Rob,
Nice try, but that wasn't an apology.
So I wrote a really long and nasty reply to you, basically explaining that you don't know what you are talking about, but then I decided it isn't worth it. So I deleted the whole thing, realizing that you really are just spouting off about something you really don't know anything about.
Please don't take it personally. It's okay, there is a lot of that on this forum. I just hope that your comments don't keep others from using one of the most incredible finishes available, if it is applied correctly. It often isn't, and that's where the misconceptions come from.
So here's an easy way to get a great finish from polyurethane. I want you to try it so that next time you will have an educated voice in the conversation, and probably a different viewpoint.
1. Go to any little hardware store and buy a spray can of Minwax Quick drying polyurethane in a satin finish.
2. Sand a board well, up to 180 grit. Don't skip grits or do a crappy job and then blame it on the finish! Go ahead and use curly maple, cherry, or some exotic.
3. Vacuum the surface.
4. Spray a liberal, even coat on the surface. Make it thoroughly wet.
5. Once it is dry you will see that there is very little on the surface. Sand lightly with 320 grit paper or a fine foam sanding pad.
6. Vacuum again and apply another liberal, even coat of finish.
7. Let it dry overnight, and pat yourself on the back for being an expert. Take it inside your house and leave it somewhere to cure.
8. After about 30 days, go back and look at it again. You will see that it isn't cloudy, isn't shiny or plastic looking. Go ahead, pour some water on it. Use it for a coaster and don't worry about wiping up that tequila you spilled...you will need to sober up though before you drive back to the hardware store for more.
Have a nice day!
Hal
http://www.rivercitywoodworks.com
Edited 3/15/2007 12:13 am ET by Hal J
Edited 3/15/2007 12:15 am ET by Hal J
Sure, if it is thin enough, poly doesn't show off its cloudiness. But, the demonstration proposed doesn't answer very much. At such minimal coating thickness ( 2 aerosol coats with very low solids content) it's not offering much in the way of the benefits of poly. And, traditional resin satin varnishes applied in the same way and to the same thickness would look very much the same and would be virtually as protective as the sprayed Minwax product.
Single part poly is just another kind of varnish, based on mostly alkyd resin with some polyurethane resin added, that has slightly different properties that include more abrasion resistance, but also poorer adhesion properties, a bit of haziness, and a more difficult rubbing out process compared to traditional alkyd or phenolic resin varnishes. Polyurethane varnish has been heavily promoted promoted by the consumer grade manufacturers such as MinWax. Yes, I could make it look OK by keeping it very thin. But I can have a thicker and more protective film using traditional resin varnishes without getting the haziness that would begin to appear with a single part poly coating of the same thickness. That's why it's pretty easy to recommend not using poly except for the few specialty applications such as floors where its benefits are of value.
Just a general FYI here...
Target Coatings has a poly finish that doesn't suffer from cloudiness:
http://www.targetcoatings.com/oxford-super-clear.html
Hal,
You are right it wasn't an apology. I don't believe I owe you one as the only way you could have been offended is by personalizing a generic remark that I made. You on the other hand have directly insulted me a couple of times now. But that is ok. I don't want or need an apology. What I would like though is for you to answer the question I posed to you.
Do you or do you not believe that polyurethane varnish, when compared to a pure alkyd or phenolic resin varnish, suffers from cloudiness, poor adhesion, inferior rubbing characteristics and lesser UV resistance? If so then in what circumstances would you say this is a positive trade off to gain a little bit of abrasion resistance?
If you would actually like to have a discussion on the relative merits of different finishes, I anticipate your reply. If you would prefer to continue offering only veiled insults and minimalist finish schedules instead of any facts, that's fine also. But I don't think you will have much luck convincing anyone that you hold the correct view.
Rob
Sorry Rob, but I can't see arguing just for the sake of arguing.
I have a lot of experience with both kinds of varnish; Both have different qualities. Each has a different appearance. I guess what you prefer to use depends on your personal skills in application and what you want the final product to have for appearance and durability.
My contention is that polyurethane is not only for those that don't know better or for floors.
The rest is academic, except for the note that catalyzed waterbased finishes are really the best for floors, not polyurethane.
Hal
http://www.rivercitywoodworks.com
___
Oh, one other thing I forgot to tell you:
I would never use thinned polyurethane for a wipe on finish either! I don't think it really works very well for this and in using it this way it doesn't seem to impart its protective qualities, or really even look good. I do use alkyd varnish for this and really like the results.
___
Edited 3/15/2007 4:15 pm ET by Hal J
Hal,
All finishes obviously have different qualities. That is really my whole point. Any decent finisher will choose his finish for each project based on the pros and cons of each finish and the desired results for that project. I am just trying to imagine a fine furniture project where clarity, adhesion and UV resistance would be sacrificed so that you can use a varnish that has extreme abrasion resistance instead of just very, very good abrasion resistance. That set of pros and cons of polyurethane isn't just something I made up, and it doesn't have anything to do with the way it is applied.
Your continued backhanded snide remarks about my finishing abilities aside, I would like to know how you apply a finish to make it more UV resistant, or have better adhesion properties, or increase its natural clarity. Sure you can apply a very small amount of poly and it will be pretty clear. But that isn't solving its clarity problems, it is simply side stepping them. Not only that, it is side stepping them at the expense of the only true quality that poly has, its abrasion resistance. Those faults and positives of poly are not academic. They are the basis on which an informed finisher would choose to use or not use it, or any other finish. You can continue to use poly while ignoring its weaknesses if you like, but I contend if you do that you are placing yourself in the category of those who don't know any better, not me. Actually that isn't even true if you do know better and simply choose to disregard it.
You have offered nothing to prove your contention except offer a schedule that works around one of polyurethanes flaws to the detriment of its only positive attribute.
Rob
I personally am not a poly fan and never use it. But Jeff Jewitt asserts that the cloudiness can mitigated by thinning the material before it's applied. http://www.homesteadfinishing.com/htdocs/ChoosingFinish.htm
As a general rule a thinner coat will be more flexible, and thus exhibit better adhesion, than a thicker coat. There are all sorts of exceptions and caveats to this of course, and certainly different resins exhibit differing levels of adhesion that are inate to that kind of resin. But overall, thinner is always going to be more flexible than thicker and flexibility is one of the keys to adhesion in many circumstances.
Edited 3/15/2007 8:00 pm by Kevin
Whew! Thanks Kevin!
I hope you don't get sucked into arguing with Rob though.
Hal
Kevin,
Certainly applying a thinner coat will mitigate the inherent flaws in any finish. I probably should have posed the question in my earlier post to Hal this way.
I would like to know how you apply a finish in a way that changes it's basic qualities?
Because as you point out there are ways to work around the flaws in a product. But the flaws still exist. Why anyone would choose to work around them when there are perfectly good alternatives is beyond me. You don't use poly so I guess the reasoning is beyond you too.
Hal,
I would like to point out that you are the one who initially engaged me in this discussion. You are also the one who resorted to insulting me. I would also like to point out that while I made painstaking efforts to respond to any type of semi-valid point you brought up. You ignored every question or point I had, never attempted to prove anything and did little else than tell us your finishing schedule for poly and attempt to belittle my ability.
If you must get the last word in at least make it something substantiative. For instance, you could answer the question I asked you 3 times now. Does poly have the flaws I listed previously in comparison to varnishes made with other resins? There is no shame in admitting you were wrong, these forums are here for us all to learn.
Rob
Well, just so we're on the same page here... I don't know whether you read Jewitt's article or not but he's pretty blunt about at least some of the alleged flaws in poly actually being flaws in application rather than inherent flaws in poly, or at least partially so.
It seems to me, and I have used poly, that of all the alleged flaws with poly the delamination/adhesion and the cloudiness and the "plastic" look are the primary downsides at first glance. But all can be worked around and eliminated for the most part by simply spraying thinner material and keeping the dry mil. thickness down.
The reality is that choosing a finish is always a matter of balancing trade-offs. If it weren't then there would only be one finish on the market and we would all swear that it is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Kevin, I took the liberty of copying some of your post and highlighting some of the key phrases in it. With the highlighted areas as qualifiers I agree with everything you said.
I don't know whether you read Jewitt's article or not but he's pretty blunt about at least some of the alleged flaws in poly actually being flaws in application rather than inherent flaws in poly, or at least partially so.
It seems to me, and I have used poly, that of all the alleged flaws with poly the delamination/adhesion and the cloudiness and the "plastic" look are the primary downsides at first glance. But all can be worked around and eliminated for the most part by simply spraying thinner material and keeping the dry mil. thickness down.
The reality is that choosing a finish is always a matter of balancing trade-offs. If it weren't then there would only be one finish on the market and we would all swear that it is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
The last sentence I highlighted is what I have been saying the entire time. It is just that in my opinion when finishing furniture the balance is almost never in favor of using poly. My biggest gripe about poly is that the consumers have been sold a bill of goods by the finish manufacturers that poly is some super finish and that using anything else is a disaster waiting to happen. How many woodworkers just automatically grab for a can of poly when the time comes to finish their project? This, to me, is a shame because their are many better options available. But these options are getting harder to find because of the finish it all with poly crowd.
Rob
I don't disagree, Rob. My perspective is a bit different than most here because I work in the commercial production finishing field and nobody markets poly to this field. Or if they do, their market share is tiny. All the big players market the same choices: lacquers and varnishes, both water and solvent borne. So my "consumer" perspective is different. Of course this has to be balanced by the flip side of that same coin - I'm set up with a full line of professional spray equipment and all that goes with it.
I personally love working with vinyl conversion varnish and would probably be pitching it as often and with as much zeal (maybe a bit less...) as Frenchy and Rich pitch shellac except that too few here have access to the kind of equipment needed to apply it properly. Doesn't make me any better than them, it's just that it's not a fair comparison. So comparing it to poly is as much an apples-to-oranges comparison in terms of equipment as it is in terms of resins.
The "finishing schedule" that you refer to is not mine. I just wanted to give you a simple way of seeing how good polyurethane can look without a great deal of effort or skill.
So how does your sample look?
Hal
Hal,
Thanks for helping me understand how to use poly. It was very helpful to know how to apply a finish without expending a great deal of effort, or the need to posses a great deal of skill.
I see you still won't answer the question I asked you in my first post to you. Does polyurethane give up clarity, uv resistance and adhesion properties compared to varnishes made with phenolic or alkyd resin or not? If you haven't answered because you aren't sure which varnish contains what resin I will compile a list for you, just ask. In the meantime all of us lazy unskilled finishers await your next golden nugget with baited breath.
You take the cake. You choose to confront me for assuming your finishing skills are substandard because of a statement I made to someone else, before you even entered the discussion. You then do the very thing you wrongly accused me of doing by assuming that my finishing skills are substandard because I don't think the pro/con equation favors poly. Well if that is the case I guess that there are a lot of really crappy finishers posting here.
If poly is such a good finish just use it and don't worry about what I think. You certainly seem to have an inferiority complex about something. Is it the poly or your finishing skills? Get back to me when you can answer the simple question I have asked in every post I have made to you.
Rob
Edit to add: Since I made a point earlier about responding to any question or point that you made i thought I should continue that practice even if it is one sided. So to answer your question about how my sample looks:
I didn't make a sample using your suggested finish. I'm sure you knew that when you asked the question. The reasons I didn't are twofold. First it isn't really germaine to this discussion, as the issue wasn't whether or not I was able to get a semi-satisfactory finish using poly. I can. I just don't often encounter a situation where poly is the best finish for the project. Secondly, if I did choose to apply a polyurethane finish it certainly wouldn't be a Minwax product, and it wouldn't come out of a spray can. I believe my SATA KLC-RP will deliver a slightly better finish than an aerosol can even in the hands of this talentless hack. So know that I have answered your question I will await your answer to mine.
Edited 3/16/2007 8:54 pm ET by Rob A.
It's all very well for you lot to whitter on relentlessly about the benefits and disadvantages of oil based alkyd varnishes versus polyurethane varnishes.
Whilst I have developed a slight preference for alkyd types I have to live with polyuerthane varnish being the only choice if I want to use a more brittle abrasion resistant short oil varnish for interior use. I have searched high and low since I moved back to live in the UK in 2003 and for the life of me I cannot find an interior alkyd varnish.
So if the finish is to be varnish for interior use, fairly rare really, it's polyurethane applied with a brush, with a rag, and even sprayed sometimes. I can't say I've noticed the 'cloudiness' and adhesion issues much discussed in this thread being a significant problem.
A sealer coat (or two) of highly thinned (50- 65% solvent) gloss varnish can be brushed on very open pored woods such as oak and elm: a second of a somewhat thinned (10- 15% solvent) gloss brushed on: plus one coat of a slightly to somewhat thinned sheen of preference produces a highly durable finish. On finer textured woods like sycamore, cherry and maple, the preliminary super thinned coat(s) can usually be omitted, but I find it generally doesn't hurt to use one as a sealer and fibre stiffener. Rubbing down lightly with 320 to 400 grit between coats provides an adequate key for the next coat.
It can be a bit tricky getting a dry film without debris floating into it from the air, but I avoid rubbing the final coat to a desired sheen wherever possible. I can't actually recall how many years ago it is since I rubbed out a varnish finish to a preferred sheen. It might have been sometime in the 1980's or 1990's, but I just don't know. Nowadays I aim for a finish straight off the brush or spray gun, but that can be problematical I agree due to the long dry time. Sometimes I go for a final coat ragged on, but I tend to avoid the last one if I can as it can end up a bit streaky if you're not careful, or just plain unlucky, ha, ha.
Polyurethane doesn't have to be cloudy and suffer adhesion problems, certainly not in my experience, as long as suitable procedures are followed and final film thickness isn't too great. Sliante.Richard Jones Furniture
SATA KLC-RP
Nice gun! I've got a SATA-JET 90 in the gravity gun configuration which like yours is an RP rather than HVLP. I like it a lot although it doesn't produce as wide of a fan as I'd prefer. Still, I use it regularly. My baby, though, is my early model DeVilbiss GTI (HVLP) gravity gun. I picked it up in near perfect condition at a pawn shop several years ago for $73. I still have the receipt too. Undoubtedly the guy running the pawn shop didn't realize that they were retailing for just under $500. I was actually nervous buying it because I was afraid that he'd catch on to my excitement and raise the price. I'd have paid twice his asking price without hesitation.
Now what I wish I could afford is one of those new SATA-JET 3000 RP's with the digital readout in the handle. Sweet looking gun! And the girl holding it on the poster ain't bad lookin' either. But at $600 for the gun I just can't justify forking over that kind of money when I already have two very servicable guns along with a few more lesser guns.
Edited 3/16/2007 10:00 pm by Kevin
Kevin,
The SATA is a fairly new purchase for me. I bought it as a present for myself after paying my dues with a $40 no name gun for years. I must admit that the generic gun works pretty well but the adjustability and precision that the SATA has is quite a revelation. So now the cheap gun spends its time hanging on a hook waiting until its time to spray some dye again.
I looked real hard at the Devilbiss Finishline III mainly because of the price but in the end splurged on the KLC-RP. I wish I could have found a deal like you got. I can just picture it... trying to act like you could take it or leave it, when in reality you kept thinking that the next guy in the door was going to start a bidding war. Good find! And yes, the SATA-JET 3000 and the girl are the stuff of dreams, but I'm sure that they are both pricey each in their own way. And we must always strive to be happy with what we have. I'm very satisfied with my gun and my girl. They are both better than I deserve. :-)
Rob
I'm very satisfied with my gun and my girl. They are both better than I deserve.
Ah, VERY well said. If I were wearing a hat I'd tip it to you. Very classy statement! I wholeheartedly echo those sentiments with respect to my gun and my girl.
Very smart choice with the gun too. I'm a long-time DeVilbiss fan but you most certainly ended up with the better gun.
Edited 3/17/2007 12:12 am by Kevin
Just so you know, I didn't really read your post, just scanned it enough to see that it is the same continuing drivel. Please don't be insulted by this statement, it is merely an observation, and I'm sure there is no one else that desires to continue reading it either. So you can go on arguing without me from now on. I don't have an inferiority complex, I just really don't care.
I did see you mentioning your Sata spray gun and thought I should suggest you check out Graco's HVLP guns. One of the nicest features they have is the ability to adjust the spray pattern and the amout of air from the back of the gun instead of changing spray tips. A very versatile setup.
Hal
http://www.rivercitywoodworks.com
Edited 3/19/2007 12:12 am ET by Hal J
Edited 3/19/2007 12:14 am ET by Hal J
Hal,
That seems about right, just what I was expecting.
Rob
I think you are slightly misunderstanding what Jeff wrote. Jeff is referring to applying a thinner total film thickness, not thinning the product. However, if you apply a thinner total film thickness, you are also mitigating the protective qualities of the polyurethane additive.I am not a fan of poly varnish either--particularly the consumer brands found in the big boxes. There are some excellent true marine poly varnishes but the ain't cheap.Howie.........
I respectfully disagree. Jeff specifically mentions poly bridging the wood pores, and thus trapping air in the pores, as a prime cause of the cloudiness. Applying a thinner coat won't mitigate that. Applying a less viscous coat, as he suggests, will mitigate it.
I think the problem in reading the article is that Jeff is talking about two different aspects of using poly. There is the viscosity issue where he says:
To me this seems more like a rara avis, particularly for those of use who brush on finishes. I tend to get surface bubbles or brush strokes if I don't thin varnish a bit and I think that bit (10% + or -) would likely deal with bridging. So I'm pretty sure the test samples I did with poly don't fall short for this reason.
But, he also says, further down the page:
In this case, too thickly pretty clearly means total film thickness. I think this is where a contradiction in using poly does in fact crop up. If you want lots of protection people tend to do two things--choose poly, and also apply thicker coatings. I would generally chose a bit thicker coating, but only as compensation for having not chosen poly. I think the trade-offs between protection (except for abrasion) and the appearance with thicker coats favors traditional resins over poly. And, if a thin, almost in-the-wood, coating is what's wanted there isn't enough protection from any (consumer) coating to make much distinction between poly and traditional resin.
Good points, and that's why if you go back a few comments you'll see that I mentioned both viscosity and dry film thickness to Rob when I referenced Jeff's article.
Steve,
I appreciate the information that you have provided to this thread. I must be the guy who doesn't know any better. I have used the MinWax WOP and the varathane 900 gloss polyurethane a lot and had success. I haven't noticed any significant problems like the ones mentioned. But, it is possible I just need to train my eye. I want to do some comparison testing with the varathane product against a good quality varnish with alkyd or phenolic resin. What brands would you recommend? My thought is do create some test panels, probably using cherry, and apply multiple coats, level, and rub out to satin. Then compare visual results.Also, someone recommended diluting a marine varnish to create a wipe on varnish. Marine varnishes are formulated to remain flexible and are apparently not very wear resistant. What would the advantage be for using marine varnish in this application?Thanks, Tom.
Tom,
Obviously I'm not Steve, and after watching me butt heads with Hal you may not be interested in my advice, but you shouldn't take my off hand comment personally. It wasn't meant to insult anyone, although it may have come off that way.
Anyway, I think that if you do a test between the different varnishes you will see a difference in the clarity, and the alkyd and phenolic resins will rub out easier and more consistently because they are harder. Phenolic being the hardest. The UV resistance is more of a long term test, but if you finish a sample with the Minwax that you have been using and set it in a spot that gets a lot of sun, I would give it a year or two before it starts to yellow and crack. As for adhesion you can apply any non-poly varnish over waxed or dewaxed shellac without any problem. You also don't need to be so concerned with sanding between coats to form a mechanical bond that is critical for poly.
To answer your questions, a good phenolic resin varnish is Waterlox high gloss, or original satin. Don't get the original sealer & finish as that is a wiping varnish. A couple of good alkyd resin varnishes are Pratt & Lambert #38 or McCloskey Heirloom in the gloss of your choice. All of these varnishes should be thinned for brushing, approx. 10% to 15%. You should thin the first coat around 25%. And if you want to use a wipe-on varnish thin your favorite varnish 50% and make your own. Why pay the manufacturers to do it and pay varnish price for mineral spirits. If you already know all of this then I apologize, just assume it is for the benefit of others.
I don't know why someone would suggest using a marine or spar varnish on an interior application. I can't see any advantages.
Rob
Rob,
Thanks for the information. Right now, I don't plan to include the MinWax WOP in my comparison, but will look at the Varathane varnish against at least one of each of the other two types that you mention. I have another friend who also has used the Varathane product a lot, and we may collaborate on this test. If I then switch to one of the other products, I will look into creating my own WOP with that varnish. In any case, thanks for the information.
Best regards, Tom.
I agree that marine spar varnish is best left for exterior uses where it beats the pants off of "want-to-be" spar varnishes.
I like for a phenolic resin varnish Waterlox Gloss (not the Original/Sealer which has much lower solids content), for alkyd--Behlen Rockhard, and for a lighter color Pratt & Lambert 38 or McCloskey Heirloom.
I think comparison panels is a good idea. It's hard to remember subtle details from finish to finish, and it's also just human nature not to find fault (or to exaggerate faults) with actual project results. On test panels it is easier to be objective. Try to make the samples as large as you can--it's hard to tell anything about a few square inches.
Of course, ideally, the tests would be set up as double blind, where either the administrator and the people doing the judging know what panel has what finish on it. And, for really reliable results you want multiples of panels and of judges. I doubt any such tests have been done anywhere. There are lots of different ways to set up the judging protocols and those ways will influence results.
Edited 3/19/2007 7:34 am ET by SteveSchoene
Steve,
Thanks very much for your reply. Your comments on the test design are appropriate. I haven't thought much about judging criteria as yet. (This is starting to sound like being back in high tech) I think that I am primarily interested in clarity of the finish and the ability to rub out to a consistent gloss. I think I am inclined to take published information on UV resistance and abrasion resistance as gospel.
By the way, Rob grouped the Pratt and Lambert product in the alkyd group, while you labeled it as phenolic. I will check on their web site.
Best regards, Tom.
Sorry, didn't mean to have P & L called phenolic, only that it is lighter colored (because it is formulated with soya oil instead of linseed oil). You do seem to be concentrating of the most important appearance factors.
Just so you know, Rob, I am not trying to prove anything. I could send you samples, do tests, cite research, etc, but I have too much important work to do instead.
I just don't think it is right for you to state that woodworkers who use polyurethane don't know what they are doing. Do you remember that this is where all this started?
It seems as though you may have a personal prejudice against polyurethane finishes, and for some reason have the need to argue about it. The only thing I can figure out is that you have read a little, but have even less actual experience testing the finish, and so have a narrow view of its attributes. It is sort of like if one person once did a poor job of cutting dovetail joints, then all dovetail joints must be bad. Or this one: Have you ever seen a poor enamel paint job where the paint was applied to thickly, and there are runs and sags, maybe a few spots with not enough paint to thoroughly cover? Maybe the second coat was applied before the first coat dried completely so the whole thing never cured correctly? All enamel paint isn't bad because of a bad example.
You really should give polyurethane a try. You will probably be surprised at the results, unless you try do a poor job of it on purpose just to support your argument. Many years ago we did a lot of testing of multiple products with different application techniques, and came up with something that works really well. You know nothing about what our finish looks like or how it performs. It is really quite remarkable how natural it looks, and how resistant to water, abrasion, and even alcohol. It need not be thick and cloudy to have these characteristics.
I do agree with you that there are better products for some applications. But don't assume that the polyurethane finish applied by everyone is thick and cloudy, or done by people that don't know the difference. There are also catalytic lacquers that are as clear or clearer than the resin varnish that you tout so loudly, and they are easier to apply, dry quickly, and are much tougher.
Hal
At our shop we use a mixture of equal parts of gloss poly, boiled linseed oil and paint thinner. It's an easy wipe on/wipe off formula which will give great protection when finished. It's a lot shceaper than so called wipe on/wipe off finishes in a can.
First coat is put on heavy as most of it will be absorbed int the wood. After 10-15 minutes wipe off. Allow 24 hours to dry. Additional coats are put on lighter. Again wipe off lightly after 10-15 minutes and allow to dry throughly. A light sanding with maroon sanding pads betweeen coats will give a soft sheen to the finish. For the last coat, I wet sand with thinner then apply a very light finish coat. After it dries, I let it sit for 72 hours then buff it all out with a soft cloth and buffing compound.
The finsh will last for years, is easily repaired, and looks beautiful. Natural cherry finished this way is a thing of beauty! It really brings out that deep cherry color and will continue to darken with age to a patina that can't be matched by other finishes. Try it.
a. Apply a sanding sealer. sand lightly w/220. (If you have raised the
grain prior to the sanding sealer you may not need to sand after.
b. Brush on varnish, as many coats as you need to achieve a good
amount finish on the surface, sanding between coats.
c. After having accomplished a good depth of varnish on the surface,
sand to 320.
d. Then apply thinned coats of varnish. I use flannel that has been
laundered twice. Either sand with old 320 or higher grit until you
achieve the surface you want, or use 0000 steel wool to buff the
finish.
e. Apply the final thinned coat of varnish and if required rub it out
with rottenstone and 1/2 paraffin oil and 1/2 mineral spirits using
the flannel or an old tee shirt or some other soft cotton.
f. Wax and you're done.
Applying the varnish with a brush the first couple of coats saves wasting a lot of time. There is no value to 'wiping' thin coats on surfaces that are very porous.
pins
I have used Minwax wipe on poly many times and many times and found it a great finish. Don't get the poly thing confused with the poly in a can that is supposed to be brushed on. I usuall put on 6-8 coats and it does not give you the plastic feel.
Greg
I totally agree. I also find that prepping the wood or project with a good "sand & Seal" helps before applying the wipe on poly. I also have never been able to make a satisfactory wipe on by thinning the brush on type poly. Each has been developed for its on applications. As for that matter why would one want to? DavidDavid
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled