# Staining Oak Trim



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

After reading a few posts here, I feel like a real novice just off the turnip truck. :blink: I don't do staining much, as you will tell.
Anyway, I built up some trim around a wall partition and want to stain it. Without thinking, I used oak trim pieces. I want to use MinWax stain and mixed some Redwood with Sedona Red to get the shade I want. 
I used a practice piece to test and am NOT happy. I sanded with 150 followed by 220 (as instructed) and applied the stain mix. 
The problem is that the oak does not seem to be taking the stain very deep. For the darkness of the color, the wood doesn't change color very much, even after 4 coats. It IS getting darker but not as much as I would expect. 
Did I do something wrong or incomplete? Is there some way to make the oak take the stain deeper?
Maybe I'm not even asking the right questions (?) 
Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.


----------



## mdntrdr (Dec 22, 2009)

I'm guessing you have Red Oak?

Try another sample sanded to 150x. :smile:


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

Hmm, I wouldn't know one Oak from another. I went to the local moulding store that carries a ton of trim in several woods. I picked the oak sample (without thinking about it) because it was the board with the most complete assortment of styles. It didn't say anything about what kind of oak - just oak.
Do you mean sand it with 150 ONLY (no 220 followup)? 
What would that do (trying to learn something here)?


----------



## mdntrdr (Dec 22, 2009)

150x only, it will allow the wood to absorb more stain. :smile:


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

There are a few different ways you can achieve the color you want. You can mix aniline dye powders to the stain mix that you have to darken it or you could use a different brand stain. Minwax isn't the best brand anyway. The color will fade faster over time than other brands of stain. With Sherwin Williams wood classics oil stain you can add a universal tinting color to it to darken it. A better method would be to first stain the wood to majority of the color you want with an aniline or transtint dye stain and then use a oil stain to give it some warmth. The dyes are more like ink and you could feasabily stain a oak board black if you wanted. One place the dye powders are available is at Mohawk Finishing Products. Since it is dry powder it can be mailed without all the hasmat fees. Then the powders are mixed with dentured alcohol you can obtain locally.


----------



## Masterofnone (Aug 24, 2010)

Steve Neul said:


> Minwax isn't the best brand anyway.


Bingo...

Just my $0.02, but first of all a lot of the oak trim availible at the box stores is actually some sort of oak vaneer over ply or MDF. I don't know where you got your trim, but if it is not solid oak it is going to be difficult to get it to take color because the wood is only paper thin, thus it's capacity to hold stain is very very small no matter how you sand it.

Your best bet is to get a gel stain. I like to use Verathane (because its easily availible in my area). You can either add the red to the original stain OR tone your finish reddish, OR put down a 1lb cut of Shellac and use a red glaze to tone the wood.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

mdntrdr said:


> 150x only, it will allow the wood to absorb more stain. :smile:


+1. :yes: 









 







.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Steve Neul said:


> Minwax isn't the best brand anyway. The color will fade faster over time than other brands of stain. With Sherwin Williams wood classics oil stain you can add a universal tinting color to it to darken it.


It should be stipulated that it's your opinion, unless you have certifiable proof. Minwax is a Sherwin-Williams company. Universal tint can be added to most any stain.









 







.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

Many thanks for the replies. Lots to think of.
First off, the trim was purchased from a store that sells ONLY trims and such items, not a box store. The trim is solid, not any kind of ply (one test is the price but you can see the ends and when it's cut).
Next, I'm not concerned with the color; I've mixed to pretty much the color I want (give or take).
As I said, my problem is getting the stain into the wood. In my ignorance, I never thought there would be a problem with the stain penetrating into the wood. I'm continuing to apply coats to the original piece just to see how much it will take to achieve the color depth I want. Maybe I should have bought alder or pine (?).
I think I'm too far along with this project to switch to the dye aspect but it does seem to be a better approach if it penetrates the wood better; could I get direction to some tutorial about the dye approach?
I am going to use another sample and try the 150 sanding to better open the wood to accept the stain. How hard should I sand the wood down - very deep or just enough to clear the top smoothness?
Is there no other way to get this stain into the wood?
I appreciate the thoughts put into my problem.


----------



## Masterofnone (Aug 24, 2010)

Something isn't adding up... Solid oak, even sanded to 220, should have zero problem accepting a stain. You didn't use a prestain did you?

Maybe you need to let it sit on a little longer before you wipe it back.

Alder and pine will blotch. They'd need a prestain.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

I don't know what you mean by a 'pre-stain' but, as advised by MinWax, to avoid blotching or other imperfections, I put a coat of their 'Wood Conditioner' on the oak first. And, as advised, applied the stain well within their two hour window. I'm not a finisher but it seemed to me that I was applying stain to a surface already sealed with conditioner; like I was staining a surface already on the wood, not the wood itself. But - what do I know :laughing: - maybe we're wandering into staining theory here.
Are you saying that prevented the stain penetration? 
Coming from a technical background, it didn't seem that the 220 would hurt anything but smooth the surface better. 
I can try both ways but don't have a lot of samples to work with. 
Should I try without the Wood Conditioner? Is the Oak smooth enough to not get splotch/blotchy with just straight stain? 
I know everyone has an opinion but a little hard direction would be appreciated.


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

cabinetman said:


> It should be stipulated that it's your opinion, unless you have certifiable proof. Minwax is a Sherwin-Williams company. Universal tint can be added to most any stain.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I don't report opinions. I report many years first hand experience. I don't even google what I know like some. I have proof that the stain fades but I don't currently have a camera with enough resolution to show it. Just because Sherwin Williams bought the Minwax company doesn't mean the Wood Finish Stain is the same product as their Wood Classic Stain. Did you ever try to add tinting color to Minwax stain? I have. It goes straight to the bottom of the can and won't mix with the stain. I even called Minwax and talked to a technical advisor and was told the woodfinish stain isn't really a oil based stain but a oil based aniline dye.


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

silvercbx said:


> I don't know what you mean by a 'pre-stain' but, as advised by MinWax, to avoid blotching or other imperfections, I put a coat of their 'Wood Conditioner' on the oak first. And, as advised, applied the stain well within their two hour window. I'm not a finisher but it seemed to me that I was applying stain to a surface already sealed with conditioner; like I was staining a surface already on the wood, not the wood itself. But - what do I know :laughing: - maybe we're wandering into staining theory here.
> Are you saying that prevented the stain penetration?
> Coming from a technical background, it didn't seem that the 220 would hurt anything but smooth the surface better.
> I can try both ways but don't have a lot of samples to work with.
> ...


 That is your problem. You don't use a pre-stain conditioner finishing oak as oak doesn't blotch. The prestain conditioner is for woods like maple or pine. Use the stain without the prestain conditioner. A wood conditioner is a sealer. It's like a thin coat of varnish so that is what is preventing the wood from staining.


----------



## Masterofnone (Aug 24, 2010)

Yup, there you go. Oak doesn't blotch. Blotching is caused by wood absorbing the stain at different rates so you get inconsistant color. Pine, maple, cherry, alder... they all blotch, and they need some sort of "pre-stain" in order to equalize the surface. Oak is a wood that absorbs the stain at the same rate, and you get a consistant color throughout. Applying a pre-stain (in the case of MinWax, an oil based wood conditioner) to oak seals it up, and then it can't take any color.

To answer your question about sanding, the finer you sand something, the more is seals up the wood. So sanding something to 220 will appear different than something sanding to 150. This is a trick you can use on endgrain... since endgrain absorbs much more stain then flat grain, you can actually sand the endgrain with 320, 400, and 600. That helps seal it up and it will appear the same as the flat grain. 

That being said, I would always sand to 220. Stopping at 150 will not be as smooth.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

Wow!!  What a learning curve. I'll try a piece without the 'Wood Conditioner' and see how it turns out. When you know some of the basics, it all makes sense.
What Steve said about the additive settling to the bottom is true; I mixed some oil based Rosewood to the MinWas Sedona Red and I have to stir it all the time. Overnight, all the Rosewood is at the bottom in a big lump. It seems to disperse OK and I got the color I wanted on a separate piece of Dfir so it looks like I may be good to go. 
When I do the sample piece w/o the 'pre-stain', I'll give some feedback here so the next 'newbie' can learn something. 
I wish MinWax had said their WC didn't need to be used on Oak. When you don't know, you don't know.
Thanks to all for a lively thread !! Much help - I'll remember the site for the next time. I'll check in first before starting any finishing project. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## HowardAcheson (Nov 25, 2011)

Minwax Wood Finish stain contains a small amount of resin (varnish) that dries to hold the color pigment onto the wood surface. At the same time it also seals the surface of the wood so applying additional coats does not lead to much (or any) change in intensity of color. Applying a different color without sanding off most of the prior color will not be productive. Absorption of the new color will be minimal because the wood pores have been sealed by the prior coat of stain.

If you plan to top coat your item with a clear coat, you must be sure you wipe off the excess stain after letting it sit on the surface for 15-20 minutes. If the excess is not wiped off, the stain will not dry properly nor will a top coat dry completely either.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

Well, I'm back after some experimenting with the oak samples I have.

Howard is absolutely right - multiple coats do very, very little to add/intensify the depth of color. Three coats look pretty much like one coat. So much for that. And it, also, didn't seem to matter whether I sanded it with 150 only or followed the 150 with 220.
As I said when I started this thread, I'm not a 'stainer'.

I also realized I don't know much about the differences between woods. I have gained a distinct feeling that the oak is a VERY dense wood and does not want to accept stain very well; at least, not my MinWax/Redwood stain. Could someone verify that for me?
For future reference, what woods DO accept stain readily?

At this point, I cannot change my wood of ignorant choice (oak) as I learned all this after I purchased the trim (lots of it - pricey).
So, my next question is (drum roll): is there any Brand of stain that will penetrate this oak and give me the deep reddish/rosewood color I want? One of you mentioned Sherwin-Williams stain; I'm not beyond changing my stain (nothing has been applied to the actual trim yet) but I'm not sure I'm capable of formulating my own mixtures yet. I don't mind setting aside my current batch for some future use on pine or such if I can find something that will penetrate this hard oak. The color I have now, while ok is NOT what I would like to have as the final product.

As usual, advice and opinions gratefully accepted. Since this thread is titled: Staining Oak Trim -- it may be inspected a lot by future visitors in the quest for basic information so all thoughts will be valuable.

Many thanks. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

Softer woods accept stain easier than harder woods however they tend to blotch and give you more trouble finishing than the harder woods. Once you get it figured out you will find you can stain a hardwood just about any color you wish with better results. If you are needing to go dark with these hardwoods you should probably experiment with dyes. A dye is more similar to ink and you know with a bottle of ink you could turn the oak board black if you wished. Another thing you might try mixing stains is to get some universal tinting color. Some Sherwin Williams stores sell Cal-Tint tinting color in bottles you can just add to most stains, not Minwax though. Sherwin Williams Wood Classics stain is one you can modify with tinting color. All the stuff is is the colorant like the paint store have in their machines to color paint. Some paint companies will also sell you come color out of their machines if they don't have it in a bottle. You might carry a jar with you. I came out of a Sherwin Williams store last fall with some white tinting color in a Styrofoam cup. The colors you might need most often for wood stains is black, raw umber, red oxide and yellow oxide.

The image is that of red oak.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

The Rosewood I want to use is Zar #124 - Rosewood. The intent is to 'red' it up with the MinWax sedonna. The ratio I worked out (by testing) was 3parts Sedonna to 1part Rosewood. But when it's put on the oak, it is so unlike the test mix; way too light. And I get only one chance/coat.
I'm going to stop by a Sherwin-Williams store this PM and see what they have to say. I'll look into the dye aspects. Any thoughts on where I can start with the dyes? What do I use as a 'base' to add to?


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

Sherwin Williams sells dyes but don't be surprised if they have to order it for you. Most stores cater to house painting and that is more of a professional product. I haven't used any of theirs. I normally use either Ultra Penetrating stain from Mohawk Finishing Products or their aniline dye powders. The powders are the same thing, it just needs to be mixed with alcohol. The dyes are a product that is better off sprayed at low pressure. 

You might also try adding pigment to the Zar 124 you are using. Minwax stain is the only one I'm sure you can't add tint to. The color will get more concentrated with more pigment. Anytime you stain unless it's a dye you should only stain once and wipe off all the excess. Any stain left on the surface can interfere with the adhesion of the finish you put over it. The only way I know of altering Minwax stain is intermixing it with other minwax stain or add aniline dye powders to it.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Rockler sells Trans Tint Dyes. They will mix with just about anything. Click on "more info" for color chart.









 







.


----------



## Al B Thayer (Dec 10, 2011)

silvercbx said:


> Wow!!  What a learning curve. I'll try a piece without the 'Wood Conditioner' and see how it turns out. When you know some of the basics, it all makes sense.
> What Steve said about the additive settling to the bottom is true; I mixed some oil based Rosewood to the MinWas Sedona Red and I have to stir it all the time. Overnight, all the Rosewood is at the bottom in a big lump. It seems to disperse OK and I got the color I wanted on a separate piece of Dfir so it looks like I may be good to go.
> When I do the sample piece w/o the 'pre-stain', I'll give some feedback here so the next 'newbie' can learn something.
> I wish MinWax had said their WC didn't need to be used on Oak. When you don't know, you don't know.
> Thanks to all for a lively thread !! Much help - I'll remember the site for the next time. I'll check in first before starting any finishing project. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


I've used that wood conditioner before. If you stain directly after using the conditioner it will except the stain. It's written on the can. You just can't wait more than a few minutes.
I Personally would never stain oak unless a filler is used to fill those big pores. Oak grain is just too pronounced and varying for me. It's hard to get a fine finish out of it. The filler I use does except some of the stain and it will even the color and allow you to get a really level finish.

Al

Friends don't let friends use stamped metal tools sold at clothing stores.


----------



## Masterjer (Nov 6, 2012)

I have used a fair bit of oak and I really prefer a gel stain on the oak (with no conditioner). It gives it a very nice uniform color. The gel sits more on top of the wood and fills in the big pores so it gives a really nice color to the wood. A bonus is that the satin doesn't run when you apply it on vertical surfaces.


----------



## Al B Thayer (Dec 10, 2011)

Masterjer said:


> I have used a fair bit of oak and I really prefer a gel stain on the oak (with no conditioner). It gives it a very nice uniform color. The gel sits more on top of the wood and fills in the big pores so it gives a really nice color to the wood. A bonus is that the satin doesn't run when you apply it on vertical surfaces.


Yes I like the gel better too. But I try to avoid getting the stain in the big pores and that the reason for the filler. If I have to use stain my choice is dye stains. 

Al

Friends don't let friends use stamped metal tools sold at clothing stores.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

The MinWax Conditioner states (on the can) to: "let it sit for 5-15 minutes" -and- to apply the stain within 2 hours. When I applied the Pre-Stain, I let it sit for about 5 min, wiped it off, and applied the stain. The total time involved was less than 15 minutes. The results were as I have described. The oak accepted only one coat of stain; subsequent coats added nothing to the color. 
There is a Sherwin-Williams outlet here that is not one of their retail stores; they have stains that will not seal the wood. I'm going back Tuesday to check out their colors; they will make any color I want. Seems like that may be an answer. Maybe not. Looked at the dyes at Rockler but don't know if I want to get that involved.


----------



## Tman1 (Jan 14, 2013)

Also not an expert on stains, but I have had my share of staining attempts over the years, some more successful than others. A couple of things I have learned

1 - the stain is never as dark on the wood as it is in the container, especially on oak. If when you said you got the perfect color, you determined this by how it looked in the container, you need to go with much darker stains. 

2 - the way to get the darkest stain is to make sure you apply plenty of stain and leave it on the wood as long as possible. Higher quality stains will have finer pigments, which will absorb better. 

3 - gel stains tend to stain darker than liquid stains and give you better color control. I think they must be a cross between a glaze and a stain, because they work better on top of other finishes. 

I can't speak at all to dies because I have never used them, but my understanding is in line with what has already been said.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

When I said I had the perfect color, I meant I had applied the mix to a couple of boards (pine - and I know it's not the same) and a couple of coats, then a couple of coats of Poly - and it came out just great. The color in the container looked like reddish mud. I was hoping to get something close to it on the oak - still hoping and working to get the color I want.
With one oak sample, I floated stain on it constantly for 5 minutes (by the clock), keeping the wood wet. After 5 minutes, I let it sit for 12 minutes then wiped it off. There was no appreciable difference in color from the other samples. Which is the primary reason I agreed with the thought that the Pre-Stain (Wood Conditioner) effectively sealed the wood before the first stain coat was applied.
I guess I'll have to look into gel stains.
The staining is turning out to be a larger problem than the trim construction but that's just my ignorance and inexperience. I've noticed that there is a wealth of varied experience here on the site.


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

That's really not a good idea to let stain soak for 5 minutes. It's not going to add that much color to it and what you would be doing is deeply imbedding the wood with the solvents which would make it take longer to dry. What you need is mix a darker stain than you use on the pine. It could be the same pigments but more concentrated. From you description it sounds like you need to add red oxide to the stain but you can't do that with Minwax. If you would use another brand stain you can add tinting color to it. I sometimes will even thin red oxide oil primer to use for stain. It has a heavy concentration of red oxide tint in it.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

Yeah, it was just an experiment. When you don't know anything, you experiment as much as you can afford.

What is the difference between a 'wiping' stain and applying the same stain with a brush?

Just for the learning curve, why are some stains specified as 'spray only'. Why can't you brush on a 'spray' stain. What is the theory behind the formulation or the application?


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

With a wiping stain there isn't enough of a binder to bond the pigment to the wood so all of the excess needs to be wiped off. If you just brush it on it leaves a film on the surface that is not bonded well to the wood and when you varnish over it the varnish sticks to that film of stain instead of the wood. Then some weeks later the finish starts pealing off. As a rule of thumb it's a good idea to wipe all oil stains off for this reason. Now the gel stains have a more concentration of the binder so you can brush it on and just leave it. I think the gel stain was invented to finish woodgrain masonite doors to look like wood. It will adhere to most anything. It more or less is paint thinned with varnish and covers the wood. For that reason I don't care for it. It makes wood look plastic. Then the dye stain is like it sounds, its a dye that stains the wood. It is more similar to ink so it doesn't interfere with the adhesion of the varnish you put over it.

The majority of spray stains are lacquer based. The stuff dries so fast you could never brush it. Even the dye stains are better sprayed because the alcohol in it evaproates it makes it more difficult to work by hand. You can't brush it, it needs to be applied with a rag if working by hand.


----------



## Masterjer (Nov 6, 2012)

Here's my current project on red oak. I'm making towers for my man cave to flank the 120" movie screen and to house the front speakers. 

These two towers are nearly 8 feet tall made of oak ply and solid oak trim. I used a general finishes java gel stain (1 coat) and then sprayed 3 costs of lacquer. The color is really deep which us what I was going for. This was my first attempt at spraying, and I am really pleased with how fast it went and how the finish looks so far. I still need to rub out the finish, but I'm very happy with my growing skills.


----------



## Masterjer (Nov 6, 2012)

Here are the pics.


----------



## Masterofnone (Aug 24, 2010)

silvercbx said:


> Yeah, it was just an experiment. When you don't know anything, you experiment as much as you can afford.
> 
> What is the difference between a 'wiping' stain and applying the same stain with a brush?
> 
> Just for the learning curve, why are some stains specified as 'spray only'. Why can't you brush on a 'spray' stain. What is the theory behind the formulation or the application?


This is all turning out to be WAY more complicated than you need... 

If you're looking for a red tint, try one of two things... Go to a paint store with a hunk of oak, and see if they have any "mistints" with a reddish hue. Sherwin Williams sells mistints for $0.50 a quart and $2 for a gallon. Since its "waste" they'll be happy to slap it on and see if there is anything you like. 

Another thing to try is Verathane Cabernet gel stain. Below, I used it as glaze for a cherry music box:









You want red? There it is.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

"general finishes"? Is that a brand? If so, who carries it?
Those towers look really good. Hope my trim turns out as good.


----------



## Masterofnone (Aug 24, 2010)

silvercbx said:


> "general finishes"? Is that a brand? If so, who carries it?
> Those towers look really good. Hope my trim turns out as good.


General Finishes is a brand. You can find it at Rockler or Woodcraft. Never seen the stuff in the box store.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

What color did you select for your towers? Any particular reason you chose the 'gel' stain?


----------



## Masterjer (Nov 6, 2012)

Masterofnone is right on. I picked up the General Finishes brand gel stain at Woodcraft. The color is Java. I went with gel after researching staining oak. I also tried transit dye in water, but I could never really get a color I liked. I also tried dyeing the wood then applying a stain. After trying wood conditioners and regular stain, I read a forum about how gel stains work on porous woods like oak and thought I'd give it a try. It was exactly what I was going for. 

It looks even better after applying lacquer. I also applied finishing wax with a 0000 steel wool pad and that makes it extremely smooth and nice to touch.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

Well, I'm back; some wiser but not much. I found a solvent stain at Sherwin-Williams that seemed to penetrate fine and the color was good. They provided the sealer and lacquer in aerosol cans for me to finish the job. So I'm good to go.
The problem is that I've uncovered so many different ways to apply the lacquer that I don't know how to apply the lacquer. There seems to be two schools of thought about that and I don't know which is the one to use. And I don't understand the difference between the two.
The first states to apply a thin coat in even passes and then let it dry for 48 hours BEFORE applying subsequent coats and let them also dry for 48 hours between coats. It also said to buff between each coat with 0000 steel wool. It wasn't stated how many coats were needed but got the impression that 6-8 were appropriate. Seemed that it would take forever to do the lacquer that way (48 hours is 2 days for each coat).
The second says to spray a 'wet' coat, wait three minutes, spray a second 'wet' coat, wait three minutes, then spray a third 'wet' coat. Then wait at least 2 hours, buff with 0000 steel wool until the surface is smooth. If the lacquer balls up, wait until the next day for a better cure/dry. Repeat the 3-coat process two more times for a total of nine coats applied.
I don't have any feel for the validity of either process; the first seems very long and the second seems about right for getting the job done.
But I'm too far invested in this job to do it quick if that's not the right way. I don't care how long it will take if that's the best way to go.
Opinions (expert, of course)?


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

There should be instructions on the can which would give a better idea of the drying time between coats. I know they put retarder thinners in aerosol lacquers which extend the drying time but without the product instructions I couldn't tell you for sure the drying time. Normally even with a good amount of retarder it doesn't take more than a couple of hours drying time before you can sand it and recoat it. I've never heard of any lacquer taking 48 hours to dry. I wouldn't recommend using any kind of steel wool or scotchbrite pad between coats. Use sandpaper. I normally use 220 grit stearated sandpaper for between the coats sanding with lacquer. Sherwin Williams also sells Glit sanding pads which are convenient having a foam backing. Lacquer doesn't sand real good anyway and if you have the surface smooth to your liking there is no reason to sand it at all. I would start with a sanding sealer or if you are using a cab-acrylic lacquer use vinyl sealer. A sealer is softer and much easier to sand and level the surface before topcoating with lacquer.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

So, is the 3-coat + 3-coat + 3-coat method the way to go? I like the thought of not sanding if the surface is smooth.


----------



## silvercbx (Apr 15, 2013)

Well, time for an update:
Used the Sherwin-Williiams wiping stain (Cherry) and lacquered it with 12 coats of spray (also SW). I used the method recommended by someone - 1 wet coat - wait 3 minutes - 2nd set coat - wait 3 minutes - 3rd wet coat -- Next day (at least 12+ hours dry [more like 20]) and repeated 4 times for a total of 12 coats. To my inexperienced eye, looks very good. As Steve said, if it didn't need smoothing, I didn't. 

I would like to ask one further question: I have a can of MinWax 'Antique Oil Finish' and was wondering if it would work being applied over the lacquer? Or would a good paste wax be better; I'd like a nice shine finish; what would be best?

Thanks for all the assistance; much appreciated.


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

silvercbx said:


> Well, time for an update:
> Used the Sherwin-Williiams wiping stain (Cherry) and lacquered it with 12 coats of spray (also SW). I used the method recommended by someone - 1 wet coat - wait 3 minutes - 2nd set coat - wait 3 minutes - 3rd wet coat -- Next day (at least 12+ hours dry [more like 20]) and repeated 4 times for a total of 12 coats. To my inexperienced eye, looks very good. As Steve said, if it didn't need smoothing, I didn't.
> 
> I would like to ask one further question: I have a can of MinWax 'Antique Oil Finish' and was wondering if it would work being applied over the lacquer? Or would a good paste wax be better; I'd like a nice shine finish; what would be best?
> ...


 Three minutes drying time isn't enough for lacquer. The method you used was more like a wet on wet catalyzed urethane. With that type finish it cures by chemical reactions like epoxy so it will harden underneath. Lacquer drys by the solvents evaporating and putting that much lacquer on that fast you have a lot of solvents under the surface still. It will be alright however it may take a month or more before it's cured. Just handle it easily untill it does get hard. I don't think I would have used 12 coats. Lacquer is a pretty hard finish and sometimes when you put it on thick it will crack when the wood expands and contracts. 

You shouldn't use the Minwax Antique Oil Finish over lacquer. It's more similar to Watco oil finish where it is a oil/varnish mix. 

I would not put any wax on your finish for a couple of months until it gets rock hard. At that time I would polish it out like you would the finish on a car. Wet sand it with 2000 grit paper and buff it with rubbing compound. I use a 7" auto polisher with a lambswood bonnet.


----------

