# Rubbed oil confusion?



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Thanks for all the info that has been posted on this subject. Always appreciated.

Did you know if you Google "home brew rubbed oil finish" you get 1,250,000 results? I have not read them all yet.

I have a practice project going with red oak plywood. I have decided to play with a home brew rubbed oil finish and start with thirds Blo, poly and thinner and experiment from there on the back of the drawer fronts. 

Now I read somewhere to use Gloss poly, I have Minwax clear satin oil based, is it really that critical to use gloss? This will be a tool cabinet in the garage.

What is the shelf life of the home brew? JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

jjrbus said:


> Thanks for all the info that has been posted on this subject. Always appreciated.
> 
> Did you know if you Google "home brew rubbed oil finish" you get 1,250,000 results? I have not read them all yet.
> 
> ...


Personally i leave the BLO out of the mix and just use the poly and thinner. 2 parts poly to 6 parts MS. pad it on as if shellac. Not a lover of BLO here.:thumbdown:


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

I have been experimenting with the exact same thing and man, you are not kidding there is a LOT of information out there on this topic...

In addition to the wonderful advice, help an suggestions I have received on this form, I found this article to be particularly helpful...you may have already seen it...

http://www.thewoodshop.20m.com/finishing.htm


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Thanks for the link! There are almost as many ways to do it as there are finishers! Rub it in with steel wool, don't use steel wool, rub it in with sand paper. The only commonality I could find is "rub it in", there may or may not be some advantage to what you rub it in with. I am going to use lint free rags.

Then there is the mixture, seems like you have to experiment and use what you like best for application and the brew.

One thing that made sense, I believe Cabinetman posted. After the first coat do not try to wipe off excess, makes sense. The first coat seals after that you are trying to build up a finish.

Here is a link I found very interesting, there may be a little misdirection in the finish industry!

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/techniques/finishing/oil-finishes-their-history-and-use

I have read much and have found no mention of the shelf life of home brew?
JIm


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Reading the link you sent, I realized I had read it before. The author is saying to use a product such as Danish oil, which the second link says is wiping varnish and then, finishing them with home brew wiping varnish?

*Finish #2: Danish Oil with Wipe On Varnish Top Coat*



I'm not confused JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Just what advantage do you think your getting by using a slow oxidizing oil with a fast drying plastic or natural resin coating? Why does anyone even consider doing this? Because "oil" by itself soaks in deeper than a synthetic coating does? linseed oil is not a good protective finish! Better than nothing? Hmmm.... yes, but even then, highly debatable! 

If you feel for some ungodly reason a need or desire to use oil, at least use something that gives better protection than blo. There is no need what so ever to use it as a mixture with varnish or polyurethane. If it's because of it's high refractive index that brings out a perceived depth to the finish that a "as packaged" varnish might not do as well, then thin the varnish/poly 90% with MS and wipe it or brush it on as the first coat, - varnish already has various amounts of oil in it to begin with!! Need more open time? Use pure gum turpentine.


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Thanks for the response.

I don't know would be my short ans.

Over the years I have seen really nice finishes. Unfortunately I never asked how did you do that. I was content to put poly on and call it done. I have never been 100% happy with the finish. 

Now I have the luxury of time and would like to experiment a bit. The internet is wonderful in that I can draw on the experience of many thousands of experience people, some are true craftsman, artisans in their crafts. 

So now I have thousands of people saying use BLO and a couple saying it is not needed? I have some saying use only gloss poly, others do not specify? That is not meant to be judgmental or critical, it appears the only way to find out what I will like is to try both ways. Maybe one way is right, maybe both ways are right?

Thanks for the input, always appreciated:thumbsup: JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

jjrbus said:


> Thanks for the response.
> 
> I don't know would be my short ans.
> 
> ...


Let me try to clear up some confusion you mention, first, some are saying to use gloss rather than satin or flat for the simple reason that a gloss does not have any light scattering material that makes the surfaces look duller or less clear or hinder the appearance of depth and clarity. A first class coating build on a surface is always done by applying clear material, normally this means gloss, and if a flatter sheen is desired by the end user, then a final coat of satin/dull/ or flat is applied. This cuts down on the final clarity substantially, but is better than building with multiple coats of flatted materials, making the film even more cloudy/milky.

Secondly, blo is not a protective coating nor used as a decorative coating in any main way, in the true sense of the meaning. So if you feel that your projects have no need of even reasonably small or modest protection from EMC [equilibrium moisture content], surface damage from spills or heat, etc., then by all means expieriment away. Enjoy yourself, have fun, be my guest, lol. 

But if when you tire of your Alchemy, and realize you want something with much better protecive qualties, then try using resin finishes only and your "upkeep" time will lessen conciderably. :yes:


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Let me try to clear up some confusion you mention, first, some are saying to use gloss rather than satin or flat for the simple reason that a gloss does not have any light scattering material that makes the surfaces look duller or less clear or hinder the appearance of depth and clarity. A first class coating build on a surface is always done by applying clear material, normally this means gloss, and if a flatter sheen is desired by the end user, then a final coat of satin/dull/ or flat is applied. This cuts down on the final clarity substantially, but is better than building with multiple coats of flatted materials, making the film even more cloudy/milky.
> 
> Secondly, blo is not a protective coating nor used as a decorative coating in any main way, in the true sense of the meaning. So if you feel that your projects have no need of even reasonably small or modest protection from EMC [equilibrium moisture content], surface damage from spills or heat, etc., then by all means expieriment away. Enjoy yourself, have fun, be my guest, lol.
> 
> But if when you tire of your Alchemy, and realize you want something with much better protecive qualties, then try using resin finishes only and your "upkeep" time will lessen conciderably. :yes:


Hi chemmy,

I am kind of in the same boat as the OP. I don't want to speak for him in any way but I don't think we are saying we must do it one way or even that there must be one right way. But the reality is that there is a ton of information out there some of which seems entirely condtradictory. I know for myself that I am really just trying to learn this stuff.

From my experimentation (which admittedly is extremely limited) I have found that any more than two applications of wiping on home brew (equal parts BLO, Poly and MS) and removing all excess after 15 minutes, yeilds very little in terms of improved results. Applyng and wiping off more than two is useless IMO. You end up simply wiping off the oil and poly that was just applied. What I did experiment with on the good advice of a forum member was to thin the home brew even further and wipe on a very thin additional coat after the first two dried completely. This additional thin coat was not wiped off at all. It provided an excellent build but took almost three days to become tack free. My guess is it will need even longer to fully cure. On another peice I simply applied a full strength poly over the first two wiped on coats and got very good results as well. 

I was of the opinion (and very possibly incorrectly so) that this home brew mixture would serve to enhance the natural grain/chracter of the wood (which it did) and provide what some refer to as an "in-the-wood finish". In terms of durability I would very much agree with you that this home brew serves very little purpose. It spots very very quickly and easily when drops of water are sprinkled on it and I can see where it would need a lot of maintaining.

The bottom line for me at least is that I like a natural finish to the projects I do. Meaning I don't really use stains or tints very much at all. Not saying they are not wonderful, just saying I prefer the natural look. In your opinion, what is the best way to enhance the natural character/grain of the wood so it has a depth and rich look or "pops" as they say? It appears you may favor the 90% thinned poly technique. Is that correct? I will certainly experiment with that. I assume that mixture is rubbed in to maximize penetration into the pores of the wood?


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Tom5151 said:


> The bottom line for me at least is that I like a natural finish to the projects I do. Meaning I don't really use stains or tints very much at all. Not saying they are not wonderful, just saying I prefer the natural look. In your opinion, what is the best way to enhance the natural character/grain of the wood so it has a depth and rich look or "pops" as they say? It appears you may favor the 90% thinned poly technique. Is that correct? I will certainly experiment with that. I assume that mixture is rubbed in to maximize penetration into the pores of the wood?


+1. :yes: Finding out for yourself will give you a good understanding of what does what. The "home brew" does have some advantages. It represents what manufacturers sell as a "stand alone finish". Their thinking is to simplify a finish and its application. It could be less expensive in the long run.

For your "home brew", you have the option of varying the ratios of the mix to your needs. As for enhancing the wood, it can simply be done with a thinned version of BLO, and then applying a wiping version of an oil base varnish or polyurethane. Or, other topcoats, such as lacquer or waterbased polyurethane.

The oil in the mix will provide a better flow, extend the dry time, but it will affect the hardness compared to a mix without it. It doesn't pay to rush a finish. When applications seem dry, and then recoated, that will affect the previous application from curing/drying completely. It doesn't pay to get anxious to continue on when a finish just feels dry to the touch.










 







.


----------



## HowardAcheson (Nov 25, 2011)

>>>> Now I read somewhere to use Gloss poly, I have Minwax clear satin oil based, is it really that critical to use gloss? This will be a tool cabinet in the garage.

The sheen of the varnish makes no difference when mixing up an oil/varnish mixture. An oil/varnish mixture is an in-the-wood finish. In other words, little or no finish is left on the surface particularly after you wipe off the excess. It's intended to leave the look and feel of the wood. You would see no difference in sheen if you used gloss or satin varnish.

A note though, oil and oil/varnish mixtures should not be used on the interior of drawers or carcases if there will be cloth or clothing items stored in the space. Oil based finishes off-gas almost forever and the odor will permeate and cloth items left inside.


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Hi Tom, i know you and others are probably looking for the simplest methods for producing what you talk of. I can't fault you for that. and personally i think it's fun to experiment with all things. Having said that, there comes a time when the fun ends and you have to be serious about what matters most in a coating, mainly it's protective or decorative qualities. Both, hopefully, having very similar qualities. 

Unfortunately, there are few clear coatings of any type that really provide first class protection against EMC swings within the wood itself, and of coatings that do provide the best protection are not ones we would use for decorative purposes [ decorative in the sense of showing all the depth and beauty of the natural colorings of the wood species.] They either contain pigments or aluminum flakes, etc., to help slow down the absorption or loss of moisture in the wood. 

It's also not like i have not used BLO or tung or dehydrated Castor oil or oiticica and the rest. It has been my finding that all of them just don't give enough protection to make them a good choice for furniture, cabinets, or other wood products. 

Personally, i see them, when used as a finish, an adulterant when incorporated with know resin finishes that do provide adequate emc protection as well as chemical/water/and other resistance. As your finding out, why would anyone want to use something that gives less protection than one would get by using the resin alone?

There are two ways to gain the best refractive qualities of a coating of any kind. One is to match up the refractive index of the coating to the wood. Those that give the best results are round 1.5 for the coating as to the 1.5+ for the air refractive index for most woods. Many coatings fill this bill including urethane/polyurethane/ nitro lacquer/ acrylics/ epoxies/ shellac/ mastic/sandarac/ alkyds/ and many more. Oils of course fall into this category also and terpenoids to. most of your solvents fit this bill also, it is why we use them, all of them to begin with. 

This is not new science or chemistry, it has been know for over a century science wise and much longer just by use and observation of those who first used them. You are correct in your thinking as to my preferences, but my preferences are founded on chemistry as well as my own visual ascertainment as to what gives me the best results. So yes, in my findings, not my opinions or any one else's, the thinner the first coat of any resin finish is applied to the wood substrate, the more optical affect it will have as to showing all the depth and character the wood offers. 

To make this even more so, you can use a slower evaporating solvent to carry the resin even deeper into the wood than would normally be accomplished. Keep in mind though, once you have totally penetrated the "visible" wood surface, further penetration is of no real value as to what can be readily visibly seen. Any underlying beauty is hid from our sight. the only added benefit then is the carrying of the resin deeper bringing better adhesion characteristics at most. 

You can also thin it even more that 9 to 1, for example if I'm finishing new Brazilian rosewood or teak, i use a formula of 9.5 parts propanol to .5 part of shellac, the same hold true for acrylic, nitro, and all others. the thinner the better, the slower initial drying the better. This is the real key to penetration, DOI, and adhesion. 

On the application of the coating, in this case poly, i persoanlly would brush the thin mixture on back and forth for a few minutes, then let it set until all or most had soaked in, removing any puddles that may have formed, but hopefully thats not the case. On other surfaces when usung say nitro or acrylic, i spray it on using slow thinner nad 5-10 percent retarder to get maximum penetration, let dry, sand lightly, and then apply more less thinned coats over that base. 

I hope this is helpful Tom, 

Chemmy


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

HowardAcheson said:


> >>>> Now I read somewhere to use Gloss poly, I have Minwax clear satin oil based, is it really that critical to use gloss? This will be a tool cabinet in the garage.
> 
> The sheen of the varnish makes no difference when mixing up an oil/varnish mixture. An oil/varnish mixture is an in-the-wood finish. In other words, little or no finish is left on the surface particularly after you wipe off the excess. It's intended to leave the look and feel of the wood. You would see no difference in sheen if you used gloss or satin varnish.
> 
> A note though, oil and oil/varnish mixtures should not be used on the interior of drawers or carcases if there will be cloth or clothing items stored in the space. Oil based finishes off-gas almost forever and the odor will permeate and cloth items left inside.


i'll agree with you Howard if your talking just a few or even several coats that have been wiped of extremely well. on the other hand when i was doing both guitars and gunstocks, if one is to build a few dozen coats of like material, mine was 50% tung to 40% thinner, to 10% resin, that you'll find that a gloss can and does build, if by chance you use satin or flat, the gloss will be much less.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> if one is to build a few dozen coats of like material, mine was 50% tung to 40% thinner, to 10% resin, that you'll find that a gloss can and does build, if by chance you use satin or flat, the gloss will be much less.


 
Gentlemen let me first say thank you for your detailed responses. I may seem like I am little slow...lol:wallbash:....but honestly this is helping me quite a bit

Chemmy in the excerpt I have quoted here from you, you seem to be saying that the your tung oil/thinner/resin mixture actually did produce a build after a few dozen coats. I likely will not being trying that experiment but I am curious if this would also hold true for the "equal parts" ratios I am using in my BLO/Poly/MS brew or if the build you got has to do with the specific materials and ratios you used........can I assume you fully wiped off any excess material after each of your applications?.....


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Gentlemen let me first say thank you for your detailed responses. I may seem like I am little slow...lol:wallbash:....but honestly this is helping me quite a bit
> 
> Chemmy in the excerpt I have quoted here from you, you seem to be saying that the your tung oil/thinner/resin mixture actually did produce a build after a few dozen coats. I likely will not being trying that experiment but I am curious if this would also hold true for the "equal parts" ratios I am using in my BLO/Poly/MS brew or if the build you got has to do with the specific materials and ratios you used........can I assume you fully wiped off any excess material after each of your applications?.....


Well you have me there Tom, i honestly gave up using BLO after several attempts and not liking the results. polymerized tung is a different animal in the sense of build and other attributes. for sure the more coats you put on and the longer they dry in between the more build you will get. so an off the top of my head answer is yes, unless some one has applied that may coats of BLO/resin mix states differently. But just considering that not every microscopic bit of the mix is really wiped off even with good power behind the wiping, it for sure would have more build than just a few or several coats. 

I'm with c'man on the fact that most people are not patient enough to allow full surface drying of oil, [through dry is a different story], before applying additional coats. Even when using resin coatings, people are usually in to much of a hurry to produce the finished product to allow for the bulk of the solvents/thinners/diluent/ to evaporate out of the coating.

Even though the manufacturers may have adequate drying times for re-coating purposes, it's not detailed enough for the enthusiast. what is really being unsaid is, that those drying times are a normally 75 degrees and 50% humidity. If your applying and drying at say 60 degrees and 70% humidity, the drying will be longer. those two variations always sway drying times fro m a little to a lot.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Well you have me there Tom, i honestly gave up using BLO after several attempts and not liking the results. polymerized tung is a different animal in the sense of build and other attributes. for sure the more coats you put on and the longer they dry in between the more build you will get. so an off the top of my head answer is yes, unless some one has applied that may coats of BLO/resin mix states differently. But just considering that not every microscopic bit of the mix is really wiped off even with good power behind the wiping, it for sure would have more build than just a few or several coats.
> 
> I'm with c'man on the fact that most people are not patient enough to allow full surface drying of oil, [through dry is a different story], before applying additional coats. Even when using resin coatings, people are usually in to much of a hurry to produce the finished product to allow for the bulk of the solvents/thinners/diluent/ to evaporate out of the coating.
> 
> Even though the manufacturers may have adequate drying times for re-coating purposes, it's not detailed enough for the enthusiast. what is really being unsaid is, that those drying times are a normally 75 degrees and 50% humidity. If your applying and drying at say 60 degrees and 70% humidity, the drying will be longer. those two variations always sway drying times fro m a little to a lot.


I didn't get many virtues when I was hatched...lol...but I did get patience...so I am fine waiting the extra time...i am in no hurry....lol.....that seems to be a key ingedient


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> If it's because of it's high refractive index that brings out a perceived depth to the finish that a "as packaged" varnish might not do as well, then thin the varnish/poly 90% with MS and wipe it or brush it on as the first coat, - varnish already has various amounts of oil in it to begin with!! Need more open time? Use pure gum turpentine.


Chemmy one more clarifying question for you on this.....

So I believe you are saying that as it relates to enhancing the inherent character of the wood and maximizing the perceived depth of the finish, the first application is critical. Given that, I am going to experiment on some scrap using your method with gloss poly thinned 95% with MS. I appreciate you suggesting this. I am opening to any and all experimentation.

I will also give the pure gum turpentine a try to compare results. Is pure gum turpentine the same as the turpentine you can buy at the big boxes? In addtition to this are there other readily available thinning agents that would be better at allowing this first application to obtain maximum pentration? 

Also, how long do you let this first application sit on the wood before wiping off? Or do you not wipe it off at all?

Thanks for your help


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

jjrbus said:


> I have read much and have found no mention of the shelf life of home brew?
> JIm


Hi Jim,

Yeah, I have not read anything about this either. I am guessing (and this is ONLY a guess) that the home brews should have the same shelf life as the individual ingredients would by themselves as long as it is kept sealed and stored properly. I am sure someone will correct me if that is not the case. I keep my brews in metal one quart containers that I buy at the big boxes and I store them in the house so they stay warm. Not sure if that is necessary but it's what i do anyway.

:thumbsup:


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Chemmy one more clarifying question for you on this.....
> 
> So I believe you are saying that as it relates to enhancing the inherent character of the wood and maximizing the perceived depth of the finish, the first application is critical. Given that, I am going to experiment on some scrap using your method with gloss poly thinned 95% with MS. I appreciate you suggesting this. I am opening to any and all experimentation.
> 
> ...


Well, a seeker of info after my own heart - lol. Yes, please do some testing Tom, i think you will be pleasantly surprised. 

As to pure gum turpentine, it used to be available at the big box stores, but i have not looked for a long time, years. If it doesn't say "Pure gum turpentine" then it is not. If by chance it's not there I'm sure you can google and purchase online ok? I would say kerosene if not for the fact of other stuff in it which makes using it for this purpose unwise. Plus it just takes to darn long to dry!!!

There are others but not readily available so you will have to let me know just how important the added open time is to you once you have used the PGT and find it not to your liking ok? Personally, i've never needed anything beyond the PGT :yes:

Actually as to wiping, it depends on the project. but for starters you can apply by brush and brush out for a several minutes or more, [depending on temps and weather...lol] and then take up the excess with dry rags leaving just a thin film behind. I go across grain and with the grain brushing, at least several times or more. At this point the wood is well saturated and you should be able to see the depth of beauty of the wood before wiping ok? When dry, it wont look so pronounced as when wet, but will with additional coats of more full bodied resin. after the initial coat and sanding with fine paper [320], you can apply full strength or whatever dilution you choose, as for me it's right out of the can for high build. Or weather dependant, maybe 10 t0 15%

PS: just to make sure, mix and keep the heavily thinned poly seperate and use only as the first coat, i know you probably do, but just incase ok?


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Well, a seeker of info after my own heart - lol. Yes, please do some testing Tom, i think you will be pleasantly surprised.
> 
> As to pure gum turpentine, it used to be available at the big box stores, but i have not looked for a long time, years. If it doesn't say "Pure gum turpentine" then it is not. If by chance it's not there I'm sure you can google and purchase online ok? I would say kerosene if not for the fact of other stuff in it which makes using it for this purpose unwise. Plus it just takes to darn long to dry!!!
> 
> ...


I can't tell you all how helpful this information is...this has cleared up a good deal of the confusion in my pea brain......

chemmy is this an example of the pure gum material? looks like the carry it at my local HD

http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc...P_PARENT_ID&storeId=10051&Ntpr=1&ddkey=Search


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> I can't tell you all how helpful this information is...this has cleared up a good deal of the confusion in my pea brain......
> 
> chemmy is this an example of the pure gum material? looks like the carry it at my local HD
> 
> http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc...P_PARENT_ID&storeId=10051&Ntpr=1&ddkey=Search


YEP!!! that's the stuff!!:yes::thumbsup: On another note: use only for the thinned application then swith back to mineral spirits for the heavy applications, you no longer need open time after the first coat ok?


----------



## HowardAcheson (Nov 25, 2011)

>>>> i'll agree with you Howard if your talking just a few or even several coats that have been wiped of extremely well.

Any of the application instructions I have seen call for the mixture to be applied, let set 15-20 minutes and then the excess wiped off. Typically the same process is done the next day. Oil/varnish is not a good candidate for building a film finish. The high quantity of oil makes it a very soft, flexible treatment. Multiple coats can lead to an oily, soft gunk that is quite unattractive. If one wants a built up or on-the-surface film, use a finish intended for that result. Oil/varnish finishes are not the choice for film building.

For years I taught beginning woodworkers how to easily finish their projects. Keeping it simple, I only taught two easy and fool proof finishes. One was oil/varnish mixture and the second was a thinned wiping varnish. These two finish types cover maybe 90% of any finish needs.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> YEP!!! that's the stuff!!:yes::thumbsup: On another note: use only for the thinned application then swith back to mineral spirits for the heavy applications, you no longer need open time after the first coat ok?


 
Got it....but that does bring up another point...lol.....

Once the first thinned application is applied, is it even necessary to add mineral spirits? What advantage would there be to apply subsequent coats thinned with MS versus just straight poly for example?


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

HowardAcheson;289456Oil/varnish is not a good candidate for building a film finish. The high quantity of oil makes it a very soft said:


> Interesting Howard...you described exactly what happened to me on one of my test peices. For the first 2 applications I appied my BLO/Poly/MS mixture, let it sit for 15 minutes and then wiped off excesss. The last coat I thinned a bit further. I applied it very thinly and left it on to dry. It finally dried but it is a much softer finish.....its dry but almost feels tacky if that makes sense.....feels a bit rubbery but it's completely dry. It did give me a nice build though. Not sure it would be my favorite option however.


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

HowardAcheson said:


> >>>> i'll agree with you Howard if your talking just a few or even several coats that have been wiped of extremely well.
> 
> Any of the application instructions I have seen call for the mixture to be applied, let set 15-20 minutes and then the excess wiped off. Typically the same process is done the next day. Oil/varnish is not a good candidate for building a film finish. The high quantity of oil makes it a very soft, flexible treatment. Multiple coats can lead to an oily, soft gunk that is quite unattractive. If one wants a built up or on-the-surface film, use a finish intended for that result. Oil/varnish finishes are not the choice for film building.
> 
> For years I taught beginning woodworkers how to easily finish their projects. Keeping it simple, I only taught two easy and fool proof finishes. One was oil/varnish mixture and the second was a thinned wiping varnish. These two finish types cover maybe 90% of any finish needs.


and that is exactly why i personally no loger use them lol.


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Got it....but that does bring up another point...lol.....
> 
> Once the first thinned application is applied, is it even necessary to add mineral spirits? What advantage would there be to apply subsequent coats thinned with MS versus just straight poly for example?


Hopefully no Tom, only if the good old temp and humidity fluctuates enough to warrant it. But that is usually not the case. I'm in TN. and hardly ever thin it. unless i'm using a gun that has a small tip.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Hopefully no Tom, only if the good old temp and humidity fluctuates enough to warrant it. But that is usually not the case. I'm in TN. and hardly ever thin it. unless i'm using a gun that has a small tip.


Last question for the night. ....lol

Would there be any adverse effects of applying brushing lacquer over the first coat of poly-thinned-with-turpentine? I know that it is not advisable to put it on top of my home brew (BLO/Poly/MS) but since there is no BLO used in the poly/turpentine approach, I was wondering if brushing lacquer would be appropriate.

Thanks again for ALL of your help and instruction...:thumbsup:


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Last question for the night. ....lol
> 
> Would there be any adverse effects of applying brushing lacquer over the first coat of poly-thinned-with-turpentine? I know that it is not advisable to put it on top of my home brew (BLO/Poly/MS) but since there is no BLO used in the poly/turpentine approach, I was wondering if brushing lacquer would be appropriate.
> 
> Thanks again for ALL of your help and instruction...:thumbsup:


what you will find Tom, is that the solvents in the lacquer will attack the poly, possibly crinkling the poly or lifting it as the action of a stripper would. On the otherhand, it would not affect the BLO, by itself once dry. 

What you can do if you want is to apply a coat of de-waxed shellac, like sealcoat, over the poly as a barrier coat or isolation coat and then use brushing lacquer once the shellac has dried sufficiently and is sanded for mechanical adhesion purposes. but you would really be better off just staying with the same resin coating if at all possible, and that is what i would highly reccomend.:yes:

On a further note, please remeber to give the first coat plenty of time to dry ok? you say you have patience, so please employ it on this test ok? lol, wait at least 24 hrs and if possible 48. Then get back with the results once you have a couple of full coats over the first ok? If this does not suit you as to looks and depth etc., then i have no further suggestions and will turn you over to C'man lol


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> what you will find Tom, is that the solvents in the lacquer will attack the poly, possibly crinkling the poly or lifting it as the action of a stripper would. On the otherhand, it would not affect the BLO, by itself once dry.
> 
> What you can do if you want is to apply a coat of de-waxed shellac, like sealcoat, over the poly as a barrier coat or isolation coat and then use brushing lacquer once the shellac has dried sufficiently and is sanded for mechanical adhesion purposes. but you would really be better off just staying with the same resin coating if at all possible, and that is what i would highly reccomend.:yes:
> 
> On a further note, please remeber to give the first coat plenty of time to dry ok? you say you have patience, so please employ it on this test ok? lol, wait at least 24 hrs and if possible 48. Then get back with the results once you have a couple of full coats over the first ok? If this does not suit you as to looks and depth etc., then i have no further suggestions and will turn you over to C'man lol


 
LOL...I think between you and c-man I am getting a masters level education here. I am very grateful to both of you and to everyone esle that has provided insight into this topic.

I plan to prep some wood today for the purpose of testing the poly/turp mixture.......i will keep you posted on the results....

I may try testing the shellac-as-a-barrier method but will certainly keep in mind that this is not necessarily the optimal approach....


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Tom5151 said:


> I may try testing the shellac-as-a-barrier method but will certainly keep in mind that this is not necessarily the optimal approach....


If you want to try the shellac, you can get* this* at the home centers. I try not to use shellac, as it isn't as durable of a coating as others. IMO, a bit soft as a sealer for substrates/wood/plywoods.










 







.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

cabinetman said:


> If you want to try the shellac, you can get* this* at the home centers. I try not to use shellac, as it isn't as durable of a coating as others. IMO, a bit soft as a sealer for substrates/wood/plywoods.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you sir....I actually have that material. I didn't realize that it was also known as shellac. I'll try it as the barrier.

Not sure if you remember me talking about one of my experiments a week or so ago where I applied sanding sealer to the bare wood and then wiped on my home brew (BLO/Poly/MS) and got a significantly heavier and faster build. This was actually the same stuff I used as the sealer. I know that likely prevented my home brew from getting deeply into the wood but it was just interesting to me that it's the same stuff. I knew it by another name...

Thanks again :thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

OK Tom, have fun, keep in mind though, what you will see when applying the thinned PGT and poly mix is for all intents and purposes, exactly what your finished product will look like when all the heavy coats are applied ok?

I'm saying this because what you will see visually with the first coat, when wet, is where you can determine if the look is all your hoping for it to be ok? This is a case if where your not thrilled with the results there is really no need to waste anymore material or time because more coats will not give you anymore substantial changes except for depth of appearance, not figure enhancement. In other words ---- first coat is a WYSIWYG, [what you see is what you get, lol]:yes:


----------



## HowardAcheson (Nov 25, 2011)

>>>> The last coat I thinned a bit further. I applied it very thinly and left it on to dry. It finally dried but it is a much softer finish.....its dry but almost feels tacky if that makes sense.....feels a bit rubbery but it's completely dry. It did give me a nice build though. Not sure it would be my favorite option however.

An oil/varnish mixture should never be applied and not wiped off. You will always get a gummy result and the finish will be easily damaged. Again, an oil/varnish mixture finish is intended for those situtations where you want an in-the-wood finish (similar to an oil finish). It is particularly nice on a darker woods like cherry and walnut. It is more durable and water resistant than a straight oil finish but not as durable as a film finish. For things that do not much abuse, it is an attractive finish.


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Thanks for all the input. I'm still experimenting.

The thinned first coat BLO, poly, MS, brings out the grain in a way I like (red oak plywood). It is different than a lightly thinned first coat poly. But still tinkering.

I like the smell of the BLO reminds me of my Dad, he used it in the 50"s. 

Will be doing some more next week, will do a full report:laughing: Thanks again. JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

jjrbus said:


> Thanks for all the input. I'm still experimenting.
> 
> The thinned first coat BLO, poly, MS, brings out the grain in a way I like (red oak plywood). It is different than a lightly thinned first coat poly. But still tinkering.
> 
> ...


The oil gives a better refractive index [slightly] so that is the difference, you or Tom are welcome to use a first coat of oil if you feel better about it and then the thinned poly over it once dry.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> OK Tom, have fun, keep in mind though, what you will see when applying the thinned PGT and poly mix is for all intents and purposes, exactly what your finished product will look like when all the heavy coats are applied ok?
> 
> I'm saying this because what you will see visually with the first coat, when wet, is where you can determine if the look is all your hoping for it to be ok? This is a case if where your not thrilled with the results there is really no need to waste anymore material or time because more coats will not give you anymore substantial changes except for depth of appearance, not figure enhancement. In other words ---- first coat is a WYSIWYG, [what you see is what you get, lol]:yes:


Thank you for the heads up chemmy. I didn't get a chance to experiment yesterday as I had hoped but tonight is the night. So I will keep you posted as to the results. I have some Minwax fast drying oil-based gloss poly on hand so I am going to thin that at 90% with the PGT and wipe on, let dry for 20 minutes or so and wipe off excess. 

I know you said you typically brush on this initial application. I am going to experiment on 3 peices of the same stock. One were I brush on, one where I wipe/rub in with a rag and then one where I rub in with 0000 steel wool just to see what, if any difference the application technique will make.....:thumbsup:

Actually these test peices will all be #2 pine. I am doing some tests to help me determine the finish to use for a pine slab coffee table, pine slab end tables and two 4 drawer dressers I am making for a cabin that we have in northern wisconsin. Going for a rustic, natural pine look but want the finish to be durable and lasting. 

C-man had mentioned experimenting with tints. I am assuming they could be added to the initial PGT and Poly application? Are tints readily available at the big boxes or would i need to look and more specialized stores for that?


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Thank you for the heads up chemmy. I didn't get a chance to experiment yesterday as I had hoped but tonight is the night. So I will keep you posted as to the results. I have some Minwax fast drying oil-based gloss poly on hand so I am going to thin that at 90% with the PGT and wipe on, let dry for 20 minutes or so and wipe off excess.
> 
> I know you said you typically brush on this initial application. I am going to experiment on 3 peices of the same stock. One were I brush on, one where I wipe/rub in with a rag and then one where I rub in with 0000 steel wool just to see what, if any difference the application technique will make.....:thumbsup:
> 
> ...


OK sounds good Tom, If by chance the pine has any knots, that are sticky from sap residue, please do yourself a favor and wipe them down with scotchbrite and denatured alcohol just to insure your coating wont be affected ok?

Oh, wow Tom, now you've gone to far !!!!!!! 

TINTS????? -------- no you can't use any big box tints, there is only one place to get them -- from "Chemmy's tint manufacturing" lol. 1 gram for 5,000 dollars, lol

A tint is usually used to create an over-all more unifrom color to a wood, when it has variations in the color, is that your reasons for doing so?

get back to me on this ok?


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> OK sounds good Tom, If by chance the pine has any knots, that are sticky from sap residue, please do yourself a favor and wipe them down with scotchbrite and denatured alcohol just to insure your coating wont be affected ok?
> 
> Oh, wow Tom, now you've gone to far !!!!!!!
> 
> ...


 
LOL...okay...I will call your customer service department and place my tint order...

I was thinking about ordering a kit like this just to experiment a bit...
http://www.woodcraft.com/Product/2005522/17818/Mixol-10-Piece-Woodworkers-Tones-Set.aspx

Actually I really love the natural color of the pine just as it is.....I just want to experiment a little to see if can give it a wee bit more of an amber tone and see if we like it.....I was thinking (perhaps incorrectly so) that the PGT/Poly mixture might be a good "carrier' as it will be penetrating a little deeper into the wood. hope that make sense...lol


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> LOL...okay...I will call your customer service department and place my tint order...
> 
> I was thinking about ordering a kit like this just to experiment a bit...
> http://www.woodcraft.com/Product/2005522/17818/Mixol-10-Piece-Woodworkers-Tones-Set.aspx
> ...


Well Tom, what your looking at are pigment stains. Pigments add opacity, which takes away from the clear look of the wood. That being said, since you only looking for a light color as "amber" it will not affect it much. 

To keep as much clarity as possible, you should use "dye". since your just beginning, i suggest trans tint dye also on the same site OK? either the golden brown if looking more for the old tobacco brown amber color, or the dark vintage maple if even a more brownish amber. you can dilute and mix the two for some intermediate colors. I just hate the price of them is all. but since you were looking at 45 bucks anyway, its below that for one or two mentioned. 

Normally i prefer to tell people to buy just blue red and yellow which is the basis for practically all wood colors anyway. But since you don't mix colors as of yet, is why i point you to premixed.:yes:


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Well Tom, what your looking at are pigment stains. Pigments add opacity, which takes away from the clear look of the wood. That being said, since you only looking for a light color as "amber" it will not affect it much.
> 
> To keep as much clarity as possible, you should use "dye". since your just beginning, i suggest trans tint dye also on the same site OK? either the golden brown if looking more for the old tobacco brown amber color, or the dark vintage maple if even a more brownish amber. you can dilute and mix the two for some intermediate colors. I just hate the price of them is all. but since you were looking at 45 bucks anyway, its below that for one or two mentioned.
> 
> Normally i prefer to tell people to buy just blue red and yellow which is the basis for practically all wood colors anyway. But since you don't mix colors as of yet, is why i point you to premixed.:yes:


Perfect....i will look at the dyes instead. Thank you for saving me some time and money...lol

Am I correct in assuming that the first application of PGT/Poly is where the dye should be incorporated? Nothing after that, correct?


I thinky my eventual finishing approach (without the dyes) is going to be:

First coat of gloss poly thinned 90% with PGT. This will be allowed to sit for 20 minutes and excess wiped off
Two coats of straight or slightly thinned gloss poly. Allowed to dry and sanded to 320 between coats
I know up front that this finish is going to end up way too glossy but I would rather start out with gloss to keep it as clear as possible. As a final step I will either apply a final coat of satin poly or try to dull the sheen with scotbrite so as to end up with more of a satin finish.


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Perfect....i will look at the dyes instead. Thank you for saving me some time and money...lol
> 
> Am I correct in assuming that the first application of PGT/Poly is where the dye should be incorporated? Nothing after that, correct?
> 
> ...


 
No Tom, if your using the dyes, thay should be put on first, then the PGT and poly ok? If you'd prefer to add it to the mix, then you will have to go with the other, transtints are not oil soluble/miscable.

It's always better to start out gloss and only flat the last coat, this to will keep your look giving more depth. every coat of satin/flat that you put on increses the amount of light scattering particles [silica] that the flatting agents are made of usually. Everything else looks like a go houston!!:laughing:


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> No Tom, if your using the dyes, thay should be put on first, then the PGT and poly ok? If you'd prefer to add it to the mix, then you will have to go with the other, transtints are not oil soluble/miscable.
> 
> It's always better to start out gloss and only flat the last coat, this to will keep your look giving more depth. every coat of satin/flat that you put on increses the amount of light scattering particles [silica] that the flatting agents are made of usually. Everything else looks like a go houston!!:laughing:


 
Got it.....lol

Transits go on first and give a more clear appearance. Tint can go in the mix but may produce a more opaque appearance...jeez......just a little bit to remember with all this finishing stuff.....:yes:

thanks again for all of your help.........I have a lot more questions but I'll just shut up for a while now.....lol:thumbsup:


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Got it.....lol
> 
> Transits go on first and give a more clear appearance. Tint can go in the mix but may produce a more opaque appearance...jeez......just a little bit to remember with all this finishing stuff.....:yes:
> 
> thanks again for all of your help.........I have a lot more questions but I'll just shut up for a while now.....lol:thumbsup:


Again just to note, they do produce opacity, but - when the color is weak like in your desire for just a light amber color, it would not affect the clarity to any real degree. The dyes however, no matter how strong they are applied to the wood, will not muddy/milk/or create any type of opacity, that is there beauty. To "confuse you even more, lol, new nano pigments have been developed that are so small that they actually are able to penetrate the wood much like dyes, and therefore have even less opacity. Rustoleum is one of the first to introduce them on the open market but they have been around a few years now and even better than before.
This will be included in my book.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Again just to note, they do produce opacity, but - when the color is weak like in your desire for just a light amber color, it would not affect the clarity to any real degree. The dyes however, no matter how strong they are applied to the wood, will not muddy/milk/or create any type of opacity, that is there beauty. To "confuse you even more, lol, new nano pigments have been developed that are so small that they actually are able to penetrate the wood much like dyes, and therefore have even less opacity. Rustoleum is one of the first to introduce them on the open market but they have been around a few years now and even better than before.
> This will be included in my book.


Got it...I noticed Mixol doesn't have an "amber" color per se'. I think I'll probabaly need to get the kit and experiment with thier color chart. They do have some stand alone colors (camel for instance) that look like they might be close so i may get those in addition to the kit...........nano pigments eh?.......just when i thought i was getting a handle on things......LOL:laughing:


----------



## wildwood (Jan 25, 2011)

Had trouble keeping homebrew mixes of oil-varnish mix and wiping varnish straight.

Oil/varnish/poly mix 1/3 oil, ½ varnish or poly, and 1/3 thinner give a soft finish not very protective but do give soft to touch and warmth to wood.
Simply wipe on let set for 10 or 15 minutes and wipe off excess.

Wiping varnish or poly ½ thinner to ½ varnish or poly. That is starting point my need to adjust amounts of thinner to finish depending upon look trying to achieve. I just wipe on and wait until dry and not tacky before putting on another coat. Will get a build if add enough coats. Slightly more protective than oil mix but not as good as using normal varnish or poly finishes.


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

I tried the 1/3rd's mix (poly,BLO,MS) and 90/10% MS/poly. If what you see is what you get after the 1st coat, the 90/10 is not what I am looking for. But still playing.
JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

jjrbus said:


> I tried the 1/3rd's mix (poly,BLO,MS) and 90/10% MS/poly. If what you see is what you get after the 1st coat, the 90/10 is not what I am looking for. But still playing.
> JIm 0311


ok then apply your oil first let dry and then a coat of the 90/10 ok?


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

double post sorry


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

jjrbus said:


> I tried the 1/3rd's mix (poly,BLO,MS) and 90/10% MS/poly. If what you see is what you get after the 1st coat, the 90/10 is not what I am looking for. But still playing.
> JIm 0311


Please correct me if I am wrong..(and I often am...lol) but I didn't take it as 90% MS/PGT and 10% poly. I took it as whatever volume of poly you start with thinned 90% with MS or PGT. You will still have 100% of the poly but add 90% of that volume again in MS or PGT. So for example if you started out with 5oz of poly and thinned it 90% with MS or PGT, you'd have 9.5 ounces of total material....I am really bad at math so that may be the same thing you stated.....sorry if we are saying the same thing...


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

You know what guys, you have to first be realistic ok? Number one, your working with woods [red oak / pine that really don't have any real figure to them to begin with ok? 

If their just flat sliced veneers or solid woods with no interlocking grain like curly maple/quilted maple, flame maple, etc. Or sapele/ribbon mahogany/or a vast number of other highly figured woods, there just isn't much depth or 
doi [distinction of image] 3 dimensional type thing to bring out.

The one thing I'm sorriest for in this in not having you post pics of the wood both coated and uncoated to see what could be done or if it could be done as to satisfy you. 

It's like i tell people to use potassium dichromate to bring out the crotch figure in mahogany or other ribbon or block affects, and it works marvelous for this, but to put it on a plain sliced veneer or flat cut board it does nothing for it but darken it to whatever degree, do you see my point?

If there is really nothing there to maximize dimensionality, then there is just so much you can get no matter what you use ok?

And i think this is the problem with your findings so far. 

For example, if your to dam off a sample piece and pour say 1/4 inch of oil on it tung or BLO, your only going to get so much Refraction/ DOI/ that can be observed. it's not that the refractive indexes are not close or depth of image either or clarity, it's just that's all the wood has to offer ok?

It reminds me of a customer who wanted me to do her gold leaf frame warerguild technique, where the gold is burnished to a high metal like gloss with agate burnishers. So of course i told her it would be no problem and took the job and finished it. 

She came in to see it and looked at it and just shook her head and replied, "no, i want the whole frame polished like that, not just the areas you have done."

Well the areas i had done were the high parts of the leaves/grapes/cherubims/etc., where one is able to use the burnisher to get into to accomplish this. This was not something that could be done without specially made very small burnishers and hundreds of hours of meticulous gesso/clay/etc. work and even then the deepest parts would have been impossible. 

so in explaining this to her, she stopped and asked, well why didn't you tell me this before?" 

My answer was that she had put this to me as if she already knew about water gilding and the tools used and all else. So in my mind it was taken that what i or anyone else might of done she would see that it was a fantastic job. 

So i then told her to search and find me exactly what she was looking for a picture or sample, and show me. Knowing she would not be able to. but in the meantime until you do i need paid and you need to accept that i actually had not only did a first class job, but given you even a little more than i normally would. 

with this, she accepted the situation and i was paid, but still she was very disappointed with what she had as to what she had "dreamed" of. 

I on the other hand felt fine, lol. 

PS: she never did come back with a pic of any intricate frame similar to hers that was 100% agate burnished!!

You may have been able to do it by plating techniques, as i had also told her, but not with leaf and burnishers. 

So here are my suggestions, 

first, either use a figured red oak that will give you more of what you want, or change species and use some other highly figured wood that will most definitely give gobs of chatoyancy/depth/wave/dark light affects and and flip, bulge and any other anomaly you can find ok?

But if your sold on what you have, then just accept that what your trying to do is the best that a non descript piece of wood, no matter who does it, can be. go with whatever you find does this best and do it, lol :yes:

sincerely, 

chemmy


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

Actually.....I experimented with the poly/PGT mixture tonight with very very good results....much better depth and figure enhancement than I was getting with my previous mixture.....thanks for the suggestion chemmy...:thumbsup:


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Actually.....I experimented with the poly/PGT mixture tonight with very very good results....much better depth and figure enhancement than I was getting with my previous mixture.....thanks for the suggestion chemmy...:thumbsup:


Glad to hear that Tom, i hope Jjrbus finds the same also, eventually, lol. but like i say, you can only get as much as the wood has to offer. Hope your project works out well, post pics when your done ok?:yes:


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Glad to hear that Tom, i hope Jjrbus finds the same also, eventually, lol. but like i say, you can only get as much as the wood has to offer. Hope your project works out well, post pics when your done ok?:yes:


Thanks...I will post when done......

My plan is essentially to learn and hone my skills on less expensive, less figured wood to start, knowing that when I graduate to more figured and exotic woods, my technique and results will be much improved.......:thumbsup:


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Experimented with different mixtures. I do not care for the look of BLO on red oak plywood. Will try on some solid oak later.

I did not try turpentine but experimented with different mixtures of MS and poly.

I decided a 50/50 mixture of MS and poly gives me the look I like the best.

I did not post pictures as some differences do not show and most of it is my perception and personal choice. 

So thank you very much for all the input, suggestions and time.

JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

what ever floats your oak JJrbus, glad your happy and keep on keeping on!! :thumbsup:


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

jjrbus said:


> Experimented with different mixtures. I do not care for the look of BLO on red oak plywood. Will try on some solid oak later.
> 
> I did not try turpentine but experimented with different mixtures of MS and poly.
> 
> ...


Hi Jim,

With the MS/Poly mixture you ended up liking, did you use it as more of a wiping varnish? Meaning you applied thin coats and simply let it dry until your next coat and so on?

Thanks


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Thnks for the response

On a 6 sq in area I probobly spent about 2 min rubbing it in, then spread extra on the surface. Let it set about 15 min and wiped off excess.

For the second coat after 2 days I simply rubbed on a thin coat of a 50/50 mix. 

This is going to be for tool storage so I am going to put an unthined coat or 2 of poly. I was more interested in grain enhancement, than finish on this.

Are you working with oak? m JIm 0311


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

jjrbus said:


> Thnks for the response
> 
> On a 6 sq in area I probobly spent about 2 min rubbing it in, then spread extra on the surface. Let it set about 15 min and wiped off excess.
> 
> ...


Hi Jim,

I am actually working with oak, pine, maple and cedar....just trying different things......I am really starting to come to the conclusion that I just don't like the look and feel of the poly.......the film build up is just too plastic looking and feeling for me.....even after rubbing on a few initial coats of oil to enhance the grain. ...I'll give your method a shot and see how it goes....

I have been trying TJ's method and am just getting ready to apply his LINTUNGTANE mixture over three coats of Waterlox on some maple....I am hoping this gets me closer to a durable, in the wod finish.

My goal is really to get a low sheen, high lustre, in the wood, durable finish that would be similar to a hand rubbed finish.....I want to still be able to "feel" the wood rather than the film on top of the wood..........

i'll keep pluggin away


----------



## HowardAcheson (Nov 25, 2011)

>>>> Slightly more protective than oil mix but not as good as using normal varnish or poly finishes.

A thinned wiping varnish is exactly the same as full strength varnish. Once the thinner dries you are left with the same finish as standard varnish--it just a thinner film. Add a second or third application and the two will be exactly the same.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

HowardAcheson said:


> >>>> Slightly more protective than oil mix but not as good as using normal varnish or poly finishes.
> 
> A thinned wiping varnish is exactly the same as full strength varnish. Once the thinner dries you are left with the same finish as standard varnish--it just a thinner film. Add a second or third application and the two will be exactly the same.


That's pretty much been my experience. The thinned coats go on nicer but you need more of them to cover completely which basically gets you right back to having thicker build up and that plastic look....


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Opp's 6X6 inch not 6 sq in.

It appears on plywood that the first thinned coat penetrates more, it seems to make the grain more noticeable?????

Also I am not getting the runs and sags that I get with a full coat. It also appears that the thinned coat is not attracting the dust the way an unthinned coat does??
JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom that reminds me of when cat vinyls first came on the market and everybody was trying to get the vinyl to imitate an oil finish. first they added flatting agents, then differing rubbing techniques, then different vinyls. 

Finally i came along and made a few samples and they approved the third one, and had me train the workers to use and apply the finish. Didn't take long, one was a 50/50 thinning of the vinyl, next was 1 straght coat of vinyl, the third a 50/50 coat, sanded 320 and another 50/50 coat. 

My point? A couple of coats is all you need. anymore is not going to give you much more protection and if used, as you now know, gives to much build. A "close to the wood" finish is just that................................... -> close to the wood<--


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

I tried the PGT and poly, very nice look, but I am staying with the 1 to 1 mix of poly, MS for this project.

I did the first coat today. This rubbing on the 1 to 1 mix seems to be much better than my old way of thinning the poly a bit and brushing on.

I am rubbing it in and then leaving excess on the surface for about 15 min and then wiping off the excess. 

The first problem I do not have is the, dripping, running, bubbles of poly on the underside. I will let this dry for a day or two and try a second coat.
JIm 0311


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

jjrbus said:


> I tried the PGT and poly, very nice look, but I am staying with the 1 to 1 mix of poly, MS for this project.
> 
> I did the first coat today. This rubbing on the 1 to 1 mix seems to be much better than my old way of thinning the poly a bit and brushing on.
> 
> ...


Sounds like your experimenting is coming along nicely...

The two methods I am liking the most are:

BLO/POLY/MS and the PGT/Poly (both topcoated with 50/50 MS/Poly)

The biggest issue I have with the PGT is that it really smells A LOT. But it does seem to allow for more open time thus deeper penetration into the wood..

Just on a lark yesterday I experiemnted with applying very thin coats (2 of them) of dewaxed shellac. Sanded lightly between coats. Then I wiped on a 50/50 mix of MS and semi poly. I am liking what i am seeing so far. I am guessing I'll need another light coat of MS/POLY wiped on but that should be about it. It's not looking like plastic and is much closer to the wood.

I also tried a sample with 2 coats of PGT/Poly followed by 3 coats of Waterlox and am really liking that as well. So much experimentation...so little time....lol

:thumbsup:


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Thinness of materials for first coaters is good Tom, but what is most important is the open time. The longer the first coat takes to dry out, the more it will penetrate the wood. that is why i reccomended the PGT to begin with. Just don't go overboard and start looking for the slowest drying solvent on earth !!!!!!! lol:laughing:

If you want, you can slow down the drying time of shellac quite well with n-butynol. a slower evaporative alcohol used as a shellac retarder.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> Thinness of materials for first coaters is good Tom, but what is most important is the open time. The longer the first coat takes to dry out, the more it will penetrate the wood. that is why i reccomended the PGT to begin with. Just don't go overboard and start looking for the slowest drying solvent on earth !!!!!!! lol:laughing:
> 
> If you want, you can slow down the drying time of shellac quite well with n-butynol. a slower evaporative alcohol used as a shellac retarder.


Hey chemmy,

Thank you for the tip on the shellac. I will try that. Would you say about a 50/50 mix of thinner to shellac (I am using zinsser sealcoat)? I have been pouring a little bit on the wood and quickly rubbing it in with a rag until it starts to get tacky then I wipe in one direction to even it out and remove the excess beofre its too dry to work with....


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

Tom5151 said:


> Hey chemmy,
> 
> Thank you for the tip on the shellac. I will try that. Would you say about a 50/50 mix of thinner to shellac (I am using zinsser sealcoat)? I have been pouring a little bit on the wood and quickly rubbing it in with a rag until it starts to get tacky then I wipe in one direction to even it out and remove the excess beofre its too dry to work with....


your confusing me Tom, i don't like to be confused.. so... stop it!!!! lol

When you say " 50/50 mix of "thinner", are you meaning regular denatured alcohol???????????????????????/ or as i suggested the slower butanol??????????????????????????? If the latter i would reccomend a 9 to 1 mix just as the pgt/poly the thinner and slower evaporating the better [within reason lol] only one coat is necessary and i would not advise wiping it off. It's mostly diluent at that point anyway.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

chemmy said:


> your confusing me Tom, i don't like to be confused.. so... stop it!!!! lol
> 
> When you say " 50/50 mix of "thinner", are you meaning regular denatured alcohol???????????????????????/ or as i suggested the slower butanol??????????????????????????? If the latter i would reccomend a 9 to 1 mix just as the pgt/poly the thinner and slower evaporating the better [within reason lol] only one coat is necessary and i would not advise wiping it off. It's mostly diluent at that point anyway.


LOL.....sorry...yes by thinner I mean the n-butynol.......i hope I can fnd that stuff...if not I'll try the alcohol. I know I can find that......


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Use only Gin or Vodka, Rum or Bourbon will discolor the wood:laughing: Of course might be nice, hand rubbed bourbon finish? JIm 0311


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

jjrbus said:


> Use only Gin or Vodka, Rum or Bourbon will discolor the wood:laughing: Of course might be nice, hand rubbed bourbon finish? JIm 0311


LOL...I am going to need a bourbon after all of this experimenting.....but its been great...kind of like a gradutate class in finishing.....:thumbsup:


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Thanks for all the input on this, it has been a great thread could make a good sticky.

I sanded with 320 and rubbed on a second coat of 1/2 poly 1/2 MS, today. I am impressed with how it looks and the ease of doing it. I am doing flat door fronts laying horizontally, so the ease may be deceptive.

Looking at this I am thinking there is no reason to put anymore diluted poly on? Let this coat dry 2 days sand with 320 and put a coat or 2 of full strength poly on. Or would more thinned coats be advantageous?
Thanks again JIm 0311


----------



## chemmy (Dec 13, 2011)

jjrbus said:


> Thanks for all the input on this, it has been a great thread could make a good sticky.
> 
> I sanded with 320 and rubbed on a second coat of 1/2 poly 1/2 MS, today. I am impressed with how it looks and the ease of doing it. I am doing flat door fronts laying horizontally, so the ease may be deceptive.
> 
> ...


Nope, no advantage, like i told tom if your looking for a close to the wood finish any more than a few coats is not necessary, the first thinned coat is mainly to soak in and produce the best optical refractive qualities the product can give. Past that it is useless to continue unless for what ever reason your looking for the thinnest end product you can achieve.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

So after many many weeks of trial and error with rubbed oil mixtures I think I may have identified something that I was doing wrong...(i think so anyway).....

Up until 2 days ago, when I wiped off the excess oil after allowing it to sit for 15 minutes or so, I was wiping hard. I mean I was basically grinding the dry rag into the wood to get off every last speck of oil mixture. I was literally wiping the wood dry. That always confused me as it seemed as though I was just wiping off eveerything I was putting on. Didn't make a lot of sense....to me at least.

A couple days ago I read where the idea is to wipe off gently but thourougly. I found that it is possible to gently wipe off the excess but still leave a very very thin residual. This dries fairly quickly and cures very well. The difference in the result is night and day. I can acuatlly see a difference now with each coat.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Tom5151 said:


> So after many many weeks of trial and error with rubbed oil mixtures I think I may have identified something that I was doing wrong...(i think so anyway).....
> 
> Up until 2 days ago, when I wiped off the excess oil after allowing it to sit for 15 minutes or so, I was wiping hard. I mean I was basically grinding the dry rag into the wood to get off every last speck of oil mixture. I was literally wiping the wood dry. That always confused me as it seemed as though I was just wiping off eveerything I was putting on. Didn't make a lot of sense....to me at least.
> 
> A couple days ago I read where the idea is to wipe off gently but thourougly. I found that it is possible to gently wipe off the excess but still leave a very very thin residual. This dries fairly quickly and cures very well. The difference in the result is night and day. I can acuatlly see a difference now with each coat.


Do you remember your thread "Musings" where I suggested this?


cabinetman said:


> Before you wipe on a second application, sand the first application lightly with 320x, just to scuff it up a bit. When you wipe on, don't wipe it off. Your application should be just a thin application that you let dry.











 







.


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

cabinetman said:


> Do you remember your thread "Musings" where I suggested this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I do now.....lol...I am not a very good student huh? The little shade of differnce perhaps is that I didn't actually apply a thin coat and leave it on to dry. I actually applied a very liberal coat, let it sit 15 minutes and then wiped "most" of it off. At any rate, i have now learned my lesson.....thanks again sir:thumbsup:


----------



## Tom5151 (Nov 21, 2008)

Basically I think I am finally discovering what the term "thin coat" really means. My idea of a thin coat was still way too heavy even though in my mind it was much thinner than what i had previously been applying.....I am finding that very thin almost means a "thin residue"...if that terms makes any sense at all.


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

Tom5151 said:


> Basically I think I am finally discovering what the term "thin coat" really means. My idea of a thin coat was still way too heavy even though in my mind it was much thinner than what i had previously been applying.....I am finding that very thin almost means a "thin residue"...if that terms makes any sense at all.


All this time, on the can it says thin coat. They never said thin the poly and put on a coat Arrrrrgg. It's terrible being an amateur.:no:

I finished my tool box drawer fronts. I am impressed with how good the finish looks. I used an unthinned coat of poly. I was able to lay the cabinets down and apply the poly horizontally. 

The finish coat of poly is still a brushed on finish, it does not look sprayed. Next time I will complete the finish using the wiping method and see what happens.

Many thanks for all the help. JIm 0311


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

jjrbus said:


> I finished my tool box drawer fronts. I am impressed with how good the finish looks. I used an unthinned coat of poly. I was able to lay the cabinets down and apply the poly horizontally.
> 
> The finish coat of poly is still a brushed on finish, it does not look sprayed. Next time I will complete the finish using the wiping method and see what happens.
> 
> Many thanks for all the help. JIm 0311


Thinning does make it flow better. Maybe what you use for wiping is leaving tell tales. Fold up a lint free "T" shirt material in a neat square pad. That's what I use, and it lays out the finish very nicely. You'll get a feel of how wet to get the pad.










 







.


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

iT APPEARED TO BE FINE UNTIL THE BRUSHED COAT. THANKS AGAIN


----------



## Midlandbob (Sep 5, 2011)

I have skimmed the thread. The science and art of finishes is VERY complicated. There are many myths and misconceptions about finishes.
A fe points in no particular order.
Poly= polyurethane which is a cured plastic. Once it reacts, it is a film that in insoluble and almost nothing sticks to it not even more poly. This needs to be taken into account. A poly finish a few days old can not have more finish added and get a good bond. Scratching with sanding will allow a weak mechanical bond. The finish needs to be removed to bare wood to change. Only use it where it will not take too much abuse and you want to put on another coat. The original can be very tough like flooring that uses a very strong cured coat. A picture frame or maybe a jewellery box but not a functional wooden bowl to be used.
Varnishes are made of various plant oils that polymerise in oxygen and form a relatively water resistant film on or in the top layer of the wood. Japan driers speed up the process and are added to varying degrees. Boiling linseed oil speeds up the process. Unsoiled will form a film but it takes a long time. BLO is the base for most oil based paint. Tung oil is an alternate with slightly different properties. 
Because they are oils they are diluted with mine real spirits or it he old days turpentine. Turpentine from pine tree gum is not used much in furniture as it smells bad almost forever. Health and environmental reasons are causing the gradual removal of oil based finishes as chemists find ways to emulsify the oils (like making homogenised milk) and using other tricks allowing them to perform as well.
Shellac and lacquer are solids that have been dissolved in alcohol or acetone etc and Actually do dry by the evaporation of the solvent. A later coat even years later partially dissolves the surface layer and bond. They both can be built up.
Pigments are ground up solids that colour the product so do cause some opacity. Dyes like the aniline dyes actually alter the light transmission or reflection and impart the various colours without blocking light other that the colour. Many degrade with UV light so like the colours in wood they may change with time. Blues and reds have been the worst but the chemists are continually getting better dyes. Dying is almost always done to the bare wood/cellulose. Stains are mixed in the finish.
Enough. There are a few good books but it is a complex subject with different woods and finishes. Lots of recipes.
Bob (not spellchecked- bedtime)


----------



## STAR (Jan 1, 2008)

Thanks to all the contributors of this thread. I have only read it quickly but it is very timely. 

I am in the process of doing up an old 1920 Singer Sewing Machine where I have had to replace the veneer on the top and try to match it to the rest of the machine. The veneer with the grain I needed was a lot redder than what was on the rest of the machine. I suppose 90 years does yellow things out a bit.

I do not want to hijack this thread but I cut back put a Redwood stain on, wiped off quickly and fluked the colour I needed. Now I used 1/3 poly 1/3 BLO and 1/3 MS ( Mineral Turpentine ) Brushed it on and then rubbed it off.

The majority of the machine came up great but one section has that still sticky, not quite dry , feel. I am thinking it is the BLO has not dried off because I may not have sanded back enough to start the finishing program.. I did not want to sand the veneer too much so it looks like I came up short in this section.

I know I can get over it my way, but I would like to know what you guys would do. I know Cabinetman gave some suggestions about the top which I did not follow but eventually think I came back to his suggestion to just remove the top veneer, mainly because the repair job was very ordinary.

Pete


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

I decided to add a bit to my cabinet and could not remember how I did the finish? Had to dig this thread up again. Thanks JIm


----------



## Rick Mosher (Feb 26, 2009)

Maybe this will help demystify this topic.


----------



## jjrbus (Dec 6, 2009)

I am in the planning stages of some new kitchen cabinets and found myself searching out this thread. I may have accidentally bumped it up, hope I do not get in trouble? JIm


----------



## Manuka Jock (Jun 27, 2011)

jjrbus said:


> ... I have decided to play with a home brew rubbed oil finish and start with thirds Blo, poly and thinner ...


Just in case you were unaware ,
BLO/boiled linseed oil contains chemical additives .
Oh , and it has never been boiled in it's life.


PS . just noticed that this thread has been around long enough to grow whiskers :shifty:


----------

