A question from one with many years of experience, most of it not terribly helpful. I began using Watco Danish Oil, maybe in 1975 or so. More recently, the Minwax wipe on poly. Then, based on a note I had clipped from FWW, I made my own, of 6 parts mineral spirits, 4 parts varnish, 1 part boiled linseed oil. Wipe on, rag off, etc. I liked the result, but it is pretty new to me. I also tried the Tried -n – True varnish oil. Didn’t dry well, and was tons of hard work to use. A bit spendy also, although I don’t suppose this is important on a major piece.
Here, I see a lot of 1/2 – 1/2 varnish – naptha.
Help! What do you pro’s recommend, and why?
I have a cherry sideboard under construction, and the finish will be critical, of course.
Replies
Have you ever cooked your own varnish? Start with raw linseed oil. Get it up to about 375 degrees in an electric crockpot. After an hour start adding driers, color, and other additives. Add turpentine during cooldown to thin to desired consistency.
ps - this is an art; not a science.
PlaneWood by Mike_in_Katy
PlaneWood
There are two different types of finishes you are seeing here. One is an oil/varnish blend (Watco, Minwax Tung Oil Finish, etc) and the other is a thinned wipe-on varnish (Formby's, Minwax wiping varnish, etc). The oil/varnish product is basically boiled linseed oil, varnish and mineral spirits in roughly equal parts. It's applied, and then wiped off. The thinned wipe on varnish is varnish and a thinner--either mineral spirits or, for a faster dry, naphtha in about a 50/50 mixture. You apply it with a rag and let it dry.
The oil/varnish is a penetrating finish intended to leave a wood feel to the surface while the thinned wipe-on is an on the surface finish that can be built to any film thickness you want. Because it is thinned, it take 2-3 coats to build the same film thickness as a full strength brushed on coat but it generally is easier for the finisher to get a smooth finish.
Here's some additional info that may help: http://www.popularwoodworking.com/features/finish2.html
It occurs to me that I did not fully answer your question.
The type of finish to use depends on what you want you finish to accomplish and how easy you want it to be. It's a truism that the easier the finish, the less protective and durable it is. The range is from oil (linseed; pure, real tung oil) to multipart conversion finishes. Oil is easy but has very little protective qualities. Oil/varnish is a step up in protection, but not much. Then you get to film finishes like shellac which is very nice but will not stand up to much abuse or cleaning. Then there is lacquer which is generally sprayed so needs equipment and skill. Next, for the amateur is varnish and it's cousin, poly varnish which is problematic because of its slow dry time which allows nits to get into the finish.
So, what you you want your finish to do and how experienced are you with their applications. The oil/varnish approach is relative easy and produces a somewhat durable finish. I use it for things that will not get much abuse. The thinned wipe-on varnish is also fairly easy and will give a more durable finish.
You might want to pick up a book like "Understanding Wood Finishing" by Flexner, "Great Wood Finishes" by Jewitt or one of Dresdner's books. These will get you started and walk you through the process.
I believe that there is a little misinformation in these posts about oil/varnish mixtures.
It's getting way over-complicated. Oil/varnish mixtures are extremely forgiving, extremely flexible in the ratios and types of ingredients and all products called oil/varnish or consumer-oriented "Tung oil products" and wiping varnishes are essentially the same thing.
Almost every commercial product (Watco Danish oil, Teak oil, Minwax Tung Oil Finish, Minwax Antique Oil, Waterlox, Minwax wiping varnish, it goes on and on . . .) is a variant of this recipe:
An oil/varnish mixture can be made from an almost infinite ratio of some varnish (alkyd or polyurethane) some oil (pure tung or partially polymerized tung, "boiled" linseed) and some solvent (mineral spirits, turpentine, naphtha). One each of the three categories can be used, or several from each category can be in the brew. More varnish gives a faster build with repeated applications. Various changes in the ratios result in shorter or longer "wet" times before the finish starts to get tacky on the wood as it's being applied.
There is no one special formula that's best, and I don't think that anyone, even the finisher could tell one from the other a month after a piece is finished.
For the first several coats (wiping all excess off after allowing to "soak in") all such preparations act as penetrating oils. With succeeding applications all these preparations act as wiping varnishes or rubbing varnishes or padding varnishes (it's unimportant what name we use) and leave various amounts of a very thin film of varnish which builds with each application.
It's about as simple and foolproof and personalized a finish as exists, and it's almost impossible to do something wrong, or to make these mixtures work differently than they do (as penetrating, non-surface-film oils with few applications and as a slow, thin-varnish-film-building process with many applications).
Every year or so major magazines run yet another article about using these formulas and yet another author gets to put his or her slant on the process. A good article by Garrett Hack appeared in FWW in the Feb., '97 issue No. 122.
Rich
>>all products called oil/varnish or consumer-oriented "Tung oil
products" and wiping varnishes are essentially the same thing.
That's just not true Dick. Oil/varnish which contain varnish and heavy amounts of oil are very different from a thinned wiping varnish which is only varnish and thinner. If you disagree with me, I would suggest you look at the Flexner article that has been referred to or read up on the difference in both Jewitt's and Dresdner's books.
Howie,
It seems that you must insist that these products perform exactly as their name implies, rather than the way they actually do. I said that all these products are similar in that they contain one each of an oil, a varnish and a solvent. I'll stick to that.
Proprietary wiping varnishes are not just varnishes thinned with solvent. You may make your own that way, but the commercial products have some oil in them which makes them easier to apply. My point is that depending on the ratio of the three ingredients, the mixture performs somewhat differently, but they all eventually produce the same effect.
In the case of a wiping varnish that actually contains ONLY varnish and solvent, the effect of the first several coats is to seal the wood. Very little of the varnish will get deposited on the surface, but the wood will have an appearance quite similar to having applied oil. I don't mean that the wiping varnish will penetrate as deeply as an oil or an oil/varnish mix, but it will penetrate and seal. (The actual "penetration" by oil is very shallow and the misunderstanding that it penetrates deeply and seals "from within" is just nonsense).
Further application of the wiping varnish will then deposit more and more varnish. The same happens with an oil/varnish mix. There is really no difference even if you keep insisting that there is.
These are, for practical purposes very similar products, despite your insistence on segregating them as very different animals because the name on the can says so.(or vegetables as the case really is).
I don't care what the manufacturer names the product, I do care what's really in it and how it actually performs. After all, manufacturers have called almost any thinned varnish preparation "Tung Oil" for years despite the fact that it contains not a drop of Tung Oil. Minwax distributes the identical finish as Antique Oil and Tung Oil Finish. Some people swear that they get different results from each, but the only difference is the label on the cans after they pass under the same filling nozzle on the manufacturer's assembly line.
I've read the books. I'm not disagreeing with anything in them. And I've had lots of experiences with many of the products, and some knowledge of the manufacturing that applies to some of them. But I wonder just how much you've actually used these substances vs just repeating information about how you think authoritative sources have said certain formulations are supposed to work?
Rich
Rich, I have been involved with woodworking and finishing for over 40 years. I learned finishing working at a yacht yard as a teenager and continued up through my association with a custom furniture shop for almost 15 years. We had one professional finisher as well as an apprentice finisher for that time due to the types of and volumes we did. In addition, we contracted out--but specified--the finishing of a line of semi-custom, interior designer signature furniture. We had finish manufacturers in our shop for days at a time and at our call always. In addition to testing finishes for our own use, we tested finishes for a number of manufacturers as they came out with new products.
When I say that there is a significant difference between oil/varnish blends and thinned wiping varnishes, it's because there is. I stay current on new finishing products and have sources at manufacturers who are knowledgeable about contents of their products.
I only refer folks to published sources so that they can get more complete info than I have time to put in writing. Why re-invent the wheel?
You have your opinion and I respect that but so do I have an opinion based on long time use of many different finishing products in many different applications.
Greetings!
In 1977 while visiting Arthur Carpenter "Espinet"- in Boulinas, CA I asked how he finished his table tops as the one he was finishing was rich in color, satin to the touch. He told me his recipe which I have been using ever since. 8 coats on a table top that is likely to be exposed to liquids like a sweating glass, etc. 3-4 coats on most other things.
Very simple and it is good because it can be used in a dirty shop-that is without an air filtered room as needed with lacquer finish.
3 equal parts of varnish, turpentine, and boiled linseed oil. Lay on abundantly so it will penetrate. Leave dry about 20 to 30 minutes depending on temperature, you want to start wiping it off befor it gets too stiff and drags too much on your rags. Do a coat, let sit for 24 hours, then sand lightly with 400 or 600 grit sandpaper, just to touch all the tiny bumps that may have been caused by a small bubble or particle of dust. Repeat the process according to the number of coats you need. Don't sand after the last coat.
I have had excellent success with this method, it is simple, relatively inexpensive and as nearly fool proof as one can get.
I have been using this more than 20 years and heartily recommend it. You can use natural varnish or poly varnish to same effect.
Thanks to you, and to all who responded. I also read the thread on tung oil, which had similar information. Where you use thirds, could the thinner be replaced by Naptha, with the result that it would dry more quickly? Or is the drying time in the varnish only, regardless? I have never used naptha, but all the paint stores carry it, I think. Speed of drying would be relvant in my less-than-filtered basement shop. Dust in all of the joists, pipes, wires, stored things between the joists, etc. Honey, I TOLD YOU NOT TO WALK IN THE DINING ROOM FOR TWO DAYS! Just kidding, but no matter how well I cleaned, it wouldn't matter.
Yes, you can use naphtha, just get to the wiping off stage before it gets set up.
Might this be an issue on a somewhat large piece? Hence, thinner would be more appropriate?
For someone new to using a wipe on finish, I think using a standard mineral spirits thinner would be safer. Using an "odorless" paint thinner is not the best idea as that product acts as a retarder slowing up the drying process.
I haven't varied from the reciped given me by one whose work I so admired. You should experiment with the variations. That is how great discoveries occur, and the envelope gets stretched larger.
I always thought that turpentine was made from wood pitch or similar organic sources and that naptha was more highly processed. Whether that is true or not, I cannot say, or whether it makes a difference or not. I have never used naptha except as a cleaning fluid.
Since mine works so well, I have not wanted to improve upon it. I must warn you, it has a strong aroma-it is not for drying in the house, maybe not even the basement unless it is well ventilated. I let it dry in my garage, or on lovely days, outside on the porch.
Actually the smell is kind of clean, like a strong air purifier.
I think you will find that finishes for the wood worker are like recipes among cooks who have their pride in what they prepare for their dear ones to eat. And that the eaters get used to the recipe's they become accustomed to consuming.
Good luck!
Ted
Typical finishing thread - complete disagreement over the facts.
In your orginal post you asked what someone recommends and why.
I recommend you use Waterlox wiping varnish. The reason is it's a "true" varnish with all the accompanying characteristics. It is made with actual tung oil and phenolic resins.
The wipe-on method is simple and you're experienced with it - a combination for success.
By "true" varnish I mean it is formulated to cure to a durable film that will withstand heat, water, household chemicals, and is scratch resistant. It is not a varnish/oil blend.
The tung oil is more water resistant than linseed oil and is a more pleasant color (IMO).
Phenolic resins are more durable than alkyd resins, though less durable than urethane resins. In this case, urethane resins don't seem to be required since you're making a sideboard, not a table.
FWIW - Waterlox is essentially the same as Behlen's "Rock Hard Tabletop Varnish," only formulated for wiping.
Here's a quote from Russ Ramirez on Waterlox;
"The durability of the resulting film depends solely on the type of oil and resin used. Tung oil is the best for all-around performance, and the phenolic, urethane, and alkyd resins all provide excellent durability characteristics. With a Tung oil/phenolic resin blend, you get a component in the Tung oil that binds very well to the cellulose of the wood and a component in the phenolic resin that binds very well to the lignin of the wood. This is why I particularly favor Waterlox Original (AKA Transparent), which is 86% Tung oil with non-reactive phenolic and natural fossil resins (before thinning) - it creates rather unique optical effect that most other varnishes cannot duplicate"
Russ is the owner of woodfinishingsupplies.com, has written for Professional Refinishing magazine, is a coatings developer, and is a forum host on Woodweb - the professional finishers forum.
Paul
F'burg, VA
Paul, That is interesting. I had always read that Waterlox is an oil/varnish mixture. I'll accept your description of it as a "true" varnish. Be aware that many "authoritative sources" refer to it as an oil/varnish mixture and describe it's use as a penetrating oil which one wipes on, then wipes completely off, producing a low-lustre finish "within the structure of the wood." Others recommend that it be used to build a film on the surface.
If it is a varnish (a short varnish because you equate it with Rock Hard), why your statement:
"The tung oil is more water resistant than linseed oil and is a more pleasant color (IMO). " ?
If it is a varnish then tung oil is no longer an issue. True, it is based on tung oil, vs being based on another vegetable oil, but then it no longer has the attributes of that oil, it is varnish, period, with all its attributes.
Do you mean that the varnish known as Waterlox is more water resistant being based on tung than it would be if it were based on linseed, and it smells better based on tung than if based on linseed?
Rich
Hi Rich,
The "original" Waterlox used to be called "Gym Seal" or something similar, and was marketed as a floor finish. Now they market it as a furniture finish. I'm not sure about the newer formulations they offer - from your description of wipe-on, wipe-off they may be pure oil -or- mixtures with very low resin content - or- it may be that some people like to use varnish like an oil (not a bad thing at all).
The oils and resins used in varnishes do have a major effect on the color and characteristics of the varnish (their individual attributes are key to the performance of the final product). If this weren't the case, all varnishes would have the same exact characteristics. If you try a few brands side by side, you can see the color difference immediately. For example, try {Waterlox or Rockhard} next to {McCloskey Heirloom or Pratt & Lambert #38} next to {any alkyd/linseed varnish} and you will see the difference. Unfortunately, the durablity characteristics can only be proven by testing; you can't "see" or "feel" the differences. That's where the "scientific evidence" that Howie cites comes in the picture. By knowing the characteristics of the different formulations, you can accurately predict the level of durability the finish will offer.
Take your example for instance - NC lacquer next to an oil/varnish mix. They both look and feel good. But they don't stand up to wear and tear the same. In this case, I wouldn't want to hazard a guess on the two. But, if one was a good varnish and the other a good NC lacquer, I'd go with the varnish for durability.
Paul
F'burg, VA
Paul, you are absolutely correct. Reference to the article at http://www.popularwoodworking.com/features/finish2.html says the same thing and lists Waterlox as a thinned varnish. It also lists the products that are oil/varnish blends.
Edited 9/10/2002 11:01:40 AM ET by Howie
Hi Howie,
Thanks. I use the same article as a reference myself - though I'm pretty sure I first saw it in one of your posts.
BTW - I always use odorless mineral spirits as a thinner because I don't like the smelly stuff. After reading your advice that it was a retarder, I did some research on it and can't find support that it is more of a retarder than standard mineral spirits. Do you have a reference?
The little I did find specifies it evaporates 3% slower than standard mineral spirits. This may seem like a signficant figure until you compare it with Naptha, which is over 1200% faster than mineral spirits. The only difference between regular mineral spirits and odorless is additional refining that removes the small content of toulene and zylene (along with a tiny amount of benzene).Paul
F'burg, VA
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled