Replies

1. 
   hammer1 | Mar 18, 2012 09:34am | #1

   Talk about starting behind the eight ball! Misson isn't anywhere near early American and oak isn't anywhere near maple. Oak is a coarse, porous, open grain species and maple is a tight, close grained species.

   You don't need a blotch reducer with oak, it's not blotch prone. You will have problems reducing the look of the grain, big problems if the white oak is quarter sawn. Water based stains won't make the grain as dark and pronounced as oil based stains. Wet the end grain before applying the stain to limit absorbtion. I'd suggest looking at some of the Minwax water based stains for a color that is close. Different colors can be mixed together but you'll never get oak to look exactly like maple unless you veneer it with maple. If you think the top coat is satin, use a satin poly, shellac is glossy. Do some samples and have the customer agree in writing to what they choose with the understanding that oak is not maple and all you can do is approximate a complimentary color and sheen or you will be forever trying to make a football look like a baseball.

1. 
   SteveSchoene | Mar 18, 2012 02:56pm | #3

   Any stain with pigment will emphasize the grain in oak by lodging in the pores.  That will make the difference betweern oak and maple more apparent.  A wash coat won't help you at all in that respect.  I disagree about using Minwax anything, waterborne or oil based,  What you need is to start with water soluble powdered dye.  TransFast is one brand, W.D. Lockwood is another and has a very large selection of colors.  You can mix if you need to.  You vary the concentration of the mix to determine the darkness of the dye.  By the way, you can only see the final color of dye after you have applied a top coat, though you can similate that pretty closely by dampening the dry dyed surface  with mineral spirits.  This can help you get the color right.  You will see very little difference between end grain and flat grain.  

   But6, of course getting the color right is just part.  You then need to fill the pores, without changing the color. I would   This involves using commercial oil based pore filler.  First you seal the surface with a light coat of dewaxed shellac.  Then add pigment to the pore filler to make it a match to the dyed surface.  This is tricky.  If I were finishing this as oak I'd make the pore filler just a touch darker than the dyed surface to let the pores provide "depth". 

   Topcoat as you choose, though give the pore filler about twice as long to cure as the label directs. 

   Personally I'd make a serious attempt to convince your customer to have to finish it as a mission finish piece that contrasts with the traditional.  Furniture that has matching colors throughout a room is poor design, especially if all the pieces don't share the same style. 

   Which ever way you go, have the client sign off on your finish by having her intital a sample board that has the entire finish fully executed on it. 

1. 
   hammer1 | Mar 18, 2012 10:07pm | #4

   I have a picture of some samples. Maple on top, red oak on the bottom. All were done with oil based Minwax stain except the one with the pencil pointing to it. I just threw some Minwax water based stain on that one and it's not the same color as the above sample, similar enough to serve as an example. I think it's evident that the "cathedral" grain pattern in the oak is almost black with oil stain, where the water based is much lighter, less pronounced is what I said in my reply. White oak is different than red but both are very different from maple, that difference is difficult to hide. Oil based varnishes and shellac will impart additional amber color to a stain. Water based poly does not except to a minor degree. The grain in oak will be highlighted additionally to the water based stain if an oil base is used, which I would avoid. The major visual difference between oak and maple is that coarse grain pattern, so I would try not to make it more obvious.

   For a few dollars, the original poster could try some samples of the water based stain. If that isn't doing the trick, more complicated procedures can be tried. White oak is a bit unique due to the tyloses. These make pore filling difficult and water soluble dyes ineffective. I'm guessing from the type of question, the OP isn't an experienced finisher. I'd recommend trying something simple first, doing larger samples and realizing oak isn't maple.

   
1. 
   SteveSchoene | Mar 18, 2012 11:21pm | #5

   It is true that on some white oak examples, the dye won't "take" on the inside of the pores.  That's the reason for the tinted pore filler--it covers that problem quite readily.  I've never found white oak particularly difficult to fill with oil based pore filler--but it may need it.

   While in the small samples the Minwax water borne stain does show less emphasis of the pores, I am still reluctant to recomment the waterbased stain on large object.  They dry so quickly that you really have to be skilled to get it on evenly, and wiped off quickly enough.  If you need to use such a quick drying stain, a two person process makes sense, one person applying and another following right behind wiping off the excess stain. 

2. 
   Westchester | Mar 18, 2012 12:36pm | #2

   Questions

   There's a lot there to think about.  I'll try to get you started so after the first step the folks here will add advise  and guide you along.

   Start by wetting the oak with water - put the wet oak up against the finished maple color and decide what color tone you need to buy to get you toward the finished color.  Probably better using a wiping stain - and you can use brushing lacquer you don't need spray equipment -

   SA