My daughter wants a cabinet constructed to hide a portable clothes washer in her apartment kitchen. She wants it painted to blend in with other painted surfaces. Nothing fancy here, just a plain and simple cabinet to hide the unit when not in use.
In FW #170 in May/June 2004, Associate Editor Bill Duckworth says “Medium Density fiberboard is the perfect choice for painted cabinetry….”
In FW #177 in May/June 2005, Contributing Editor Roland Johnson says ” MDO is great for furniture panels that will be painted….”
Who to believe? Can one year’s time change specs of the materials that much to justify that much of a change in opinion? Or, are they merely stating their own individual preferences (which is not set forth in either article)?
From my reading of the two articles, it appears MDO, being more like solid core plywood, is easier to work with: less dust created when sawing, seemingly a more stable surface (edges or corners won’t break off as they might with compressed sawdust), and easier means of joinery available. But, in its favor, apparently MDO can be obtained in vary large panels which might work better for some applications (if you can lift them). True, MDO will require the application of an edge to cover the plywood edge whereas MDF merely requires that the edge be sealed before finishing. And, MDF requires application of a oil based shellac or lacquer before painting with a water based paint whereas MDO does not.
Anyone have a significant reason for choosing one material over another? Is it based on the application (what’s being made, i.e., built in cabinet vs free-standing cabinet) or does something else enter your decision making process?
Anyone know why FW has published two seemingly diametrically opposed articles within one year’s time?