pre-mixed wipe ons vs home made

[Roger Benton]

Following up the interesting info from the 'teak finish' (http://sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=139194) thread concerning the actual ingredients of some popular watco oil blends, which contained this little nugget (provided by Mr. J. Scott Holmes):

"According to the MSDS for
WATCO Exterior Oil
AND
WATCO TEAK Oil
(identical MSDS info)... drum roll please......
50% Mineral Spirits
40% Naptha
Raw Linseed Oil
Resin
Pigment Dispersion

Interestingly the Watco natural Danish oil is as follows:

60% Mineral Spirits
5% aromatic petroleum distillates
5% Dipropylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether

5% Stoddard Solvent
Raw Linseed
Vegetable Oil
Resin

Gilsonite"

seeing that watco danish oil is just less than 30% oil and resin by volume, my question is:
For general furniture work to be used indoors- By volume- are there any pre-mixed wipe on finishes out there that are worth their price compared to mixing your own solutions?
If I already have blo, tung oil, spirits and turpentine, do you guys recommend just getting some good quality varnish and doing some homework on the mixture over continuing to by store bought mixtures?
I have read nothing but great things about a few products from behlens, waterlox and pratt and lambert; can a finish of similar quality be mixed at home with off the shelf materials?

Any insight is much appreciated, as always.

[Joe Chritz]

Try not to get to fancy. Generally just buy a quality finish (those you mentioned are all good) and thin it to a consistancy that you like to work with. Usually a "wiping" finish is just sold with more thinner in it, something you can do at home easy.

One advantage of thinning at home is you can change the thinner to adjust the dry or flash off times. Thinner like naptha flashes off very quickly.

Any of the "mix" that makes those varnishes isn't something you can do at home easy. Thinning down one is something else and very simple.

Joe

[Prashun Patel]

This is something you need to experiment with in order to find yr own religion.

Mixing yr own oil/varnish or wiping varnishes is fun. Just don't get stuck on percentages. From my experience, it doesn't matter whether you use Mineral spirits or naphtha. I'd stay away from DPGMethylEther (assuming you can even get it). While it's a good solvent for things like pen ink, I find it doesn't evaporate as fast as mineral spirits and can even cause blistering. Use a decent quality varnish. The addition of oil (BLO/tung) will create a mix that should be wiped on and then wiped off. The more oil, the more open time you have to wipe off.

The easiest recipes are: wiping varnish: 50/50 varnish/spirit; oilvarnish blend: or 33/33/33 varnish/blo/spirits. Tweaking from here does little to the overall quality of either finish.

Caveat: gloss varnishes work best for me in wiping consistency. Satin/sg's tend to get streaky on me.

I also like Minwax wipeon poly. I buy that premixed. The reason is that it leaves me with no leftover, and the container is easy to work with. All things considered, it's cheap. People shun poly, but on a wipeon, low build finish, it's aesthetic 'inferiorness' to other varnishes is not noticed by me.

[Scott Holmes]

I agree on most of what Shawn stated. I don't use poly on furniture at all so I'd NIX the Minwax wipe-on poly.

Using "Tung oil" instead of BLO is on way to make your own mix COST MORE $$$, it does nothing to the final results.

[paul cottingham]

Tried and true varnish oil. Put it on thin.

[Tim Mahoney]

Dido on the Tried and True wipe on oil. It's very much like the Maloof mixture. A little pricey but it has a long shelf life. I like the semi-satin finish look.

[Neal Clayton]

don't see any reason why you can't make traditional natural resin varnishes since they're just a drying oil, a natural resin, and a readily available solvent, but the resin must be cooked, then mixed with the oil and cooked again, and for that you wind up with what companies like tried and true sell. gotta figure at least 100 dollars worth of time to make a small batch, and for that you can buy a gallon of tried and true ready to use.

[paul cottingham]

I don't believe tried and true has any driers or solvents, hence the instruction to put it on thin. Its great, and I don't wind up feeling high, and the smell (and solvents) don't set my autistic daughter off.

[Steve Schoene]

You have very good reason for using the T&T varnish oil, but I should note that opinions are very mixed on this product. Many have reported problems--as thin as they try to apply it the product does not dry.

And, the cured product is not meaningfully safer than easier to use varnishes or the metallic driers that might be toxic in the liquid varnish have become encapsulated in the cured plastic resin, with regulations requiring that these metal salts to not leach out of the varnish film beyond a very small extent. If solvents are a problem, that's different, of course, and varnish films do require a meaningfully long period to fully cure--a month would generally suffice.

[Prashun Patel]

Point of clarification:

Note the Original Wood Finish contains beeswax, whereas the Varnish Oil contains varnish.

I'm guessing the 'polymerized' linseed oil T&T uses really just means it's true BOILED linseed oil. Newer BLO contains metallic driers which actually speed the hardening of it it. Boiling it was the traditional way to hasten that process, but it's probably not as effective as the driers (not a fact, just my guess...).

Sam Maloof did reportedly use a mix like the T&T Varnish Oil, but his technique was to flood and wipe it mostly off, to achieve an in-the-wood finish. If you try to even leave a 'thin' coat of an oilvarnish, you're asking for trouble (DAMHIKT).

T&T's Original Wood Finish is akin to the Maloof "Step 2" mix, which was intended to go over top of the varnish. I believe he used that just to dull the sheen from garish to gorgeous, and for texture.

[paul cottingham]

I apply it very thinly (is that even a word?) and buff it with a cloth. I let it sit for 1 hour then buff it off. My shop is cold and around 70 percent RH and the finish dries great. It stands up to everything I and my daughter and cats throw at it.

[Steve Schoene]

Making polymerized linseed oil does involve heating, but without air. Boiled linseed oil got it's name primarily because it was heated to incorporate lead oxide driers. Some linseed oil was heat bodied (without the drier) but I think that was less common the the BLO with lead. By the way, linseed oil won't actually boil, it has a listed boiling point of 343° C but also an autoignition temperature of 343° C. Consequently, actually boiling linseed oil could be pretty exciting, and attempting to do it at home quite possibly a gene pool improvement.

[Bill Sanson]

I am looking to make or buy a maloof style finish for my soon to be started rocker and a crib that i am in the midst of. Since i can buy the Maloof finish here in Canada, I am wondering what your guys thoughts on using the Tried and True Varnish and using a coat fo the the original with the beeswax in it as the "maloof final coat" any thoughts as that is the look i am going for.

[paul cottingham]

I've done it and really like the results. I am far from an expert tho' so take that for what it is worth.

[Prashun Patel]

The T&T products will work.
The recipes are well published though if you wish to mix your own; you just need access to beeswax, oil, and varnish.

[Scott Holmes]

I'm not too sure about the effectivness of an oil/varnish blend with WAX in it...

Why? what does it do to improve the oil/varnish blend?

[Neal Clayton]

Point of clarification:

Note the Original Wood Finish contains beeswax, whereas the Varnish Oil contains varnish.

I'm guessing the 'polymerized' linseed oil T&T uses really just means it's true BOILED linseed oil. Newer BLO contains metallic driers which actually speed the hardening of it it. Boiling it was the traditional way to hasten that process, but it's probably not as effective as the driers (not a fact, just my guess...).

Sam Maloof did reportedly use a mix like the T&T Varnish Oil, but his technique was to flood and wipe it mostly off, to achieve an in-the-wood finish. If you try to even leave a 'thin' coat of an oilvarnish, you're asking for trouble (DAMHIKT).

T&T's Original Wood Finish is akin to the Maloof "Step 2" mix, which was intended to go over top of the varnish. I believe he used that just to dull the sheen from garish to gorgeous, and for texture.

washing linseed oil to create the better mousetrap for paints and finishes is a pretty well debated historical thing. artists have put a lot of effort into finding the best methods of doing so to reproduce the paints of the renaissance.

on another forum i visit that has recently been debating the means and methods of producing older (and superior) linseed oil paints and putties and such this guy, an artist who has tried to re-learn the means of traditional washing of linseed oil (http://www.calcitesunoil.com/WashingLiinseedOil.html) seems to have the most knowledge regarding the hows and whys of processing linseed oil, from who they've turned up.

it's a pretty interesting read, even if centric to artists' paints.

his opinion, in summary, is that modern processing techniques destroy the natural acids in the oil that give paint/varnish films their longevity. the old method of sun bleaching the oil he claims is superior, since it allows the impurities in the oil to naturally separate from the oil and the sun doesn't destroy the natural acids in the oil like artificial heat does.

whether all that's true or not, it's pretty obvious that something is different between modern processed linseed oil and the finishes produced with traditionally processed linseed oil.

not to say that modern finishes are always inferior, but definitely different. what our ancestors lacked in the chemistry knowledge they made up for in developing processes by trial and error. but reconciling their process to modern chemistry is beyond most of us.

that said, i think discussions of those processes that modern finish makers use, versus the processes that traditional makers used, is a helluva lot more valuable than discussions of brand names and marketing terms. brand names and marketing terms don't mean anything.

[Pete McMahon]

washing linseed oil to create the better mousetrap for paints and finishes is a pretty well debated historical thing. artists have put a lot of effort into finding the best methods of doing so to reproduce the paints of the renaissance.

on another forum i visit that has recently been debating the means and methods of producing older (and superior) linseed oil paints and putties and such this guy, an artist who has tried to re-learn the means of traditional washing of linseed oil (http://www.calcitesunoil.com/WashingLiinseedOil.html) seems to have the most knowledge regarding the hows and whys of processing linseed oil, from who they've turned up.

it's a pretty interesting read, even if centric to artists' paints.

his opinion, in summary, is that modern processing techniques destroy the natural acids in the oil that give paint/varnish films their longevity. the old method of sun bleaching the oil he claims is superior, since it allows the impurities in the oil to naturally separate from the oil and the sun doesn't destroy the natural acids in the oil like artificial heat does.

whether all that's true or not, it's pretty obvious that something is different between modern processed linseed oil and the finishes produced with traditionally processed linseed oil.

not to say that modern finishes are always inferior, but definitely different. what our ancestors lacked in the chemistry knowledge they made up for in developing processes by trial and error. but reconciling their process to modern chemistry is beyond most of us.

that said, i think discussions of those processes that modern finish makers use, versus the processes that traditional makers used, is a helluva lot more valuable than discussions of brand names and marketing terms. brand names and marketing terms don't mean anything.


Neal,
What a great and informative post. What is the other forum you were referring to?
Many violin makers refine their linseed oil in the traditional manner. If you have ever seen a violin shop you'll see the bodies hanging over head in various stages of finishing and curing.

[Bill Sanson]

Thanks guys,
I got the tried and true oil varnish and original so I am going to give it a try as well as mix my own. I put the first coat on and so far so good, although the "maloof" mix with the gloss is a bit shinny. I am thinking that the second set of coats will knock it down a bit.

[paul cottingham]

Just a reminder...it is impossible to put it on too thinly. Be interested in your results.

[Bill Sanson]

Hey fellas, well i did my tests and I think for the crib I am going to go with the tried & true finish, 3 coats varnish/oil and then 2 coats oil/beeswax. I am doing it this way as it is for a crib and I just feel better with all the natural ingredients, although it is a bit of a amber look which I am hoping will darken into the traditional cherry look over time.

For the rest of the furniture ie the dresser and the rocker I am going to use the Maloof mixture with semigloss as I think this is most natural and best looking and a little more cost effective darkens the wood a little but not a lot.

Any thoughts or comments, I know that all finishes when dry are safe (ish) however for my first i thought i would be real safe...

[Neal Clayton]

Neal,
What a great and informative post. What is the other forum you were referring to?
Many violin makers refine their linseed oil in the traditional manner. If you have ever seen a violin shop you'll see the bodies hanging over head in various stages of finishing and curing.


here (http://historichomeworks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1625&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0) is the thread i was referring to. started with a contractor working on a historic building that specced traditional paint, so he tried one of the newer linseed oil paint concoctions and had a very prompt failure due to mold/mildew. we managed to find one guy in the UK selling traditional paint made in a small shop, their product aptly named something like "two guys, a dog, and a paint shed" ;) beginning on page 2 of that thread, louis from the above mentioned website on page 3. there's a similar thread regarding linseed based glazing/filling putties stickied in their window/door forum.

it's of interest for historic preservation for obviously simple reasons. we have century+ old doors and windows with linseed oil paints, glazed with linseed oil putties. we have interior architectural details that still have linseed oil + pine tar varnishes on them. they are not rotten. they still look pretty good despite decades of exposure, whereas our modern alternatives are harder to work with and in the case of the paints, fail much quicker. why?

i think there are several reasons for the above, from my studying, and the studying of others on that forum (most of which are professionals involved with historic buildings, specifically windows and doors). 1) the people who made their own paint centuries ago had better lumber to work with than we do, which was naturally more resilient. 2) they knew alot more about surface prep and treating the lumber itself to resist parasites and fungus than we do. 3) they used linseed oil for everything, so they knew better how to process it into finishes and apply it than we do. 4) specific to lead, it wasn't just a resilient pigment, it was a toxic pigment and that was important. they knew it was toxic, and their selection of it had a lot to do with that.

the catch with all of that is before the late 19th century there were no sherwin williams stores, people made their own, and every recipe for finish or paint was passed down from master to apprentice. maybe they wrote it down, maybe they didn't. they probably didn't want their recipe published either way.

bits and pieces of history mixed with bits and pieces of common sense mixed with bits and pieces of simple chemistry, and sometimes people figure out such things...some other things, lost to the passing of time. i can say since i've built reproduction windows and doors for my own 100+ year old house over the years to match some of the old ones that were thrown out by previous owners, that a lot of those old methods that would seem counter-intuitive to modern 'common knowledge' are in fact correct, and the modern practices wrong. i think that's what's lost in discussions and comparisons of modern materials and methods in most cases. the old timers had a simple problem, and thus devised a simple solution with the materials they had, by simple trial and error to determine why something works or doesn't work.

i know it sounds preachy, but...

unless someone tells us, we don't know how to treat exterior wood to resist fungi, we got to home depot and they tell us to buy green, wet, chemically treated lumber.

unless someone tells us, we don't know when to use oil formulas, and when to use water/acrylic formulas, we go to the paint store and they tell us what to buy.

unless someone tells us, we don't know what type of varnish is appropriate for what, we go to the paint/hardware store and they tell us what to buy.

unless someone tells us, we don't know how to build our mousetraps better, we only know from our own experience and observation how to build things.

and when the extent of our experience and observation, as it is for many people these days, is leaving our condo to go to the minwax aisle at home depot to get something to fill in the dent in our particle board desk, that doesn't bode well for the next generation of people, some of whom will be required to build things. if all that next generation knows is what we tell them from our own knowledge, then they're not gonna be much better off.

but that's the situation we have, since we have traded 'how and why' for product marketing.

on the upside, we do have the wonderful magic internet that has almost the entirety of our collective knowledge of 'how and why', it's just a matter of convincing people to use it for something other than a quicker route to said minwax aisle at home depot ;).

(btw i wasn't targetting you with the above rant(s) shawn, yours just happened to be the one i was quoting. nor do i consider myself an expert on paint and finish formulations, other than how much of an 'expert' one could be from arriving at the conclusion that shopping via MSDS sheets is alot more productive than shopping via brand names and labels)