Waterborne acrylic vs lacquer solids content?

[Eric Baird]

I am pretty new to spraying finishes and am only familiar with spraying Deft brushing lacquer out of quart cans so far. I am going to switch to water based finishing so I will be able to spray inside and not worry about fumes (and compressor noise/ hauling gear out) as much.

Softwood is what I primarily work with and have been having issues with the lacquer soaking into the spongy grain and not the rings. Thus requiring more smoothing and more coats to look right.

Am I correct in assuming that in addition to the advantages of the waterborne acrylic "lacquers", they have a higher solids content as well? Meaning the lack of a high solvent content will prevent them from soaking in as much? I need the finish to go ON and not IN the wood as much. Are they just thicker in that sense? And would the high build versions Ive been seeing be even better?

Thanks.

[Jim Becker]

The amount of solids is generally product specific, just as it is with solvent-based products. I rarely put water borne directly on wood simply because 1) most of them would result in a lifeless color and 2) there may be significant grain raising. That's personal preference. Most of the time, the water borne finishes I use are going on over de-waxed shellac which I use as a barrier coat between the clear finish and any dye and/or oil I may have used to bring the wood alive with. That said, if you raise the grain with distilled water first and knock off the "nubbies" with 320 paper first, you'll get minimal grain raise with your first coat of water borne. Hit that coat with a few quick swipes of 320/400 or a white pad to remove any remaining "nubbies" and you'll be good to go with a sealed surface. The Target Coatings finishes I use as well as Minwax Polycrylic do seem to have enough solid to stay on top, but if the wood you're working with is excessively absorbent, you may very well need to seal with something like de-waxed shellac first to avoid uneven absorption of your clear coats.

[Eric Baird]

Thanks for the reply.
What do you mean by lifeless color? Not adding a little amber tint like NC lacquer does?
The grain raising I understand because there is water in there after all and I can imagine some swelling before drying.

I have learned Im always going to have to sand at least one of the coats. No getting around the stuff that pops up or sticks down. There are a lot of conflicting opinions online about using shellac as a sealer. A lot of people say a thinned first coat of the final finish will achieve the same effect.

I am on a mission the find the fastest to apply good looking finish for bare wood. The Target waterborne has the dry time and burn in of a solvent based lacquer I believe. Thats on the shopping list. Have you tried their high build version?

This is all stuff I know I have to just try out for myself but an experienced opinion helps.

[Jim Becker]

Yes, you can add a little tint to the water borne finish to warm thing up a bit, but I personally don't find that as effective as oiling first, sealing with a barrier coat and then spraying the finish. Personal preference.

I've only used the regular EM6000 and its predecessors, not the high build.

[Curt Harms]

I too prefer dewaxed shellac as a first coat. Spraying goes pretty fast and it's ready to recoat in less than an hour generally. I've experimented with coloring water-based 'varnishes' and so far haven't found a good "looks like oil based" formula when used without a shellac sealer.