Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43

Thread: Rubio Monocoat - The answer to your finishing prayers?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    9,599

    Rubio Monocoat - The answer to your finishing prayers?

    After reading lots of good things about Rubio Monocoat and Osmo Polyox and a conversation here about a natural finish I decided to try Rubio Monocoat on a stereo cabinet project that likely will get significant abuse from albums being slid on and off the lower shelf. These hardwax oil finishes claim to be easy to repair if needed, and RM has zero VOC plus it comes in several colors, so that's why I chose it over Osmo Polyox.

    I watched a few YouTube videos and reviewed the directions and info. or RM's website before giving it a try on some scrap. My initial test confirmed it's dead simple to use. Put it on with a plastic spatula, white non abrasive pad, or rag, let it sit for a few minutes, and then wipe any excess off completely, completely, completely. RM is a 2 component product that can be used as a 1 component or 2 component product. It takes around 20 days to fully cure when used as a 1 component product, about 7 days when the catalyst is added. It is seemingly outrageously priced but ends up not being all that expensive to use compared to traditional finishes because you only need to apply one coat and there's very little waste because you don't have overspray or even need to use a brush to apply it.

    I used it on a walnut and Baltic birch stereo cabinet I designed. I bought a 350 ml package of "pure" which is their neutral color. It cost about $55. Outrageous, right? There is a little 275 ml can of part A and a tiny little 75 ml can of the catalyst. To apply it you mix 3 parts of Part A with 1 part of the catalyst, just mix them together and apply it. The cans came with a plastic spreader to assist distributing it on the wood without wasting any, a good idea for how much it costs per ml. That worked well on the wide open horizontal sections. Then I went back over it with a white Scotchbrite pad and also used that to do the edges and vertical surfaces. Watch some YouTube videos for more details, but it's incredibly simple to apply. Once it's on you let it sit for just a few minutes and then wipe and buff it off, thoroughly. I used blue shop paper towels. What's very impressive is you will not get lap marks if you do a section of a table top, for example, and then do another section after buffing off the first. In fact, that's the recommended way of doing any surface that takes more than a few minutes. Thinking back on how I often have rushed to do a large surface with wipe on or brushing varnish to avoid lap marks this was a very impressive characteristic. The only downside to using RM is it doesn't have the claimed spread rate. RM claims 30 - 50 m2/L, which is an average of 40 which is 0.43 sq. ft. / ml. My project had about 30 sq. ft. so 70 ml should have been enough to do it, maybe 75 allowing for waste in the non woven pad. Instead, it took about 110 ml, which is at least 50% more. A little still goes a long way, just not quite as far as RM claims. So it cost about $16 to do my cabinet. My guess is it would have taken about 10 oz of Sealcoat and 20 oz of WB clearcoat to do this cabinet had I gone that route, and that would have cost around the same amount, maybe a little more. One no stress coat using RM vs. setting up my spray booth and applying a coat of Sealcoat and then 2 coats of WB, sanding in between each coat, makes RM look pretty attractive.

    I made a test sample on my walnut, following RM's directions to sand no finer than 150 grit and to vacuum and wipe it clean. I used mineral spirits because a YouTube reviewer said that's what RM's (expensive) cleaner smelled and behaved like. RM is soluble in mineral spirits, too, and that's what I used for clean-up. I'm impatient and couldn't wait a week for it to fully cure, so after only 3 or 4 days I started testing for resistance to cold water, hot water, and Bourbon. None of those did anything, although the cold water did raise the grain a little; I could feel it being a little rougher after I wiped it off. But the next morning it felt fine again. If you have read any of my other finish test reviews you'll remember that cold and hot water and Bourbon have done significant damage to some products I've tested, permanent damage in some cases so the results here were impressive for a non-film forming product. I have not yet tested it against mustard or ammonia containing cleaners.

    To test how easy it is to repair I abraded off some of the finish on my test sample with 325 mesh sandpaper. After cleaning off the dust I applied some new RM finish to it, let it sit a couple of minutes, then wiped and buffed it off. There is no difference in appearance between the repaired area and the original, nor is there any overlap of finish in the old area. To me this is a huge advantage over other products when it comes to repair. Similarly, you can fill in a scratch and there's no evidence of the repair in the surrounding area. The scratch itself is still there, but the new finish makes it less noticeable. And if you want to scrape or sand out the scratch the repair would be completely invisible. When's the last time you were able to do that, easily?

    OK, what's not to like? Well, it's a matte sheen, pretty much dead flat actually. So if you want some sheen you're mostly out of luck. You can apply RM's Maintenance Oil over it to give a claimed satin sheen but that's about it. I suspect you would get a higher sheen if you first sanded to a finer grit, but RM says not to go above 150 grit. I do know that the area I repaired by sanding to 325 grit before applying the new finish has the same sheen as what was sanded to 150 grit, although it does feel smooth (no surprise), so maybe not.

    What's it look like?



    You be the judge.

    John

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    SE PA - Central Bucks County
    Posts
    65,638
    Thanks for that, John...my current shop situation has me contemplating alternative finishes and your work detailed above is very helpful about that. What is the expected temperature range for using this product...'just curious. TYIA!
    --

    The most expensive tool is the one you buy "cheaply" and often...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    9,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Becker View Post
    Thanks for that, John...my current shop situation has me contemplating alternative finishes and your work detailed above is very helpful about that. What is the expected temperature range for using this product...'just curious. TYIA!
    Here's a link to the TDS for RM Plus 2C, what I used: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/02...f?v=1625840789

    It says the working temperature range is 48 - 86F, the RH range is 35 - 60% and the wood moisture content should be 8 - 12%.

    As an update on testing, Windex did nothing, and that's saying something because it's the bane of many finishes. I'm using a piece of 1/16" veneer for my testing. I'm seeing that most liquids actually penetrate through the finish as evidenced by the veneer bowing, yet when I wipe them off and let the wood dry again there is no damage or raised grain. I can sometimes convince myself that the liquid has dissolved some of the finish and left a light spot, yet after it's really dry again it looks perfectly uniform. This stuff is definitely different from traditional finishes and in a good way.

    If your projects call for a nearly matte sheen, Jim, RM may fit the bill in your current shop setup - and beyond.

    John

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    924
    Thanks for sharing your experience, John. I have a small container of the Osmo and have been waiting for an appropriately sized project to try it. Your thorough discussion is a big help.
    Rustic? Well, no. That was not my intention!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    SE PA - Central Bucks County
    Posts
    65,638
    That temp range is VERY generous compared to most finishes! Now you have me thinking...
    --

    The most expensive tool is the one you buy "cheaply" and often...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Kensington, Maryland
    Posts
    274
    Very helpful as always Thanks John. I’ve been curious about Rubio monocoat. But 150 grit?? As a turner that’s kind of a show stopper. If you are so inclined would be curious to see what happens if you sanded up to 400 and tried it out. I could of course try that test myself too. So many finishes, so little time….

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    9,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Gaylin View Post
    Very helpful as always Thanks John. I’ve been curious about Rubio monocoat. But 150 grit?? As a turner that’s kind of a show stopper. If you are so inclined would be curious to see what happens if you sanded up to 400 and tried it out. I could of course try that test myself too. So many finishes, so little time….
    Rubio recommends 120 grit and no higher than 150. I found that quite surprising, too, but the proof is in the pudding as they say and it looks just fine. You do not see any sanding marks. More importantly, those grits are supposed to keep the pores open so that the finish is absorbed. According to Rubio, if you go finer the pores become closed off and the finish won't absorb well enough to do its job properly.

    So far I've observed no damaged to the finish from cold water, near boiling water, bourbon, Windex, or French's mustard. This stuff is good.

    John

  8. #8
    I also do a fair bit of turning and thought the same thing, 150 grit is where I usually start. I would definitely have to change me sanding regime.
    I'm usually wary of finishes that create a slurry or pudding, as you mentioned, they tend to just fill in the 150 grit open pores and mute any chatoyance the wood may have.
    I don't know if this was a concern on your project but just wondering about the look or depth of the finish as the light catches it.
    Very thorough review, thanks

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    SE PA - Central Bucks County
    Posts
    65,638
    I can't say I've ever heard of the Mustard test...
    --

    The most expensive tool is the one you buy "cheaply" and often...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    9,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Weber View Post
    I also do a fair bit of turning and thought the same thing, 150 grit is where I usually start. I would definitely have to change me sanding regime.
    I'm usually wary of finishes that create a slurry or pudding, as you mentioned, they tend to just fill in the 150 grit open pores and mute any chatoyance the wood may have.
    I don't know if this was a concern on your project but just wondering about the look or depth of the finish as the light catches it.
    Very thorough review, thanks
    Rubio makes a big point of telling you to clean the wood before applying the finish. Vacuum then wipe the surface with their cleaner (or mineral spirits). If you do that there will be no dust, and no slurry. You see the grain clearly but since Rubio is very much a matte sheen you will not get the depth of a high gloss finish. On the left side of the closeup photo above there is some curly grain in the walnut. Under the Rubio it's not nearly as noticeable as it would be had I used a higher gloss finish.

    I saw on Osmo's website that they offer a gloss sheen in addition to the matte version. That may be something you should look into if you want more depth to the finish. I wasn't concerned about it with this project but I'm sure I will be in the future.

    John

  11. #11
    Thank you, I appreciate it

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    10,301
    John, wood sanded to only 150 grit feels rough to me. Does Rubio magically make that rough wood smooth?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    9,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie Buxton View Post
    John, wood sanded to only 150 grit feels rough to me. Does Rubio magically make that rough wood smooth?
    No, it won't make it any smoother. As I mentioned earlier, I created a repair spot on my sample board where I sanded that area with 325 grit sandpaper. It felt decidedly smoother on that section after I applied the second coat. To Ed's question about sheen, however, it made no difference.

    I have not yet tried making a new sample that I sand to 325 or even higher grit. I'm sure it will feel smooth, the repair on the first sample proved that. What I'm most interested in seeing is if the durability drops off. Guess I'll go make another sample.

    John

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    10,301
    Rubio has a big collection of stains. Final sanding at 150 might be to leave lots of scratches for the pigment particles to lodge in.

  15. #15
    Is this the first hard wax oil type product you've used?
    Just wondering if you had already used something like Fiddes or similar to compare it to in terms of durability.
    https://fiddes-usa.com/shop/floor-fi.../hard-wax-oil/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •