Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Waterlox?
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=15135		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Steve Saville [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:22 am ]
Post subject: 
Based on what I've read here, I bought some gloss Waterlox, but I'm confused on how to use it.

Is it good as a finish, or is it just good as a base for other finishes like Rockhard?

In use, would it work to.....
1) Epoxy pore fill
2) Shellac
3) Waterlox - level out
4) Top with Rockhard

Any tips and suggestions are greatly appreciated.
(I did read through about every thread with Waterlox in it.)
Author:  joe white(old) [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 3:50 am ]
Post subject: 
Steve, It is used as a finish but I use it as a tie coat between the wood and the sealers. This was recommended by Rick Turner and so far I find it to work great. I also have used it to seal or "set" stains before sealing over them. I can't suggest how to use it as a finish.
Author:  Steve Saville [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:16 am ]
Post subject: 
Thanks Joe.
Does anyone know it it works well with shellac, epoxy and Rockhard?
Author:  mgcain [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:21 am ]
Post subject: 

Waterlox is an oil/varnish blend and is great for hand application. I haven't used it on a guitar, but in my furniture applications I have used it  quite often.  It will pop the figure on wood when used as a base coat, and is an acceptable finish for occasional tables.  Its not the most durable finish, but can work well to accent the grain under a coat of shellac. shellac sticks well to it - I have no idea how it will work with epoxy/zpoxy.  If I wanted a more durable finish, I would apply the waterlox - let it dry and cure thoroughly, then seal with shellac and topcoat with the finish of your choice...


Mitch
Author:  James Orr [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:52 am ]
Post subject: 
Steve, for a natural finish, Rick mentioned using it in two different ways.
The first was to epoxy pore fill, then coat with two thin coats of Waterlox.
The second method was to coat with a thin coat of Waterlox, epoxy pore
fill, then coat with another thin coat of Waterlox. The process for
sunbursts was different. If you're interested in reading more about his
process, look up the Nitro vs. Poly thread in the archives.
Author:  David R White [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:29 am ]
Post subject: 
Sorry if I'm missing something obvious but this discussion is confusing me.

Waterlox makes a sealer and a high gloss finish, which is being referred to here?

I thought that epoxy used as a pore filler would also properly seal the wood, if not waterlox has a sealer so why are we adding shellac into the schedule?


Author:  SniderMike [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:36 am ]
Post subject: 
Yeah, I'm not sure what the purpose of the waterlox would be under
another varnish.

Why not just epoxy pore fill, and Rockhard right over that, maybe with
shellac in between? Or skip the Rockhard and just use the Waterlox? Why
the waterlox in between?

Author:  Steve Saville [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 8:31 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=drwhite] ......Waterlox makes a sealer and a high gloss finish, which is being referred to here?.....
[/QUOTE]
High gloss finish.


[QUOTE=SniderMike] Yeah, I'm not sure what the purpose of the waterlox would be under another varnish.
[/QUOTE]
Me neither. That's why I'm asking.
I've read a lot of threads here on Waterlox and I'm not sure how to use it. I think Waterlox cures very fast on just about any wood and works as a good tie coat. That makes it different than Rockhard.
Because it cures faster, I was wondering if you could use it instead of Rockhard to build up and level and then use Rockhard as the final finish. Is Rockhard a better top coat than Waterlox? Is Rockhard tougher and easier to polish?
If not, could we just use Waterlox?

[QUOTE=SniderMike] Why not just epoxy pore fill, and Rockhard right over that, maybe with shellac in between? Or skip the Rockhard and just use the Waterlox? Why the waterlox in between?
[/QUOTE]
Great questions.
(Are those rhetorical questions?)
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 8:32 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=drwhite]I thought that epoxy used as a pore filler would also properly seal the wood, if not waterlox has a sealer so why are we adding shellac into the schedule? [/QUOTE]

Yes epoxy will seal the wood but some top coat finishes do not bond well to epoxy therefore shellac is used a an intermediary seal coat because it bond to epoxy quite well and most every top coat finish will bond well to shellac
Author:  Dominic [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:00 am ]
Post subject: 
The Nitro v poly thread is a great read for this stuff like James mentioned. I have saved the whole thing so i could print it out and read at my leisure. I believe the most promising application mentioned in it was to use Waterlox as a tie coat for a poly finish on the top. (No pore filling) And then using CA glue to glue the bridge straight onto the finish and not have to chip it back to wood under the bridge.
This appeals to me for a number of reasons including (mostly) because I tend to mess up chipping away the finish a bit.
Dominic

Author:  Burton LeGeyt [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:13 am ]
Post subject: 
In an experiment I found that Waterlox did not give the same sort of high gloss finish that even tru-oil would. I epoxy sealed some mahogany and then applied 3 coats of waterlox and sanded thru to 1200 and then used a polishing compound and I could never get a mirror finish. I would have to try again before I said for sure, but it wasn't what I would consider a "high gloss" finish. I have been using it for necks where I was using tru-oil because it dries on rosewood bindings on the fingerboard where tru-oil sometimes never seems to.
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:15 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Dominic]I believe the most promising application mentioned in it was to use Waterlox as a tie coat for a poly finish on the top. (No pore filling) And then using CA glue to glue the bridge straight onto the finish and not have to chip it back to wood under the bridge.
This appeals to me for a number of reasons including (mostly) because I tend to mess up chipping away the finish a bit.
Dominic

[/QUOTE]

Would not appeal to me because I know CA will get brittle with age. Just me but I will stick to using a pva or hhg wood to wood joint thank you. No offence meant but this would scare me.
Author:  James Orr [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:35 am ]
Post subject: 
These are my notes from the Poly vs. Nitro thread if anyone is interested.
No telling how long I'll leave them up. I have Al Carruth's notes for
Rockhard in there, too.

Finish Notes
Author:  JohnAbercrombie [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 11:47 am ]
Post subject: 
James-
Thanks for the notes.
John
Author:  grumpy [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 12:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
ooOH...

You may think about asking us to review these things before posting to the public... For example, I DON'T use two coats of sealer, and I don't scuff before topcoating. No idea what maroon scotchbrite is...
Author:  joe white(old) [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 1:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
Mario, The maroon scothbrite is the 3M scuff pads that you can use to scuff a finish before painting. The maroon one is pretty darned agressive and I do not use them in guitar finishing. they also shed bits of fiber and dust particles. Great in the auto industry but just too dirty and agressive for me.
Author:  James Orr [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 1:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hey Mario. Sorry about that. It looks like I added the scotch brite scuff to
them all. I made those corrections. These are just things I note for my
own reference.
Author:  SniderMike [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=SteveS]   
[QUOTE=SniderMike] Yeah, I'm not sure what the purpose of the waterlox
would be under another varnish.
[/QUOTE]
Me neither. That's why I'm asking.
I've read a lot of threads here on Waterlox and I'm not sure how to use it.
I think Waterlox cures very fast on just about any wood and works as a
good tie coat. That makes it different than Rockhard.
Because it cures faster, I was wondering if you could use it instead of
Rockhard to build up and level and then use Rockhard as the final finish.
Is Rockhard a better top coat than Waterlox? Is Rockhard tougher and
easier to polish?
If not, could we just use Waterlox?

[QUOTE=SniderMike] Why not just epoxy pore fill, and Rockhard right
over that, maybe with shellac in between? Or skip the Rockhard and just
use the Waterlox? Why the waterlox in between?
[/QUOTE]
Great questions.
(Are those rhetorical questions?)[/QUOTE]

No, not rhetorical

My understanding is that some are using it as a tie coat for finishes that
might not adhere well to the epoxy pore fill. My thought is that it's
redundant if you're just putting another varnish on top of it, as well as
shellac underneath. I would suggest trying both the Rockhard and the
Waterlox on some scrap, and then only using the one you like better for a
topcoat. The shellac sealer probably isn't a bad idea, but even that isn't
necessary if the topcoat sticks to the porefill well. I couldn't tell you if it
does or not though....
Author:  Howard Klepper [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:35 am ]
Post subject: 
No offense meant to Steve, but isn't there something a bit bassackwards about getting the product and then trying to find a purpose for it?
Author:  Steve Saville [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Howard Klepper] No offense meant to Steve, but isn't there something a bit bassackwards about getting the product and then trying to find a purpose for it?[/QUOTE]

That no offense line reminds me of my relatives in the south when the say, bless his or her heart, and they think it gives them license to say anything rude and nasty that they want.

Things like, "Bless his heart, he's the dumbest son-o-gun ever to walk the green earth."

If I bought a $1,000 shaper and asked how to use it for guitars, you'd have a good point, but a $15 can of finish tacked on to an order is hardly a big deal in my book. I have it now and can experiment with it.

No offence taken, I've got tough enough skin, but that kind of comment has caused major blow ups here in the past month.

Howard, do you use Waterlox?
I love your work and guitars and enjoyed meeting you at NAMM last year. Will you be there this year?
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/