Jump to content

MMI Enterprises

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,057

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Posts posted by MMI Enterprises

  2. Posted · Report reply

    James,

    "What can be simpler than that?"

    Answer= using one product..

    But hey if your only doing one coat of each, and your doing it wet on wet, and the two individual manufactures warrant their product being used as such, or scopes of work in any contracts with customers (residential or commercial) list the two product, and the color outcome is predictable enough then sure your labor would be close to exact same as using only the one product and so the question why not might be in order? Seems almost too many things for the average joe to consider so they use a single product. Your answer to why dual them products together then is because it's 'better'. You believe it, which I respect, but I want to know how its truly better. Are you saying that if you total the stain used on your two discrete coats and hypthetically remove it from deck to a mix bucket and then reapply a mixed up version via two coats that you would have left over compared to your dual method?. In other words you get more in the wood via your method.. If that is what you think or know as true then I ask why is going deeper better when the ac lock is plenty to make the product last as long as some have seemed to testify. So far it sounds like your just recognizing that two wet on wets is better in general for a richer/better look (due to thickening/concentrating).

  5. Posted · Report reply

    So Kevin, what your saying is it's better to use a non-drying oils first then use a Linseed type to seal in the non-drying oil.

    ...nope didn't say that, not even between the lines did I say that. Instead of "first then use a" you can substitute "along with a". Think of the muddy water analogy or rather realize the staining product in question has a certain singular thinness built in and both the drying oil and non-drying oil is available to the wood. The wood will take/absorb the parrafinic as it sees fit. I do not prescribe to an idea of another product going deeper= better if that is where your at. Must be true to some point on some wood or some wood projects but I haven't seen it matter on a deck... In other words if it's sealed and looks good and lasts yer good to go. The two medium wet on wets of AC in my mind and experience is plenty of parrafinic for most wood. It is a myth/misnomer that our goal with AC, or RS for that matter, is that we will have a wetter/richer/glossier look hanging around after the job is good and dry/settled so I personally do not make any aim for building coats of linseed. I only mention for sake of Dan and Charlie's thoughts on heavy first versus lite first. You know AC's use of linseed is for a lock and that even a few coat is not very concerning on future maintenance ,..so don't play me..haha :)

    And if do that first you will use less of the Linseed type product. And using to much of a Linseed type and building up coats is bad for exterior horizontal wood. Is that what you said ? ..see above..lol[/QUOTE]

    James, why you not just try putting ac on first then after it sets up get in some highlites with rs colorant?.. yonk yonk

    Pun aside I do see where your going with rs first then AC and but have to call it like I see it. Your using it as a more inexpensive filler/base hoping the ac will sit up higher and more even. My thought on that is that indeed I would rather have the linseed deeper and blended inside the wood than up top. Ac works fine in this regard. Your somewhat correct in prior statements about how linseed doesn't rebulk wood but it does get in pretty darn microscopically for my tastes (again experience taken from doing gun stocks with pure linseed). Perhaps attaching a synonym word such as 'rebulk/swell' could be used for novice ear? Truly I have no problem with your method I just find dueling more complex and labor intensive and not for me in practice. I just prefure the KISS methodology while actually working a job. Don't get me wrong as I have done what your doing on my own wood via experimentation. Dueling most any parrafinic with a drying type oil works to opaqueize (new word)/richen and overseal (new word) the wood. Same thing can be achomplished with dry on dry. Check it out..I'll give an example of a crazy tri method. On my kids swing set I got RS mixed with Omax on top of factoring colored PT. Looks pretty darn good..lol

    All that said..none of us are very far apart here.. :)

  6. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    I'm pretty much with Dan on many things here in that if we are mainly considering wet on wet then both the two product methodology and the heavyness of coats is just akin to sillyness and overkill...saying otherwise would be like saying muddy water don't wet wood compared to clean water. See both the products in question make use of a solvent. Reapplication of said solvent to either will disolve and mix with that which is uncured. (8 hr by some accord for AC, never for RS). Since I've delt with lots of linseed over the years on gun stocks, furniture, and the like I can assure that an 8hr dry is not needed to build up coatings due to skinnng/oxidizing at the surface.

    ...If talking about an actual coating, Once a coating skins you can count on it holding up subsequent coats whether its lite or heavy thus concentrating solids and pigments to a deeper richer look. I said it, Dan said it, I said it again.lol.

    Now I'll just elaborate on that by saying that skinning over a 'coating' by way of heavy coating is generally a no no. If it is a catylizing type coating the coating itself creates heat that forces outgassing from the substructure itself besides the obvious solvent based carriers not being able to escape before thicker and thicker skinning takes place.(epoxy or urethane can fisheye). Such doesn't applY to our low bodied semitrans type wood stains even if their solids did cure the same(which they don't). They dry by oxygen being brung in by the metalic dryers. Linseed on its own does not cure/dry but rather it 'thickens'. Such thickening is mostly what causes us to be able to build up the look/evenness of a deck sooner than an actual cure. If on first coat you loose 50%+ of a products thinness due to spraying or evaporation over whatever minutes (or hour) then subsequent wet coat will thicken to some average between the two. Is main reason why stuff gets better looking. We are concentrating pigments and solids thus becoming more opaque.

  7. Posted · Report reply

    Kevin,

    To be honest, and quite frank, you do not have a clue as to what you are suggesting or even talking about.

    Check out the stain polls here on TGS for the past several years. Do you think all these contractors have been fooling their customers over multiple years?

    We have tested and tried various oil stains over the years. Baby oil still wins, hands down.

    I'll assume your not meaning to insult but rather your just being defensive if not biased based on your business model. The polls haven't the foggiest effect on how long a deck job lasts or how financially effected customers are by models or a drying versus non drying method. Try being more specific to a point of contention rather than generalizing my statements as all being wrong or suggestive.

  9. Posted · Report reply

    Kevin, these are always wet-on-wet coats. I guess that it is also a matter of semantics. To me, "wet" is anything that has not started curing.

    Go back and reread my description. The steps have two coats and you can see the difference between the steps and the wooden patio. The one coat (which was heavy) is blotchy and light.

    "That could sit for an hour while we do everything else. "

    Gotcha there on mentioning an 'hour'.. ..and yes its semantics or hard to say at what point a natural oil product can be considered as dry enough to where it will slow down penetration of the next wet on wet on wet. In the heat an hour can be enough to consider the procedure almost as a dry on dry procedure especially when the first coat is light. Soon as there is any tack I suppose ya start to leave the term of wet on wet behind. You can for sure feel the thickening difference when back brushing AC an hour along with a microfiber pad so it becomes more of a coat then a penetration..(try it over an acrylic sometime if ya don't believe.. haha).

    But yup if ya know ya got a porous one a lite coat wll work..

  10. Posted · Report reply

    Kevin,

    My customers, some who have been with us at the 8 year mark, would tend to disagree. So do I.

    If they tend to disagree I would think it relates more to them having never experienced enough other options and a carefree attitude towards emptying their wallets to a 'maintain it more often' type busness model rather than it relating to anything of a comparison of product durability/depletion over the long run. Although I am a fan of feeding wood non-drying oils I do also believe I don't have to stop there. I can give it MORE for the sake of saving my customers long term labor and material costs. Your welcome to present how much money would be spent over an 8+ year deck care program with an non-drying oil product versus one containg drying oils. I would welcome seeing the savings I can offer my customers by way of using this or that product. Facts are facts though in my opinion and it is just not goign to work out in favor of a straight non-drying oil product.. a product that washes or leaches away faster than another is going to be seeing a deck redone more often to acheive like results. Yea sure perhaps a cycle or two in with a certain non drying oil product a deck will seem to be lasting longer but this is mainly due depletion of the pigments being slower compared to the oil. Such leads to a more opaqueness but it does not mean the wood is sealed on a continual basis which is key for long term wood health as well as consistant asthetics....Not saying such products don't look good.. just that it is inconsistant and too much change.

    Here ya go I got a new acronym for RS.. 'Risky Seal'

    lol..just kidding somewhat.. keep a deck up regularly with RS and all will be well. AC's better in every aspect though far as I am concerned. I bet yours and mine customers both would agree if given the chance to experience the dif. In giving customer options they tend to go with longer term savings...

    ..Now if ya care to lend an ear I can elaborate by taking from similar trade example in my providing interior floor care... My floor care business opperates on a schedule pretty much unheard of these days. I am like the energizer bunny or timex when it comes to ability of keeping floors up. In a world where many of your big stores are done nightly I still provide a product that gets large scale-high traffic customers by on a 2 week schedule. I save these customers literally thousands of dollars monthly in both labor and material. What I provide is supperior in every aspect and is condusive and sometimes custom to the perticular environment. Yea I could make more and sell more product and material but why I ask when I am in it for pride of work, professionalizm, and a humble existance firstly. Money or rather large profit is but a secondary grace due more to low overhead and such. I have no per store goal persay other than providing a fair service and keeping a lasting relationship. I have no goal of depleting resources by constantly recoating or stripping floors. I don't even like to strip as the labor is intensive to say the least so you can consider my labor a resource if ya like. I strip anywhere from 1-4 year after only recoating approx. every quarter. This commercial example of providing a more suitable cycle of savings on flooring can be almost directly translated into wood care if gone about the correct way..with time frames being stretched out of course... Far as the model goes it is one of having eggs in many baskets and is value based. Again though I give it MORE and turn it into value+quality. :)

  11. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    Ken, Unsure what we to gain from that pic as we know not what it would look like with another coat. Not really close enough pic either.

    That said perhaps refering back to what Dan, Lyle, and myself had said about our coating procedures is in order. To be clear I would not disagree with the bennefits of dual coating in a dry on dry procedure for products with a drying/bodied/coating aspect. That seems to be where your going here and rightly so as any innitial coat (whether lite or heavy) is going to act as a seal similar to old painter techniques or like using a sanding sealer on interior wood. Makes for a better look as the second coats solids (both dying oil and pigments) sit on top the dry first coat. So please note that when I imply multi-coating not being needed with AC that I am refuring mainly to wet on wet coating to where an applicator is striving for a finished look right then and there. Just doesn't work that way with AC. With spraying two wet on wet medium coats, a little backbrushing, and a little spotting here and there I have seen no need to apply a second coat after it dries. Reason being that it is only the pigment itself being even or not even that can call an AC type of deck as unsuitable. Pick or make a custom offering of AC with enough pigment and its end of story.The end goal here is not to acheive a darker/richer/wetter look when the job is dry by way of tons of non drying oil such that some products provide or push but rather to have an even pigment tone with a durable enough seal that will last through some weather and abuse. I mean I would say to Rick that oiling is nice but open depletion is not when you can have the best of both worlds as James touches on with a mix..

    Btw.. hey James, I've always said my old dads mixing of linseed and thompsons was supposed to have been the bomb..so there ya go, mixes can and do work :)

    But anyways Ken... I don't think we are in much if any disagreement, just wanted to be clear is all.

  13. Posted · Report reply

    Hear what your claiming there Dan about AC. Do you think a two coat drench is true based on how other products act on the wood or a provable fact based on seeing what one coat looks like after it dries and settles in?. I tend to want to double wet coat as well but pretty sure I been told there really no need to do that. In fact the trying to keep an even wet rich look throughout a project seems futile due to the dual soaking in action/slight top coating(linseed) and but after it all dries and settles it all seems ok all on its own unlike other products that are more of a coating type nature....

  18. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    Maintenance

    "A maintenance coat of Hardwood Finish should be applied within 3-6 months after the initial application or as soon as oil looks depleted. The next maintenance coat should be done again in approximately 10-12 months or whenever oil looks depleted. Over time, the wood fibers become fully protected and the maintenance will become less frequent."

    What some do is they notice their ipe starts to look like a failed coating with a slight dingy or whitened look to it (resembles fade, leaching, or water staining or even failed lacquer, etc.) without actually getting up real close and personal to it and thinking about what is going on. They then take a strong washer to it and go about removing what offends them. This is fine and all as it can be hard to hurt ipe with pressure but basically they end up back at brand new fresh wood with tons of extractives right at the surface. Looks good being way richer looking prior to the restaining and all but what they have actually done is they have extended the problem of getting stains to last on ipe by removing what it needs to grip and absorb to. They usually do this blasting away for sake of instant gratification of course. In reality the fake aging/weathered wood is needed for any chance at a longer run between stainings. Think of it as a micro version of the larger fur/velvet we regularly have to remove from other woods for them to look good ..some will never get this and are likely to repeat the cycle over and over.

    It is tricky as parts may show the dinge/faded/leached look and other don't and look fresher. The fresher looking areas will be the shaded parts or parts protected from the elements or washings and have the extractives and coatings right at the surface... So what can be done to remedy such situation one may ask??.. well you can try to only slightly clean the faded/dinge looking area with less pressure and but you use stronger chems and less pressure on the richer looking areas in goal of fake weathering/removal of extractives without removal of the micro fur.

    The effect will only be slight and but a mock up/test will confirm that the areas will blend nice once they are oiled. Curiously the same effect takes place when dealing with recoating of concrete coated with lacquer coatings.. Only the gross dirt buildup or oxidized/crystalized lacquer should be removed in such case. On wood you do have to remove the finishes though that are of a coating type nature or your risk delamination, non drying, or non color matching situations. Just try doing it chemically is my current recommend... All such jobs deserve a mockup rather than a 'go for it' attitude.

  25. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    Pics may say a thousand words... btw, what are you talking about in mentioning fuzzies? Are you setting us up to where we question the prep job?

    I wonder what happened with using wtw (honey gold stuff) on cedar...actually you did not say the wood was cedar though. Thought that is what most back east like to use though :)

×