Woodtux vs. timberOil

[plainpainter 217]

Ok this is a totally subjective test that is basically comparing apples to oranges, i.e. one coat of woodtux vs. 2 coats of timberoil done 6 weeks apart; the woodtux finish is months older than the timberoil; and the list goes on and on. But all that aside, timberoil beads water so incredibly even 2 months after the second application - where as I went back to do some interior painting for a customer that I had refinished their deck with wtw this summer - and I looked at it after a rain - and it wasn't beading water at all. I will be curious to see how the timberoil finish survives the winter and what kind of maintenance it will need next year. I still have no intention of bringing timber oil to my customers - until I see a niche for it - or a customer demands it. Although I am seeing it's application to decks adjacent to chlorinated pools - where any finish is totally killed - and something like timber oil would always blend back in without looking splotchy.

[bigchaz 157]

I dont think beading water is particularly representative of a good finish. Thompons probably beads more than anything the first month you have it on. Ive never had a woodtux deck bead a lot of water, but I know they look 100 times better than any thompsons deck ever will

[PressurePros 248]

Beading water has nothing to do with a good finish, thats a marketing myth.

[Beth n Rod 1,279]

Beading water is a sign of coadhesion. This is where surface tension comes into play according to molocular compatibility and wtw is not a product designed initially to bead water. Remember, it can be mixed with water on a wet deck application. (note the mustard color upon initial application before the water is forced out and the intended color sets in.) It lets the water spread out so that it dries faster and avoids the little beads of water that amplify sunlight and create it's own demise. Remember playing with a magnifying glass?

Parrafin wax based products and some acrylics will bead water. Alkyd and oil based products will not. I have had to explain this one to a number of customers who are looking for the "thompson" effect as seen in the commercial. Sorry folks thats for car waxes.

As Ken stated, the finish does not depend on whether it beads water or not, the product was designed to be permeable so that water didn't stay trapped in the wood. (based upon old conversations with the mfr.) If that has changed then my statements are moot. But it still performs this way on the surfaces we have applied it to. The wood looks wet but the product is functioning as designed. If there is any splotchyness, this opens up another proverbial can of worms alltogether.

Rod!~

[plainpainter 217]

I think the wtw isn't beading water - is because a cure alkyd is something water will cling to. Timber oil isn't a cured finish - it's a oil impregnated finish that water can't cling to - so it beads even close to 2 months after application. I am not arguing the pros and cons - or wtw is doing it's job or not. It just looks really cool - I like the Timber Oil product.

[MMI Enterprises 289]

Daniel,

If comparing the term 'cling' to Rod's terms 'coadhesion' and 'molecular compatability' then that about right. Almost like saying same thing to me in a layman terms or outlook..

I'll add that not all curing type finishes whether the solids carrier is oil, water or an alkyd(emulsion mix) can be boxed into causing water to bead. It is more to do with the solids molecular compatability as Rod says. I can attest to this as I've probably used at least 30 brands of acylics or urethane mixes in hard surface care over the years and the beed can't be pinned down to having much to do with smoothness, how old the finish is, or the amount of oxidation present. For example I burnish floors totally smooth as glass and the finishes can still hold their characteristics whether beading or not. In case of car finish I think the loss of the beading that is so sought after becomes about the oxidation changing the mechanical surface tension of the water to wax relationship and the molecules of the wax being covered over. In floor care like I do oxidation does not apply as they serviced regularly. I still see tons of difference between finishes and their beed ability or rather their ability to not beed water. Is a strange thing to consider that at same time of having a more slip resistant finish (almost the term 'cling') I can still have a non water bead situation so that water dries quiker yet the surface is totally smooth, thick, and shiny. Water beeding comes down to molecular compatability and dispersion in my book. Maybe the term 'affinity to water' can be used as well. Silicone is a nasty bugger and I think it be main culprit in the o'l water beading arena.

Terms like 'surface tension' or 'slip coefficient' or 'slip resistance' are used to actually measure such aspects of surfaces or coatings effects on them.

We touched on the water bead thing in a few other threads back in April that you may wish to check out:

http://www.thegrimescene.com/forums/wood-cleaning-restoration-decks-fences-etc/10325-stripping-new-water-based-stain.html

http://www.thegrimescene.com/forums/wood-cleaning-restoration-decks-fences-etc/10187-experienced-deck.html#post102703 This latter thread could use some tending..

:)

[acegot 14]

Generally a surface with "sheeting" action will evaporate faster than "beading". Less chance of discoloration from sun magnification or hard water deposits. For years I've compared the difference & found that sheeting action of a product has been beneficial. For 16 yrs. now I am still explaining to people that because their deck is not "beading" water that it is still being protected. My 2 cents worth, have Happy Holidays!

[MMI Enterprises 289]

Hi Lyle...how goes it yer way, anything much happening on the wood over there? Nice to see you pay the site a visit..

Happy Holidays back at ya..Enjoy!!

[James 624]

This goes back to being able to understanding the difference between Drying -oils and non- drying oils. Film forming , non- film forming and solid the content of a product( how much goes into the wood or how much stay's on top).

Dan, on all of the WoodTux projects I did this year. The finish seems to break down after a couple of months and starts to absorb water. Even the so called new batch. I have grave concerns with the changes that happened. Because the new stuff is no where like the old stuff. The less you used per 100 sqft the faster the failure. Anything that is easy to remove does not have the ability to hold up to UV ray's and weathering. I can not believe how easy Woodtux is to remove even after just applying???

I spent 2 years doing trials with this product and it completely changed over night. The first deck I did looks better than all the decks I did this year. I had a very good year but this product caused too many headaches and I will have a few more in the spring to deal with.

[plainpainter 217]

Jim - I think you are a genius. My personal timber oil deck still looks great like 2 months after the 2nd application - with water still beading. I can see how this will work for customers - where they get use to a price to pressure wash and stain. And with parafinnic oil stain - like you said - year after year, there is less oil you will need to saturate into the wood. Yet you can still charge the same amount of money. Now I am saying this in regards to pressure treated - I don't have experience with hardwoods. As well - you don't have to worry about wear patterns - splotchiness, when you layer stain over stain. I did 3 sizeable decks this year - with the improved wtw batch - one new deck, with just a TSP/Bleach/surfactant house mix - as it was just less than a year old. And then two full restoration decks. I am curious as well - and I will compare to how my Oct. '06 woodtux jobs holds out.