Ending the Debate

[plainpainter 217]

So I ordered a 5 gallon pail of Woodtux this morning and asked Russell what steps should I take to apply the stain - as I heard from people online that it is hard to work with. He asked me what stains I am use to - so I told him Cabot stains and California Storm Stains. He then told me there's no problem - that I shouldn't worry about it. I then asked him what's all the commotion about - he then replied that some guys don't like it when they apply stain to the railings, and drops make it onto the wood and then when they go do the deck part - those drops flash. My Jaw dropped down to the ground - apparently it's real easy to use paraffinic non-drying oil stains, I wouldn't know because I have never used them. But I am shocked that so many professionals think working with drying stains is such an issue. And now I understand this whole fim-forming issue as well, guys who are use to products like phenoseal and readyseal - are from a totally different universe. They are so use to products that just drench into the wood like it was mineral oil - that any product that I would use such as Cabot's, California Storm Stains, Sikkens, etc would be from their perspective film-forming stains. This is absolutely not true! And if Woodtux is anything like those stains - it's not a film-forming stain by any definition. Just because there is some cured product that lays at the surface.

For those that don't know what a film-former is: It's anything like the ol' two part Sikkens, deck and deckbase that makes a thick polyurethane coating on the wood - that peals. Or any product like a spar varnish -heck if you thinned down spar varnish 1:1 with spirits - it would no longer be a film forming product in my book.

So please stop the threads accusing many products of being film-forming, I'd rather not read all the rhetoric. If it ain't a thick poly like coating like Sikkens Deck & DeckBase - then it ain't a film forming stain. A drying stain perhaps, but film-forming no.

[JFife 14]

Danboy,

...You missed it.....it isn't a big deal until the SECOND application. Try getting a stain that "kinda pentrates, kinda doesn't" to look right. Some area soak, some flash on top of the old sealer. Result: blotchiness. .....Or, you can just strip the old sealer and start afresh. Sell that one to the customer in two years:) At least with the true, heavy film-formers like DEK you know what you are going for.....a nice thick coating. And let's say you do end up applying to the point you develop an even coating....those are even harder to maintain. And strip??

Like I said in the other thread, I use all kinds of stuff, but for long-term maintance, a product like RS should be a mainstay for a service Co., especially if they have employees. Build a clientbase on simple re-treats. The idea of WTW as a backup for weather issues is interesting, however......but I'm not in the deck biz, so I am not pursueing that angle.

[Russell Cissell 65]

Jon

I really don't think you have an understanding oh how/why Wood-Tux works. For the most part the discussions on the BBS involve a comparison between drying and non drying oil based stains. One thing that is seldom discussed is the difference between Wood-Tux and other drying oil based finishes.

"Try getting a stain that "kinda penetrates, kinda doesn't" to look right. Some area soak, some flash on top of the old sealer. Result: blotchiness. .....Or, you can just strip the old sealer and start afresh."

You are making assumptions about the maintenance of the finish that are simply incorrect. If you provide regular maintenance there is no need to strip the finish and no reason the maintenance application would be splotchy. Maintenance is extremely easy.

I do understand where you are coming from. With many drying oils it is difficult if not impossible to clean them after a year or two without significant loss of existing finish. That is what leads to a splotchy maintenance application. Wood-Tux is extremely high in resin and pigment solids. As a result, it can handle several years of weathering and still hold up to a good cleaning.

When you maintain the Wood-Tux, all you have to do is wash the surface to be sure it is free of dirt and grime the reapply as needed. The maintenance application will blend with what's in the wood to a nice even finish.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against nondrying oil finishes. We manufacture one that is positioned more as a conditioner for old dry cedar siding. It can be used as a stand alone finish, but it is rather expensive and doesn't offer near the surface protection that our drying oil formulas achieve.

The point I want to make is that both types of finishes can be easily maintained. It comes down to the quality of the individual product type. There are plenty of drying-oil finishes that would not make a good choice for a maintenance business. The same is true of non drying oils. It comes down to the product itself.

There are nondrying oils out there that are nothing more than paraffinic oil (mineral seal oil) with pigment. They are marketed as wood "stains." They would offer you the same ease of application, similar coverage rates and a beautiful finish. They lack some of the other crucial ingredients (particularly biocides) that allow them to be a good maintenance finish. You chose the products you use because you know they will deliver the performance your customers expect. I'm sure you wouldn't be happy with just any nondrying oil finish.

I don't expect just because someone has success with Wood-Tux they would be happy with just any drying-oil stain. It comes down to the individual product.

[Thad 135]

This thread makes my head hurt and my eyes water and makes me glad I'm not smart enough to be a Woodie.

[Deck Guy 14]

Dan,

I'm with you on the application issues. Anyone who has used most regular oil-based stains knows not to allow drops to dry on the deck, then expect them to simply dissapear when he gets back to apply stain there. I use a combination of stains, and it's not rocket science at all. Some are easier (RS) and some more difficult, but there are always tradeoffs in appearance, performance, longevity, and maintenence.

Let us know what you think of the Woodtux.

[Beth n Rod 1,279]

The most common cause of splotchiness in my experience has been with products that are designed to stay mostly on the surface and over time and UV exposure, change color and actually become darker. Then when it comes time to perform maintenance and the finish has worn unevenly and is gone is some areas, it is impossible to get the color to match the old existing stain so therein lies the need to strip it all off.

I just did a wash today on a cedar deck we did 2 years ago and the color was still very much intact in the wood after the wash was complete (will post pics later, pc is going through a tune up) and will only require a light coat to rejuvenate the finish.

For those who have not used an alkyd based stain:

In terms of working with a product like WTW, it is necessary to make sure you leave no sharp edges and this includes drips, runs, pad or brush marks or even marks left from a spray shield. Distribute the excess product to other parts that are yet to be treated and basically spread it out. Avoid reapplication to the areas already treated and you will have an even result. Recoat only where the wood is showing the product is soaking in readily. Once complete, the finish will be a matte appearance. If you have any shiny areas, either use a pad to remove and redistribute the product or take a rag with mineral spirits to take up the excess.

Rod!~

[Beth n Rod 1,279]

Here are some links to maintenance decks with WTW in them.

http://forums.thegrimescene.com/showthread.php?t=4316

http://forums.thegrimescene.com/showthread.php?t=4576

Rod!~