| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=27545 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Haans [ Mon May 24, 2010 5:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
Having just learned the McFadden "routine" for finishing and admittedly was still RE-learning how to lacquer when I was working with Behlens (Mohawk) lacquer, I'm figuring on going back to Mohawk since it is now half the price ($32.) of Seagraves. Seems as though I remember Behlens going on heavier shot straight out of the can (fewer coats). Anyone with any thoughts or comparisons? |
|
| Author: | bluescreek [ Mon May 24, 2010 6:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
I used them both , and used the same schedule. It worked fine. One trick I did learn is you spray the first coat of finish when the vinyl sealer is still tacky. I get a better adhesion |
|
| Author: | Haans [ Tue May 25, 2010 5:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
Thanks guys! I thought I heard someone say they thinned Mohawk a bit compared to McF. for the build coats. You all seem to think vinyl sealer is better than a shot of thinned lacquer for the first coat? Hate the smell of that vinyl... |
|
| Author: | bluescreek [ Tue May 25, 2010 5:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
I think my lacquer about 10% no matter what brand I use |
|
| Author: | Haans [ Wed May 26, 2010 6:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
So, back to the second question...do I need to use a vinyl sealer coat? It sticks better than thinned lacquer? |
|
| Author: | Foster [ Wed May 26, 2010 6:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
I would say to use the sealer rather than a thinned coat of Lacquer. If there is any contamination on the white wood from finger oil or whatever the sealer will not let it affect the top coats. |
|
| Author: | BruceHerrmann [ Wed May 26, 2010 1:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
I've used both vinyl and shellac with no noted differences. The shellac can sit for days before being top-coated. I like that. It can also be sprayed over fairly quickly if that's needed. But both work well. I've sprayed spit coats of Zinzlers pre-mixed shellac out of the quart can and used their spray cans and have not noticed any difference. My main goal with both is to enhance adhesion and protect bindings and purfling from color changes when filler is applied. I realize that's pretty obvious but worth mentioning.. edit, forgot to mention that I've used McFadden's for more years than I can remember and just bought my first gallon of Mohawk, glad to hear the comments. I plan to spray it just as if it were McFadden. Can't justify the increased costs... |
|
| Author: | Haans [ Wed May 26, 2010 5:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
Well, since I'm dyeing oak and mahogany, I'm scraping binding anyway, so I guess that the "spit coat" comes after filler, then the binding is scraped, and build coats are started. I guess if I was doing natural finishes, I would do it your ways... I too can't justify double the price of Mohawk just for a "formerly McFadden" moniker. |
|
| Author: | BruceHerrmann [ Wed May 26, 2010 6:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
Haans, I've done things the way you describe as well, sometimes I want the color from the pore filler to be taken up by the wood so I'll do the spit coat after. It works well. My point is that sometimes I want to control the basic color of the wood and protect it with that spit coat, then fill pores. Both ways work well. I'd like to hear from someone when the new McFadden's substitute comes out, also their new pore fillers- which are much more expensive as well. I just bought some pore filler from Mohawk, price is good and I would imagine that it will work well. Only problem is, the label on the can did not get printed all the way so the directions are mostly not there. They say they want you to thin it with something but I can't tell what. Guess I should contact them for a new label for the can.... |
|
| Author: | woody b [ Wed May 26, 2010 7:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
BruceHerrmann wrote: ......................................................................................... Only problem is, the label on the can did not get printed all the way so the directions are mostly not there. They say they want you to thin it with something but I can't tell what. Guess I should contact them for a new label for the can.... If it's Mohawk "Grain Filler" you can thin it with Naptha. I don't know if the label said that or not, but it works. Here's the Mohawk info. http://www.mohawk-finishing.com/mhk_cds/product_pds/m608-all.pdf For lacquer, I've used Mohawk more than Mcfaddens. Same schedule. Mcfaddens seems to cure a little faster but for me they seem to build about the same. |
|
| Author: | Haans [ Thu May 27, 2010 7:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Finishing schedule differences between Mcfaddens and Mohawk |
I've use McFadden's filler on my oak parlor, and it works well (took 4 coats though). Does anyone have the experience to compare Mohawk and McF. fillers? |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|