Official Luthiers Forum!

In light of Kim's ordeal with Z-poxy, what are some suggestions for alternatives?

I have used Z-poxy for 2 builds and have liked the ease of use and the pop factor on figure... I used Z-poxy because I thought it was relatively safe. I also like using Tru-Oil because of the safety issue or lack of safety from other finishes (plus its easy to apply).

I've heard pumice or waterbourne... What works well, is easy to apply, and pops the figure...?

Steve buddy I don't know of anything that pops figure and works as well for me as epoxy finishing resin which includes Z-Poxy and System III. You can also add West Systems epoxy (not considered a finishing resin) the list of what I like to use too. The ease of use and results are the best experience that I have had with pore fillers.

What happened with Kim as horrible as it is and was is not going to stop me from using epoxy for pore filling. Kim helped make us very aware that epoxy is a sensitizer and that this -could- happen to any of us. But..... not everyone responds the same way to sensitizers.

Cocobollo is a wood that a lot of folks can't deal with but others do fine with it and continue to use it.

For me Kim's story is knowledge and a warning of sorts that will always be on my mind when I use epoxy but until such time as I see that I have issues with epoxy I see no need to change. I also intend to build with Cocobollo too.

The real value of what Kim shared with us is that these things -ARE- possible so use best practices, ventilation, dust control, wear gloves and cover any part of the skin that is exposed to the sensitizers and see how it goes for you.

And most importantly, at least to me, I hope my friend Kim is continuing to be on the mend.

CA glue is also has potential to cause chemical allergy reactions to its fumes, I know quite a few model airplane builders who now have serious issues with CA and for years had nothing. I am a retired Automation Electician and spent the last 15 years working in a Chrysler paint shop and we had several skilled trades workers who had to leave the paint area due to developing a chemical allergy.

Like Hesh says take all safety precautions and please be aware if even small reactions start.

Fred Tellier

_________________
Fred Tellier
http://www.fetellierguitars.com
Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/pages/FE-Tellier-Guitars/163451547003866

First there is probably no product out there that there will never cause an allergic reaction to by someone. Allergenic reactions, be it form accumulative sensitivity or any other cause is one of those things that happen. Good news is they happen to very few, but if you are one that fact has no compensation to you. I have worked a large part of my lifer around all sorts of epoxies without incident. It could happen to me tomorrow. Or I may never have issues. I have a brother that was 35 when he became allergic to both white corn and peanuts. He, like me ate both as regular staple of his diet for the first 2/3ds of his life and the onset of his allergy was also a repetitive sensitivity issue, yet I have never heard him blame Green Giant nor General Mills for the onset of his allergies. So, now this all poses the question; Does this mean I should band those from my diet? Does this mean those products are bad products?

I did not post during the thread on Zpoxy for several reasons. the least of wich was I was not wanting a confrentation. You see while KIM was terably affect it became odvious that the thread was rapid assigning blame to Zpoxy when true culpret for Kim could easly have been many or all brands of epoxy that uses the simular base and hardner. it is my opinion was that it is a darn shame this happened to Kim but the crux of the post seem to slightly condemn Pace products IE Z-poxy for this and your own words deminstrate this “I used Z-poxy because I thought it was relatively safe” shows how it was interpreted that way. Truth is that Z-poxy and most commonly marketed epoxies are generally safe to the general public. While Kim presented a quite convening medical opinion and one that has truth to it. it left out the fact that the reaction he had is exception not the rule. I feel deeply sad that Kim went through this and my heart goes out to him but the truth is it is not very likely at all that any other member of this forum would ever have this reaction. That said you have to choose for your self if the potential risk is to high for you. Keep in mind you have to make the same kind of analysis with any chemical compound you come in contact with on a daily basis. From the air you breathe to the toilet paper you wipe your ____ with.

Use common sense. Don’t take a few isolated situations as the proof of episode expectancy alone. Know the facts and judge your risk from there.

And please, no mater what product brand name is linked to an episode find out if that product has attributes that caused the episode that are specific to that brand name only before you publicly bash the product. It is just the wrong thing to do if you don't have conclusive evidence that this was specific to a given brand.

I have no monetary or other interest in any epoxy company so I say this with no predigest, If an singular or rare incident is caused by a chemical or other attribute that is not solely specific to a given brand name epoxy, to singularly assign the liability to that given brand name epoxy is in a way kin to liable because you can start a panic that is uncalled for and unjustifiably affect the companies ability to business and the livelihood of the employees that work for that company. If the problem chemical is common to the epoxy industry, then assign the problem to the epoxy industry as a whole not to a singular company.

I am continually amazed that posts asking for pore filler options seem to skip the traditional materials. Paste wood pore filler (both water-based and oil-based) has been around for a long time and is what Martin and other factories use. Put some red-brown stain in it and watch what happens to a mahogany neck. Not exactly a "pop" but it definitely enhances the grain. I have never heard of anyone being allergic to these products.

Can do water based fillers, oil based fillers, tru-oil and other oil's in a slush fill. many others ways. I don't like CA as the fumes drive me out and it doesn't have anymore benefits to the build than other things like the epoxy's, and to me more harmful. I though may be more sensitive to it. I like the Z poxy or other epoxy's and use them. Even use mask if using CA for linings, binding and other uses. Thing is, one may or may not be allergic or get allergy to the extent such as Kim. I tend to treat stuff with precaution on most things where there are fumes, toxins or whatever and when getting to that stage, just plan it out and take the time to make sure using precautions.

I've been using Z-Poxy for quite a few years with good success, but like any other finish component, it has it's drawbacks. I'm in the process of trying HHG as filler. So far, it's just a test and this isn't anything new, but sometimes we forget the old methods in our continual search for "a better way". I'm revisiting the "old way". HHG is cheap, easy to apply, sands beautifully after a couple of hours and cleans up with water. It looks like a couple of applications with a coat of shellac will do the job nicely.

_________________
Jimmy Caldwell
http://www.caldwellguitars.com

Egg whites but then again there are people allergic to eggs so that is a no go. And as far as Oil and water based fillers while we may have not heard of anyone being allergic I have little doubt that there has be someone how has or have perceived that they have had a reaction. It just means that we as individuals have not heard of the cases.

One of my workmates was in here with me at lunch and he had a pretty whimsical funny satirical comment. “Accumulative sensitivity allergies are a lot like repetitive motion injuries. Not everyone will suffer the affects. But maybe we should band keyboards just to be on the safe side”

Steve,

There are a number of alternatives to epoxy products however any water based product will need time to dry out properly between application and sanding if you are to avoid sink back. Like so many things, the single biggest reason for people have trouble with these kind of fillers is their own impatience.

The method of using Egg Whites to grain fill has been around for a very, very, long time. So long in fact that it is epoxy which should be considered as an alternative to them. Before egg whites are ever written off as outdated, they should at least be tried to see why craftsmen and women used them for hundreds of years before ones success with epoxy is held up as being in anyway superior.

A few folks are also happy with this high solids product by Oxford.

http://www.targetcoatings.com/shop/catalog/Oxford_High_Solids_Water_Based_Grain_Filler_Glaze-11-1.html

My advise, if you insist on using epoxy to grain fill, is is to work well ventilated, keep a fan blowing on you at all times. Wear a hooded Tyvek suit and a respirator, or preferable a positive air pressure face shield at all times. Use a good barrier cream on any area not covered by the Trvek suit and DO NOT rely on only Nitrile gloves to protect your hands, you need to be using the thicker washing up gloves over some cotton gloves.

The specialist who treated me, Mr Kurt Gebauer, is foremost in his field of industrial dermatology, Google his name and you will see for yourself that his opinion is very highly regarded in this field. Dr Gebauer was straight up with his advice and that is we should all do what we can to limit or better still, avoid exposure to epoxy products. The invisible fumes really are insidious and travel through your clothing and skin as if not even there. Unless you take precautions to address this kind of exposure, it remains only a matter of time before each individual becomes sensitised and has a reaction, and as you have seen from my images, quite a violent reaction it can be.

As a foot note it is worth mentioning that I worked with epoxy on many occasions in the past, probably a tad more than most here and never had any issue. This is why it was so easy for me to believe my skin was reacting to something else other than epoxy. I have no doubt that my current condition would be near as bad had I not re-exposed myself to epoxy in the belief I my skin was reacting to insect attack. That was the point of my well detailed post, to make folks aware of ALL the facts.

The message here should now be very clear, proceed with great caution if you are going to use epoxy and if you suspect that you may be having some kind of reaction, no matter how mild, STAY AWAY! Do not re-expose our you could find yourself in a lot more trouble than you bargained for.

Cheers

Itchy Kim

Standard kit I wear when working with oil or synthetic based drilling muds out on the oil rigs is as follows:

1. barrier cream on hands and wrists.
2. surgeons disposable gloves (they make getting the nitrile gloves off alot easier).
3. nitrile elbow length gloves. Use the ones that dont have release agent left on the rubber..this can cause contact dermatitis in some people.
4. Tyvex suit.

Steve--

I think that the most benign method of pore filling is using shellac (a little) and pumice. It works well, but its more labor intensive than Z-Poxy -- at least for me. If you mix the shellac flakes with Everclear, its pretty much FDA approved!

As to epoxy, firstly, Kim I'm really glad you are on the mend. I have been involved in the commercial application of large amounts of epoxy in the past -- a 'cultured' marble company that cast it's own Corian under license and boat building. I only saw one case of a sensitizing reaction on Kim's scale and that was with a boat builder. That person can no longer work with epoxy and I suspect that Kim won't be working with it in the future either. For most people, working in a well ventilated area with gloves, glasses and a respirator will be sufficient personal protection. It is, after all, chemistry. We should be extending the same precautions towards working with solvents and finishing materials -- even naphtha. It pays to not be cavalier, but Z-Poxy is a good product and I will continue to use it in the same manner that I have been using it -- with gloves, glasses and a respirator.

_________________
Jim Howell
Charlotte, NC

I haven't tried it but has anyone tried using a heavey cut of shellac. I have a jeff jewitt french polishing video that shows hime doing a major fill with a 7# cut which would be too much I'm sure for pore filling, but maybe a 4 or 5#?
Mike Mcnerney

_________________
Mike McNerney

O'Brien shows on one of his DVDs using drywall plaster dyed to the color of the wood. Its hard to imagine but it must work.

_________________
A higher purpose for wood.
Rich Smith
Issaquah, WA

??? A "complete thread hijack"? That seems a bit over the top. I don't see it as a hijack in any way. It's directly related to the original post.

_________________
Mike

"The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that. It's good knowin' he's out there. The Dude. Takin' 'er easy for all us sinners. Shoosh." The Stranger

It could and should work but account for some shrink back. One thing though Shellac by its self can and will bridge pores if you are not very diligent. This would need to be a firm squeegee process to avoid bridging.

I would rather see wood dust employed with shellac. the wood dust fills the pore and the shellac is the bonding agent that binds the dust together and to the pore. Do this and 1lb cut is sufficient.

Filippo

I could not disagree with you more!

Hesh did not hijack this thread in the sense that you are implying.
He is adding his thoughts to this conversation. Something that has always been encouraged not discouraged here at the OLF. Even if those thoughts are not the "answer" to the question.

Hesh does not work for an epoxy manufacture so a "sales pitch" comment is uncalled for and a little mean spirited.

I would ask that you let Brock and I moderate the forum when needed.
Thanks
Lance

_________________
Support the OLF! Bookmark our STEWMAC link Today!
Lance@LuthiersForum.com

I have read a lot of good recomendations for protecting your self when ussing epoxy, But one thing I feel I should mention is a respirator does not protect you from the hardner. I have been an automotive refinisher and body man for years and and the one thing all the paint courses teach us is that you need to wear a fresh air mask which suplies you with fresh filterd outside air to protect you. Now I would agree that spraying epoxy would cause much more exposure, but I think we have got to treet it with a lot more respect. I would suggest that ussing a paint suit, barrier cream, nitile gloves and a dust mask outside or under an exaust fan would be good practice. I just wanted people to know a charcoal respirator does not protect from the hardener.
For me this has been a good reminder to limit exposer and protect my self as much as possible. I myself have been carless at times and seeing those pictures has realy opend my eyes.
Thanks for sharing that with us Kim, glad to hear you are doing better....

Filippo
The point of my post was that here a the OLF its quite common for a thread to veer left and right of center. Heshs post was simply a reminder that although there are alternatives to Epoxy, lest not through out the baby with the bath water.
If we were to delete or discourge every post that was not a direct answer to the orginal posters question it would get pretty boring around hear very fast.
The "spirit" of community and the ability to have a friendly conversation with out the constraints of "Only answer the question please" is part of the charm at the OLF.

In regards to moderation, of course you don't have the same "buttons" as I do, but by you telling Hesh what he can and cannot post is a form of moderation and one that should be left to Brock or I.
As I mentioned in my PM, and this goes for anyone. If you have a problem with a post, feel free to
alert Brock or I and let us moderate as we see fit.

Thanks

_________________
Support the OLF! Bookmark our STEWMAC link Today!
Lance@LuthiersForum.com

Filippo - consider that Hesh's opinion was that there is no alternative to expoxy. Certainly seems relevant to me, a newbie here to learn.

If you could please direct me to the alternatives listed in your posts, i would be glad to reread them as i seemed to have missed them.

Back to the subject...

I saw Robbie's video on LMI regarding the drywall pore filler. It seemed to muddy the whole thing. It would have been nice to see the final effect but that clip did more to scare me away from it than anything else.

I have seen some photo's here of FP and pore filling done with pumice, but never a side by side comparison. After seeing the drywall method, i'd be cautious to try pumice (although i plan to, at least on my first two prototypes).


Might be nice if someone had some scraps of wood pore-filled in various ways and finished for a nice tutorial on finishes/pore filling. It would be nice to see how expoxy "pops" the grain compared to other methods.

Rob

As a self confessed nood Rob, rather than waiting for someone else to provide you with the information, this would make an ideal experiment for you to compile and learn from. It would also allow you some personal input toward the general knowledge base here at the OLF that we could all find useful.

As for your point to Filippo that Hesh may not have found a better alternative to epoxy, this is probably more valid than you imagine. I have followed Hesh's excellent builds for a few years now. As I recall, (and please correct me if I am wrong Hesh,) Hesh has only ever used Stewmac's water based filler for his first or so build, and given that he was most disappointed in the outcome, has only ever used epoxy for the next dozen or so.

If this is the case, as much as I respect Hesh as a builder, in this area of the craft, his experience would not qualify his comments as being any more valid than someone who had only built two instruments and tried two different methods to grain fill. Of course he would have found one method better than the other, but lets not miss the point of Steve's concern. There are plenty of other possibilities out there other than epoxy and it is information on those alternatives that Steve had enquired about in posing the question which had initiated this thread. Therefore despite what others may think, and with all due respect to you Lance, I for one feel that Filippo's criticism of Hesh's interjection was completely valid.

Oh, and by the way Rob, before you waggle an accusing finger at Filippo, perhaps you could look at the lack of valid content in your own post, watching a video does not an experience make. And to avoid being labeled as a hypocrite I will add that I am keen to try egg whites when next I grain fill as I have found that nothing pops your skin like epoxy contact dermatitis.

Cheers

Kim

Rob...your suggestion to try a few different alternatives on scrap is an excellent exercise to suggest. Even if someone suggests alternatives, it's always a good practice and a much more powerful learning experience to test for yourself.

The charm of ZP has often been the idea that it pops the grain...and in fact it certainly did for me until I sanded it down to wood and only left the pores filled. In that case, it then takes on a direct comparison with other pore fillers. I have made comparisons of other alternatives on both scrap as well as instruments. I'll continue using ZP for the time being but with a renewed sense of caution. And I always reserve my right to change...even on a whim!

Barry mentioned the time-honored oil based Rosewood and Mahogany fillers. They work great once you learn how to use them. Others mentioned shellac and glue based fillers and they are valid also. Just take the time to experiment for yourself and get the real knowledge of having made a conscious decision based on your empirical assessment of what's best for you.

_________________
JJ
Napa, CA
http://www.DonohueGuitars.com

Regardless of what Filippo might think about Heshs comments, Hesh has the right to interject his thoughts even if they are slightly off topic.
That is always how the OLF has been and will continue to be!
We are not that stringent here that you should get your hand slapped for veering off topic.

With all due respect, this is the way we operate.

And again if anyone has a problem with a post or comment, instead of "self moderating" please let Brock or I know and we will take care of it.

_________________
Support the OLF! Bookmark our STEWMAC link Today!
Lance@LuthiersForum.com

Kim -
First off, while gaining experience is always a perfect solution, it is hardly the only answer in a forum. If that's the answer to every question then certainly the need for a forum evaporates.

I don't think Hesh's own experience should come into question. He had an opinion and certainly it should be welcome. If there needs to be some level of qualification established before someone is "qualified" to respond, then feel free to rate everyone one the forum and post their rating so we can know when to ignore them. I don't believe anyone questioned your ability as a doctor to diagnose your condition, nor has anyone directly affronted your conclusion. It's an awful thing to go through and let's leave it at that.

As far as my lack of content goes... why isn't questioning the results from drywall filler valid? We're talking about alternatives and i had an observation. I suppose it's the experience limit thing again? If you're now suggesting that we shouldn't comment or question the alternatives posted, well, all I can say is - nice weather we're having, eh?

JJ -
Your comment regarding having sanded off the grain popping benefit (?) of ZP leaves me with a question. Certainly there are two interpretations to "grain-popping", one being that the grain is physically raised by absorbing liquid and swelling. I am not sure I understand a benefit to this, except maybe it enhances the appearance, but that would seem to counter the desired effect of pore-filling, to smooth the finish.. The other interpretation, and this is the way I read Hesh's response, is that ZP somehow results in a better finish that makes the grain appear more pronounced, just like wiping wood with mineral spirits does on raw wood. I have never used ZP, but I would think that it would be too thick to actually swell the wood fibers and physically raise the grain, or am I guessing wrong?

Also, your suggestion that I take the time to build the tutorial myself is a good one. Unfortunately, my goal is to build with as little cost as possible. I don't plan on doing this for a living and I don't see myself getting past X guitars unless this does become an obsession. I have some great wood that I bought over the years for ONE guitar. When that's done, I am done. (I know, the first sign is denial - and it worries me!) With that in mind, I don't see myself every buying ZP unless I see a real need to build a NASA clean room before I can work on a guitar. If I ever get hooked on this stuff, you can bet I will contribute to the tutorials - until then, I'm the guy tutorials are written for. Sorry if that sounds self-indulgent, but it probably is.

Rob

Rod...My reference to grain popping was identical to the effect that Hesh described. If you sand off the ZP and only leave it in the pores, you have negated the grain popping feature but still have an effective pore fill. Still it's possible to pop grain with shellac as well with other sealers later applied in the finishing process.

Good luck on your endeavor to produce that one guitar.

_________________
JJ
Napa, CA
http://www.DonohueGuitars.com

Popping the grain is a term that refers to giving the grain "chatoyance" or a look of depth. Raising the grain is something different.

Back on to the original post, I have used oil based filler (McFaddens), Z-Poxy, and after seeing Robbie's tute, Drywall compound.

Oil based: If applied over a wash coat of vinyl sealer, will not muddy the grain. Muddies the wood if applied directly to bare wood. For me, it is difficult to use and messy. It took several tries to get a good fill, and it is like wiping owl crap around, even when diluted with naptha. My first gutiars were filled using it. Didn't like it, so I started looking for something else.

Z-poxy: For me, it works great on smaller pored woods, especially mahogany and sapele. More difficult on larger pored woods, especially Indian and Brazilian Rosewood. Some pores do not seem to want to fill, no matter how many times attempted. Dries much faster than the oil based, and it's a lot less messy.

Drywall compound dyed black: I have only used this once, and it was on a mahogany neck only, with no wash coat. Applies easily, flashes off fast. Sands wonderfully. It will muddy the wood if applied bare. I have not tried it over a washcoat as of yet. It does shrink back if sanded too soon, so it need to dry for at least a couple of hours before sanding, and may take 2-3 applications. As an aside, has anyone (Robbie!) had any adhesion issues with nitro/vinyl using this method?

I may try the water based microbead filler next, just out of curiosity. Currently I am leaning toward the drywall/dye method, based on my experience. I do sand back to the wood, leaving only the pores filled (FYI).

Hope this helps!

_________________
Brad Tucker