# 11 different finishes on Walnut - the initial coat (long but awesome) *UPDATED*



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

So I decided to "bust some myths" about finishing. Most notably that pure tung oil and boiled linseed oil based finishes pop grain better than anything else. Here is what I used (note Lacquer omitted - can't spray inside and too cold outside). All the walnut has been sanded to 220 grit

Zinsser Shellac (3lb cut right out of the can, waxed, brushed)
Minwax semi gloss poly (I thin it 50/50 with MS to make a wipe-on)
Pure tung oil
Watco Teak oil
Watco Natural Danish oil
Custom blended finish ("Maloof" finish)
General finishes Arm-R-Seal (Gloss)
Varathane soft touch Matte poly (waterborne)
Varathane Ultimate waterborne poly (oil modified, full gloss) 
2lb Cut dewaxed superblonde shellac (brushed)
2lb Cut dewaxed superblonde shellac (french polished)

I generally do this with scraps from pieces I am using for a project. You can see how wildly one species can vary in color

This has been pore filled already - 1lb cut of dewaxed shellac, let it dry, then rub with a french polishing pad - but only alcohol on the pad. The pad is tapped on some pumice periodically to work the dried shellac and walnut into the grain. I didn't do a terrific job here (It will show later)










The rest of them. Taped off so I can see the natural wood after for a real comparison.










First coats applied










1st padding session. French polish brings out every single little defect (lazy pore filling and planer snipe that wasn't visible before). This looks like crap compared to the final session and after rubbing out with rottenstone; but getting glossy.










Pure tung on the top, my custom finish based on Sam Maloof's finish on the bottom - Poly, tung oil, boiled linseed oil, and solvent. My skepticism of boiled linseed oil popping grain better than pure tung oil is fading a bit.










Waterborne "poly" (gloss) vs minwax semi-gloss. Not too much difference yet. I thinned the oil based poly to wipe it so there is barely any there. That side will be much darker










Watco "teak oil" vs Canned Shellac.

Not too much difference here actually. The shellac will be much glossier. I'm not sure what is in "Teak" oil but I actually like it. I use it on razor stands because it is an outdoor finish. My guess is Tung oil and a spar varnish. It doesn't build a film, but is really glossy for an oil/varnish.










Natural Danish oil vs waterborne Matte Poly. Both "natural" finishes. The matte waterborne acrylic side looks like there is nothing there. By the way, this Varathane soft touch matte poly is AWESOME.










And here is the kick in the nuts I wasn't expecting. Dewaxed shellac (brushed) vs Arm-r-seal. I always thought shellac (even as a washcoat which is what this basically is) did a terrific job at popping grain. Not even close.










I am going to follow the proper finishing schedule on all of these finishes and rub them out as well. Interested to see the final results


----------



## Randy_ATX (Sep 18, 2011)

I'm always interested in these types of comparisons. Will the final results be posted in this thread? I'd like to know what your top 3 choices will be once you are done.


----------



## TheWoodenOyster (Feb 6, 2013)

Cool. I am about to do some table legs in walnut and was going to do straight BLO. I'll be interested to see your results. Thanks for taking the time to share this with us all.


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

I would never use BLOCK (or straight tung oil) as a finish. Maybe try a danish oil.


----------



## Handtooler (Jul 24, 2012)

Yes, Absolutely show us more. Neither Flexnor nor Charles has done such a very nice comparison that I've seen. Useful knowledge.


----------



## vikingcape (Jan 3, 2013)

Thanks for this lumberjoe. This is really eye opening to different finishes and to somebody who knows nothing about them, a great help


----------



## Mahdeew (Jul 24, 2013)

Thanks Joe, Like to see how they turn out. I have come to like Teak oil because it is so easy to wok with.


----------



## SpartyOn (Jul 10, 2012)

Thanks for taking the time to do these comparisons, Joe. Very helpful. Looking forwad to the final results!


----------



## CharlesNeil (Oct 21, 2007)

We actually did a ton of this stuff , all sorts of finishes, unfortunately it was for our book .


----------



## ClintSearl (Dec 8, 2011)

The experiment is cute, but won't prove anything. The simple fact is that anything that "wets" the wood will emphasize the grain pattern. Claims of differences between various concoctions due to reflectance, refraction, or some other optical phenomenon are meaningless gobbledygook. Any observed differences are 99.9% due to a change in color carried by the finish.


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

Clint, go read some finishing books and troll another thread please


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

Charles, your book is awesome. I would highly recommend it to anyone


----------



## moke (Oct 19, 2010)

Joe, even in the magazines they make their recommendations…top tool…etc…
Which one do you now prefer? The Arm-r-seal looks awesome from my perspective….what say you?
Mike
BTW--thanks for all your efforts….good post


----------



## CharlesA (Jun 24, 2013)

Clint,

I agree that there is some gobbledygook on this thread, but I I find it in your almost indecipherable post. If someone takes wood and uses different finishes with observed differences, how is that meaningless? Do some finishes "wet" the wood more deeply and with longer lasting results? Popping the grain is not always mymgoal in finishing, but this is still interesting.

Charles


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

My goal when finishing first is protection. Some of these finishes would never even be considered for furniture. This is very un-scientific and I just want to experiment with looks alone.

There are a lot of perceptions about popping grain, appearance, etc. I want some empirical evidence so I know what I am dealing with down the road


----------



## Oldsaxon (Jul 17, 2013)

There's one in every thread. I've been that one, so I know. Clint, every piece of wood will take a finish differently than the next. This is highlighting some very impressive differences, in general, about how these finishes affect one species and none of them could be considered stains so just chill. This is interesting. Now play nice or go to another thread.
I, for one, can't wait to see the finished pics…and maybe a month of aging as well.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

I'll be watching and waiting too. Doesn't mater why they are different, they will be. Let's see what it is. Thanks for posting your experiment.


----------



## rtriplett (Nov 25, 2009)

I rely on Danish oil because it is easy, but Sometimes have the urge to try something else. Thanks for taking the time to let us know about your experiments.


----------



## CharlesA (Jun 24, 2013)

Danish oil really depends on the wood. I just put some red mahogany Danish oil on some sapele I'm using on a tea tray, and it is stunning. I really like the natural or red on mahogany was well. Doesn't do a thing for cherry, and mediocre on maple, as I recall. I tried it on walnut and didn't like it. But when it works, it's my favorite finish.


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

Danish oil is simply equal parts BLO, poly, and mineral spirits. I actually like the way it looks on walnut if I want a natural finish. If you want a richer tone and more gloss substitute pure tung oil for the BLO. This makes it more difficult to apply because cure times are longer and sanding between coats is required.


----------



## Finn (May 26, 2010)

I agree with Clint. Wetting the wood "Pops" the grain no matter what is used to wet it.


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

Except all this wood was dry here. Pics were taken about 2 hours after application. And they all look different. Care to explain that Jim?

Also on the same piece of wood some finishes look drastically different (especially oil poly vs Shellac)


----------



## CharlesA (Jun 24, 2013)

Another test I'd be interest in. I keep hearing it is easy to make an arm-r-seal equivalent, but I'd love to see homemade vs GF.


----------



## bowedcurly (Aug 31, 2013)

Joe Charles Neil Flexner Lumber Finisher XIIIII….. great job that looks like a lot of work, Im still trying to go with only one finish, headache for years I hate finishing


----------



## chrisstef (Mar 3, 2010)

Im into this experiment Joe and I think its more than worth while.

As to the Jim and Clints responses I don't really understand them and im not trying to be a douche. IMO there's 2 parts to any finish, the visual aspect and protection. A finish is something that we look at. It changes the color from the natural state to what we call a finished state. This is one part of why we finish raw wood, to change or alter the visual appearance. The other reason would be for protection. This test is not about protecting wood from outside forces, this is about making it look the way we want it to look.

If all finishes changed the visual nature of the wood to the exact same state there would be only one type of finish no? I can certainly see different characteristics from the different finishes that were applied.


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

Thanks guys but I am no Charles Neil. I'm I mad scientist in a basement that's read a bunch of books and has lots of cans of finish kicking around.

Unless I am mistaken, Arm-R-Seal is a wiping poly. That's it.. I can't do an apples-to-apples comparison because the only oil based polys I have are gloss arm-r-seal and semi-gloss Minwax. Maybe I'll grab a little minwax gloss and do a side by side as well.

In the past I have not noticed any difference in appearance. They seem to be completely interchangeable. I don't use the minwax wipe-on - I thin my own. I do notice the Minwax is far easier to apply without any re-work/sanding. That could be the way I thin it though.

Initial 2 coats are 50/50 poly vs solvent.
3rd through 5th coat are 75% poly 25% spirits

As long as I keep the dust out, no sanding between coats is required. Here is an example with minwax semi-gloss using this process:










Another difference is when I rub out the finishes. When I want to knock back sheen, they behave the same. When I want to keep the gloss, the Arm-r-seal doesn't rub out as well. I let it cure for about 10 days before rubbing out.*Full disclosure - this doesn't work well on ploy. It's too soft. If I want high sheen (80+) then I use acrylic, lacquer, or shellac.*

My process is to wet sand with automotive paper. I start with 1000 grit (on a half sheet Bosch OS50VC with a soft pad), work up to 1500 grit for semi-gloss (about a 65 of the scale).

If I want to take the sheen up into the 80's (and used full gloss) I'll go to 2000 grit then final rub by hand with Tripoli Rottenstone.

Even after 10 days of cure, Arm-R-Seal gums up. The Minwax cuts pretty clean. This could have a lot more to do with mode of application though.


----------



## CharlesNeil (Oct 21, 2007)

I think I can perhaps shed some light here .Simply put ..any product that has a solvent reacts with wood, oils in particular , while its true anything that wets the wood will enhance it, oils actually react with the tannins in the wood and "warm" ( light brown/amber color) the wood. Its a chemical reaction . While some oils , like WaterLox , Seal A cell do have some amber tint to them, its not enough to have much impact, but if you notice most oils are basically clear , its the reaction that gives the "pop", not to mention on figured woods they settle into the soft grains and help to add depth . A water base finish is non reactive.. so it will give a more bland look.. Shellac also will warm the wood, and the thinner its applied the better . It doesn't do as much as an oil, unless you use several thin coats, the reason is that it dries too fast. The longer an oil or any solvent finish stays wet the more reaction you get. However , slow drying oils also can blotch badly on blotch prone woods, because the oil migrates into the softer grain and produces more reaction .BLO , pure tung and the like are the worst for this. I am not a fan of either, while their ability to add pop to a figured wood, is good , their slow dry is not something I care for, but if you have time , then they do work. I do however suggest a coat of shellac over them if a water base finish is being used , just to be safe (adhesion) .

In doing some research, I got about every kind of oil I could get and tested them on glass. This is a good way to see what you really have , how well does it dry, when does it dry, amd how durable does it dry .My research showed that the pure oils, BLO, and Danish Oil dried the slowest , and produced a much softer finish than the varnish oils. 
I can also tell you from experience, that really slow drying oils can cause wood to move, as in expansion and contraction , because the wood actually absorbs the oils and they remain wet the wood swells, over time as they finally cure the wood shrinks. Its not always a major thing, but it does make it move. If you heavily oil one side of a panel, and lightly oil the other , it causes it to cup.. We tested this on several different panels and it always had the same effect . Just my .02


----------



## CharlesA (Jun 24, 2013)

@CharlesNeil-I always appreciate your 2 cents and taking the time to give it. I've read your finishing book through once, but I need to go over it again as it was too much info for me to keep straight.


----------



## CharlesNeil (Oct 21, 2007)

CharlesA go to page 166 and 167 . 168 and 169. this shows the oils on glass and the reaction differences , on 169 note the difference between th e BLO and the shellac on the Quilted maple


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

Finishing threads are almost as much fun as electrical threads. 

There are a million ways to skin the proverbial cat when it comes to finishing, and I don't think there is any magic one-size-fits-all solution for every situation. Where aesthetic values are concerned, it's often not a question of what looks *best*, but what gives the result *you* are looking for in that particular project.

Personally, I'm a fan of wiping on a coat of pure BLO as a base to add depth and color. As soon as I wipe it on, I immediately wipe off as much as possible. How I topcoat it varies according to what level of glass and protection I'm looking for. Sometimes, though, BLO darkens wood *too* much, so, again, this is no universal solution.

The photo below is from something I did a coule of years ago (and posted here at the time). In the first photo (left), the box was finished with wipe-on oil-based poly, and rubbed out to a mirror finish. The gloss level doesn't show up in the photo because there is no light reflecting from the proper angle. I just wasn't pleased with the way the walnut looked, so I sanded off the finish entirely, coated with BLO, then simply buffed and waxed the box on a three wheel system. I thought the difference was rather striking.


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

Charles, I've actually done this - but on the lids of the cans not on glass. I agree about BLO and truth be told I only use it for plane totes and mallets. I do use it to mix with varnishes (danish oil) . BLO takes FOREVER to dry. When I make danish oil I go heavier on the varnish and solvent than I do on the BLO. Maybe because the oil stays open longer, I do notice it accentuates figure more than if I simply applied poly (likely because as you explained it penetrates deeper)


----------



## CharlesNeil (Oct 21, 2007)

Charlie, the wipe on polys as well as the gel topcoats have the same issue as the shellac, they dry pretty fast and the reaction time is far less . In this case the BLO drying slow had more reaction time. Had this walnut been a piece of blotch prone wood, it woul dnot be pleasing, on a figured wood or as yo uhave here it does well , if you can stand the dry time. Personally I dye all my walnut ( cardinal sin to most), so I can use faster finishes, but thats another story for another day .


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

Charles, I agree about walnut. I believe the issue is that walnut is steamed. Even in my samples this is all walnut and it's all different colors - but it all came out of only 2 different boards. On smaller projects I don't mind the color variation but on a large piece of furniture it needs to be dyed (IMO)

Any good formulations for walnut dyes? I have just used Watco Danish oil with the medium walnut color. The results are mediocre at best, but better than the wild color variations without a dye.


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

Charles, thanks for that insight… it makes a lot of sense. As you said, BLO does not do well on some woods. As a hobby woodworker, though, the long drying time doesn't bother me.

As for the "sin" of coloring walnut, I once built a small table that I wanted to match some dark cherry stained office furniture. I had some extra walnut in the shop, so I figured I'd give staining it a shot. It actually turned out quite well. One of these days I want to experiment with dyes.


----------



## CharlesA (Jun 24, 2013)

Too many people named Charles on this thread. What I don't understand about arm-r-seal (which I use regularly) is that if it is just poly and some type of thinner, and the thinner basically evaporates (is that right?), why does it accentuate the grain so much more than plain poly? Or am I misunderstanding something?


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

In my experience it doesn't do anything more for grain than the minwax equivalent of the same sheen


----------



## CharlesNeil (Oct 21, 2007)

CharlesA , Arm R Seal is predominately a urethane resin base, as well the flattners are different. It just has a clearer makeup . Its one of my favorite wipe on finishes, and its really tough, I have it on heart pine floors/walnut floors and steps, and in bathrooms and all over… it serves well


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

So I'm calling this done. I'll mostly let the pictures speak for themselves:

French Polish - If you want gloss, lacquer or french polish. The shine on this is unreal, and this is a pretty mediocre french polish even for me. Pore filling could have been MUCH better. It's hard to tell in pictures, but you can see very clear reflections in the finish:










Arm-R-Seal (4 coats) vs Dewaxed superblonde shellac (One 1lb cut coat, three 2lb cut coats - brushed). Both rubbed out with wax and steel wool. I hate glossy polyurethane. There are better choices out there for a gloss finish. Same shellac as used above. Mode of application makes a HUGE difference sometimes










Shellac mutes the grain quite a bit compared to the Arm-R-Seal. I'll stick with the semi or satin though










Varathane Soft Touch Matte "poly" (waterborne, 6 coats) vs Danish oil (3 coats). Man, I love that varathane stuff. It's unreal. It literally looks and feels like there is absolutely nothing there:










With the tape off:










And a close up of the build. Significant enough to see it:










Rustoleum (Varathane) Ultimate waterborne gloss poly (4 coats brushed) vs Minwax oil based semi gloss (6 coats thinned, wiped)










If you want gloss you have to pore fill. As expected, not much color/depth change with the water base. The minwax stuff looks really nice though. I don't know why this gets such a bad reputation. When thinned and wiped it is a flawless finish that anyone could apply - and it looks halfway decent










Pure Tung oil vs The "Maloof" finish:










Pure tung looks kind of nice. However the finishing schedule is terrible and I doubt this is the least bit protected. However the "Maloof" finish reminds me a lot of waterlox. It actually built a film, went on as easy as danish oil, and dried in a very reasonable amount of time










Teak oil (3 coats) vs Canned Shellac (4 coats brushed)

I thought teak oil was fairly glossy - maybe for an oil/varnish but not compared to shellac. And I knocked back the shellac a bit with some steel wool.










Shellac on the left, teak oil on the right. You can see how oil blotches more than shellac. Some call that figure, I call it blotching


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

Which will you use?


----------



## da3t (Aug 9, 2012)

I am a hobby woodworker but scientist by profession, and in experiments you need to have a standard starting point. The original post describes that the test pieces were random scraps, and the first couple photos show clear differences in general light/dark colouration as well as grain structure and knots. My most recent experience with walnut (not sure what varietal) was to take a couple feet of knarly knotty stuff with lots of light/dark contrast cut off the end of a board, inserted several dowels and coat hooks and hung it by the front door, I used water based poly, probably 4-5 coats, wet sanded 320-400 grit. between coats, and I think it looks fine. The grain might pop more if I did something more complicated but I was pretty happy to find a use for this otherwise ratty old off cut.

One conclusion is to not throw out offcuts. Second is to make experiments comparable and repeatable. For instance take a single wide board with very consistent grain and chop it up into experimental pieces that would be almost indistinguishable from one another without finish, then do the experiment.


----------

