I really like the stuff.
Here is an example of the kind of gloss you can get:
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| waterbase lacquer http://luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=42127 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Dan of SC [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 7:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | waterbase lacquer |
Any of you guys ever use water based lacquer? I read that the new stuff dries just as hard as nitro and way less toxic. Any help? Thanks, Danny Gray |
|
| Author: | dzsmith [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 9:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
No, but there's tons of info here about it. Try using the search function. |
|
| Author: | weslewis [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 9:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
Em 6000, love the stuff!! |
|
| Author: | sdsollod [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
+1 EM 6000 |
|
| Author: | Robbie_McD [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
I really like the stuff. Here is an example of the kind of gloss you can get:
|
|
| Author: | meddlingfool [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
I've used KTM SV with success. Stay away from KTM 9 though... |
|
| Author: | Freeman [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
meddlingfool wrote: I've used KTM SV with success. Stay away from KTM 9 though... I've used KTM-9 with success.... In fact it has become my standard. 
|
|
| Author: | meddlingfool [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 1:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
I've had issues with it blistering under hand sweat on nearly every guitar I used it on. It layed down and buffed well, just didn't hold up. SV goes on and buffs as well as 9, without issues of deteriation. |
|
| Author: | meddlingfool [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 1:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
Deterioration? What? Whatever, you get my drift I'm sure... |
|
| Author: | Colin North [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 1:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
I've used General Finishes Endurovar (once) quite successfully and intend using it again. Hard, buffs well and a very forgiving finish to apply. (It would have to be - my first attempt at spraying a guitar!) Seems Laurent Brondel has been using it on his Essentials range. http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=285606&page=3 Recent Brondel build pics here http://lblutherie.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/the-essential-2-red-spruce-madagascar.html My attempt here http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/download/file.php?id=39223 |
|
| Author: | johnparchem [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
I did the pore fill with zpoxy. I sprayed 15 coats of EM6000 at 3 mils a coat, I did no level sanding in between any of the coats. It only took about 45 minutes to sand level and buff.  
|
|
| Author: | Beth Mayer [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 7:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
WOW John…. I just used the EM6000 for the first time and loved it. Nitro was just way too toxic while the guitars were curing in the shop. I had to stay out for a couple weeks  I didn't use it on the neck because I had heard it can go blue under some types of player's hands.
|
|
| Author: | jfmckenna [ Sat Dec 07, 2013 8:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
All these examples look wonderful but my experience has been other wise. Well, I could show a pic of one that came out stellar but then for each one of those was another one that was less then par. I can't be consistent using water base and I have tried several. I love it because it's non toxic yadda yadda but I can not control it so I gave up using it. |
|
| Author: | SteveSmith [ Sun Dec 08, 2013 7:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
jfmckenna wrote: All these examples look wonderful but my experience has been other wise. Well, I could show a pic of one that came out stellar but then for each one of those was another one that was less then par. I can't be consistent using water base and I have tried several. I love it because it's non toxic yadda yadda but I can not control it so I gave up using it. My experience as well. I've used EM6000 and PolyWhey. My main player (about 4 yrs old) has EM6000 on the neck and there are small spots here and there where the finish came off. Not at all saying it isn't good or that you shouldn't use it, just my experience. |
|
| Author: | Clinchriver [ Sun Dec 08, 2013 7:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
johnparchem wrote: I did the pore fill with zpoxy. I sprayed 15 coats of EM6000 at 3 mils a coat, I did no level sanding in between any of the coats. It only took about 45 minutes to sand level and buff. So 45 mils total? What does this stuff shrink back too? Looks great btw. |
|
| Author: | Parser [ Sun Dec 08, 2013 8:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
I usually get about .0003 inches per coat, so 15 coats would give you about .0045" of finish. I usually shoot for about .007" off the gun, otherwise you risk burning thru. Trev |
|
| Author: | johnparchem [ Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
jfmckenna wrote: All these examples look wonderful but my experience has been other wise. Well, I could show a pic of one that came out stellar but then for each one of those was another one that was less then par. I can't be consistent using water base and I have tried several. I love it because it's non toxic yadda yadda but I can not control it so I gave up using it. Nitro is way more forgiving and can be made to consistently looks more like a good Nitro finish. The EM6000 powders (will not level) if a coat is too thin. If sprayed too thick per session it is easy to get a blue tone. I also tried KTM-SV and EM7000. Em6000 is the most forgiving of those 3. I like the way KTM-SV looked and felt when cured but I found it hard to use. If possible you do not want to sand or buff through the final coat, or you might get witness lines. The EM7000 is really sensitive to each coats thickness. It is really easy to make a very blue instrument. I am all set to use Nitro with a spray booth and a spark-less exhaust system, but still find the less toxic aspect of the water base lacquers a big plus. |
|
| Author: | johnparchem [ Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
Clinchriver wrote: johnparchem wrote: I did the pore fill with zpoxy. I sprayed 15 coats of EM6000 at 3 mils a coat, I did no level sanding in between any of the coats. It only took about 45 minutes to sand level and buff. So 45 mils total? What does this stuff shrink back too? Looks great btw. Thanks, Those were wet 3. I use a mill gauge when setting up the sprayer each time, the finish does shrink quite a bit from the 3 mills wet. Once cured after a week or so, I am not experiencing much shrink back and have been able to wet sand and buff. |
|
| Author: | jac68984 [ Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: waterbase lacquer |
SteveSmith wrote: jfmckenna wrote: All these examples look wonderful but my experience has been other wise. Well, I could show a pic of one that came out stellar but then for each one of those was another one that was less then par. I can't be consistent using water base and I have tried several. I love it because it's non toxic yadda yadda but I can not control it so I gave up using it. My experience as well. I've used EM6000 and PolyWhey. My main player (about 4 yrs old) has EM6000 on the neck and there are small spots here and there where the finish came off. Not at all saying it isn't good or that you shouldn't use it, just my experience. Me three. I shoot nitro outside now till I get set up with a proper booth indoors (I built a very nice booth for shooting water-based finishes, but I've abandoned it). |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|