I know this has been discussed ad endless nauseum here, but for the life of me I couldn't find anything ont he search funtion...

What's your favorite method for obtaining an "in the wood" finish? I'm used to a more built up finish that takes 20-30 thin coats, and am having trouble wrapping my head around a non- built-up finish (that happens to me sometimes, my wife says I should write things down more...). Anyway, is it exactly the same but far fewer coats? The same 30 coats, but rubbed all the way down to the wood? Ultra-thinned finish? Other?

I would be interested in any and all thoughts or information on the subject.
Thanks,
Dave

Dave, I like either tung oil, or shellac put on by French Polishing. The tung oil is easier, put on as many coats until you have the desired finsih. The French Polishing takes longer but the results are quick. Because you use a tiny drop of oil in the shellac it makes the finish fairly water resistant.
Others here like True Oil, never used it so can't tell you about it. I don't like polyurethane because it you want to refilnish it later, it is hard to remove.

For high use guns I like poly cut 20% with mineral spirits and wiped on like wipeing poly but the result is tough. True oil is fine for hunting guns that don't get a lot of wear. It can start out looking like an old oil finish but it tends to polish out to a high gloss with use.
bill

David,
I didn't quite understand your question?
Do you want an explanation of how to get an 'in the wood finish' or do you want a quick 'on the wood finish'that looks like an 'in the wood finish'

IMHO "in the wood" finishes are a fantasy. The only place a finish can get below the surface is in the pores and then it only goes in a few thou. unless you use something like vacuum-pressure impregnation. By the time the solvents evaporate, the remaining resin solids have shrunk and there is even less penetration.

Wood stabilization applicators use a liquid polymer resin that is close to 100% solids and is applied in a vacuum-pressure tank. They can get essentially total fill of all voids with the liquid that does not shrink as it cures. That's about as "in the wood" as you can get, but is a bit beyond the reach of most hobbyists.

The "sanded in" technique is the best I have ever found for pore filling. A thin final layer of finish on top gives what most people call "in the wood", but really isn't.

OB

I'm not sure myself! I'm fishing for general information on what type of finishes and application techniques are out there that will result in either an in the wood finish or something resembling it, so that I can try some out in prep for a gun I'm working on.

I like the look of what I'm calling an "in-the-wood" finish, which to me looks like it's a satin finish that is not built up at all--I see it most often on some Beretta 68X "oil finish" guns, but I really have never even laid eyes on a truly fine oil finish to see what it is supposed to look like. Most of the guns I see with this finish have partly un-filled pores, but I still like the look more than a "built up" finish where you can tell that the finish itself has some thickness to it, and which often glosses up in shine through use.
I do not want to use a true linseed-oil finish nor spend a year applying, waiting, rubbing, etc. I am not necessarily looking for a "shortcut" per se, but am interested in what goes into making a quality in the wood finish, and a quality (if that's possible) 'on the wood finish'that looks like an 'in the wood finish', and what the advantages and disadvantages are of each...

This is to go on a hunting gun that'll see fairly hard use for two months of the year, and rarely used the other 10 months. I've used true-oil on several stocks and find it is hard to get thin enough to avoid building up, and it has not gotten as hard as I would have liked, so buffing it out shows the fine scratches as a slight "haze" on the surface. I'd like to try some other finish, but do not want to have to track down "eye of newt" or any other scarce ingredients to make my own...so an off the shelf finish is what I'm after, and some ideas about how to apply it.
Thanks,
Dave

OB; If finishing oil can't penetrate the wood, how do so many of these old double stocks get black heads from over oiling and standing in the closet for 40 years.. I've seen some that were pretty well penetrated.. MDC

Course there is a distinction between face grain and end grain (totally tubular) and end grain is what abutts that over-oiled action, Mel.

Apply a couple coats of Formby's Satin Tung Oil Finish. Don't wait for total cure. Rub each coat out and burnish it down with soft cotton cloth after about 3-4 hrs. under your average incandescant lamp. You'll have sufficient diving face grain and pores to suit you. I always use the gloss Formby's because I like some shine and I get it very easily with a bit of Simichrome Moto Polish on a rag. However I don't particularly care for heavy gloss finishes that have the build to resemble poured Epoxy.

jack

I can make a few suggestions. I am working on a Zischang style Borchardt stock right now with an "in the wood" finish. I am following, roughly, Steven Dodd Hughes' 3-part article on stock refinishing (which can apply to new wood). In

In short I use Permalyn sealer (an oil/urethane treatment). I fill grain with a slurry of permalyn and rottenstone and then shift to either more permalyn or an equal mix of spar varnish, linseed oil, and turpentine. One can build it up or not.

There is no one way to do any of this. But this works really well for me.


Now, if you ask where that 3-part article was published and how to get a copy, I'm not sure I can tell you any more, but I think it was in Doublegun. I'm certain someone here will know.

Brent

Dave,
Edit: Brent D posted while I was typing

My 2¢ - I've been using Permalyn Sealer lately. It's very thin and I cut it another ~10% with mineral spirits. Those first couple coats really soak in. Then a coat of pure. It's a modified oil so it's a little shiny, but it's not as glossy as Permalyn Finish or Tru Oil.

Finally wet sand with 1000 or 1200 grit auto body sandpaper. Since you're not obsessed about filling the pores, wipe the stock clean while the mud layer is still wipe-able. You want the stock to be finished after that coat dries. Do a pumice if it needs it.

The complete story, with additions, will be out in my new book Double Guns and Custom Gunsmithing in September 07 from Countrysport Press.
I'm scheduled to introduce the new title at the Vintage Cup, Pintail Point MD, 9/07
I very much look forward to meeting each of you there to personally inscribe books.
It's a rare thing for me to leave nearly perfect Montana in September!
BTW, I've seen Permalyn sealer soak clean through a thin forend into the barrel channel.

After viewing Joe Balicki's video on stock finishing a few years ago, I finished a couple of shotguns with Permalyn sealer. One was a field gun and one a target O/U. I got acceptably beautiful results, and the game gun, which got carried a lot under tough conditions and shot all too little, fared well. It gets refreshed after every season and looks as good as all my others.

The comp gun doesn't get as much exposure to the weather and none to briars, but it gets cheeked an average of 300 times a week year 'round. I quickly found that the oil in my skin passes through Permalyn like water through a sock. In short order there appeared a big dark oval on the comb of my honey-colored CA English stock. Eventually, I stripped it, extracted it with solvent and refinished it completely with Permalyn a second time. The problem recurred.

I refinished it with Waterlox and it's impervious to the oil. Couldn't resist my usual plug, since I've actually finsihed stocks with about every commercial finish available...TruOil, Permalyn, Formbys, ProCustom, Pilkingtons, Linspeed, Napiers...

They're all good products and any will do 98% of what I expect from a stock finish. It's the last 2% that separates the top 4 or 5 for me and Waterlox wins hands down.

Mike, I recall your photos of that gun. I think you have either an unusual piece of wood or an unusual skin chemistry. I have not had your experience with Permalyn on my .22 low wall which gets "cheeked" many thousands of times per year (I use it in competition).

Seems odd, but I've never heard or seen anything like what you have experienced with that gun.

Brent

Dave,
That recipe I put up was to specifically emulate the factory satin finish.

And I as much as I don't like change, I'm prolly gonna to take Mike's suggestion on the Waterlox. In Mike's excellent how-to he explained the tedious process I go through as unnecessary if using Waterlox (middle coats of XYZ, topcoats of ZX, Pumice, topcoat YZ, blah, blah). The finish he's getting is what I generally want and get, but it the Waterlox method is much more direct route.
And though touching up guns hasn't been a hassle, I like the idea of no different layers in the finish.

Does anyone have a copy of a link to Mikes how-to? I recall seeing it but can't find it. I'm fast growing a collection of MC "how-to's"!

Two of Mike's excellent how-to's:
FINISHING

CHECKERING

Dave, to save a thread to your PC, go up to Topic Options tab, go to Print Topic, then Intrnet Explorer File>Save

Sweetness and light, thanks!! Got the checkering one already, but missed the other.

If you go to my site here under advertizers, click on my article on finishing techniques. Of course there is oil in wood finishing.

OB,
I tend to agree with your assessement of the penetration. I have some limited experience with the impregnated wood stuff. We used some of this for making model airplane props for a formula 1 race plane. I believe the impregnated wood we used was for electrical insulation applications. Also, Browning dabbled with similar impregnated wood for the Challenger pistol grips.

I'm suspicious that the best of the 'in-the-wood' finishing techniques may only penetrate the finish solids to a depth measured in thousandths of an inch, similar to casehardening. Sectioning a sample block that has been finished in your favorite method will tell, I suppose.

Chuck: Some time back, we had a long string on Dan Lefevers original finishing method. If this method is used, the finish penetrates the wood at least 1/16", that more than a few thousanths.. MDC

Mike, I have been using a modified formula posted by Salopian (BLO+turpentine+liquid carnauba wax, shaken, not stirred) and have had nice results.

I would like to try the Waterlox you recommend, where can I get it from? I am travelling to Boston on the 1st of June to visit my son and can bring some down.

Thanks in advance.

JC(AL)

MDC,
I've no doubt that oils and solvents will penetrate very deeply, it's the finish solids (usually resins) that I suspect don't get very deep. That's a much harder thing to evaluate than just cutting a piece of wood that's been finished and looking at the stain line.

JC
http://woodworker.com/cgi-bin/FULLPRES.exe?PARTNUM=294-001

JC-

I just went to Waterlox.com, clicked on "how to buy Waterlox", chose the state of MA, and got dozens of locations. You can also order online, but it looks like it will be convenient for you to shop in a store.

There are 2 products. The Sealer is water-thin and clear. If you've used Watco or Deft Danish oil, Formby's Tung oil or Permalyn sealer, it's very similar but somewhat superior, IMO. I like the tack time, cure time and incredible durability of very thinly built-up Waterlox sealer. Like virtually any clear, transparent liquid finish, once you've achieved the minimal build-up required for true impermeability, it WILL shine if polished. Just like the others, you'll need to control the gloss by the time-honored rub-out with rottenstone. But I find the fast, extremely hard cure more forgiving than the others.

I use only light-colored, highly figured CA English walnut for my own stocks which is why I've come to prefer the "Original Satin Finish." It's thicker, more like TruOil or ProCustom oil, but that's fine. I simply cut the first 2-3 coats 50% with mineral spirits as well as the first 2-3 wet sands with 320. Once I have complete fill, I use it full strength, but sparingly of course. The stain sheen comes by virtue of added flatteners, enough so the oil is murky, not transparent. Medium-light and/or highly-figured wood is very tolerant of this cloudiness. Very dark, and especially dark, unfigured wood may finish looking cloudy. As much as we tout "low gloss, satin oil" finishes, I think dark, figured walnut benefits from a slightly higher shine than satin. High gloss usually connotes a thick, plastic-like top coat which many of us object to. But high luster doesn't have to equate to high build-up.

best, Mike

Chuck and Mike, thank you for the pointers.

JC(AL)

Mike, so as not to bungle it, are these the product numbers? :

-Waterlox Original Sealer & Finish - TB5284
-Waterlox Original Satin Finish - TB 6044 (formerly TB 6022)

Already located distributors less than two miles from my son's apt.

Thank you again.

JC(AL)

Those are the ones, JC. You gonna pick one? They're about $25/qt.

I like to rebottle it in some 2 ounce bottles filled right to the top and refrigerate.

I would advise metal or glass containers. Some plastics allow oxygen to permeate through and will cure the Waterlox. I have also experienced loss of volatiles through a plastic bottle containing Custom Pro oil. The sides of the plastic bottle start to suck in. I have not tried polypropylene plastic bottles which might do better.

Mike, a quart of each will have to suffice, considering I have to fly down with them.

Thanks again for the info.

JC(AL)

Mike, have you tried using this in combination with other finishes? It strikes me that if one WANTED a slightly more built up finish or wanted to avoid the cloudiness you mention, they might use a gloss finish for the bulk of the work, and then a topcoat or two of the satin to achieve the desired lustre??

Dave,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're asking whether it would be OK to apply the Waterlox Satin Oil over an existing gloss finish, or over another finish that you have on hand and want to use up? More a matter of convenience and economy as opposed to some practical reason for combining finishes? I'd say, as long as your first finish is oil-based and not polyurethane or lacquer it should work fine.

Waterlox is a blend of urethanes and tung oil. Practically all the commercial formulas we use for gunstock finishes are blends of synthetic urethanes and natural linseed or tung oils. On occasion, I've lightly sanded an existing oil finish and top coated with a different oil finish. In particular, I'd wager Tru-oil, ProCustom, Permalyn and Waterlox would bond well with each other. I've mixed and matched a few times with good success. In fact, the only use I'd have for boiled linseed oil would be as a cosmetic top coat after making sure the wood was completely sealed with one of the commercial blends.

To the BB at large;

I may have given the impression that Waterlox is the Holy Grail of finishes, that it will magically give the perfect result without effort. If so, I apologize, because it ain't so. There are no shortcuts to a beautiful oil finish on a gunstock....but there aren't any "secrets" either. The techniques I use are well documented and in the public domain. Years ago, I bought a video from Brownells by Joe Balicki, a well respected pro who loves Permalyn. When I bought a bottle of Pilkingtion's Classic oil finish from Brownells, it came with a neat little instruction booklet. Pete Hiatt has an excellent article right here on this site...
http://www.doublegunshop.com/phiatt3.htm

All of these sources and others give details of the very same approach I use. With proper technique any of a half dozen products will give good results, and choosing just one is largely personal preference.

I'd like to hear from anybody who tries Waterlox, especially if they already have experience and a strong preference for one of the other popular brands. I know one pro who is a fan of Permalyn and tried Waterlox sealer on my recommendation. He didn't switch. He couldn't tell me why not, he just saw no good reason to change.

Thanks Mike. The only reason I saw to combine was if you wanted to build up some finish, wanted the satin finish, but didn't want the cloudiness you mneitoned to be as much of an issue. Sounds like overthinking it to me, but I heard mention from some others about using different finishes at various points in the finishing of a stock.

Kind of big area covered by generic term oil. Seems to me that most lubes (the ones that go in the end-grain at the head of the stock) are petroleum distillates and have been since John D. struck Pennsylvania Light. Tung and linseed are plant resins aren't they? I agree with OB and Chuck that there is a big difference between sealing wood and filling grain and marinating the stuff under pressure. And filled grain, be it with deposits of rottenstone, Silex, or cured finish isn't in the wood; it's in depressions in the wood.

jack

Jack you're a clever, sensible bugger you know? I bet your wife gives you hell? Always find your replies knowledgable.

Never been accused of any of that before, Sal. Probably getting better at disguising my ignorance as olfart wisdom? My wife knows I wilt under pressure and just gives me heck.

Insomia has reminded me (we are somewhat west of the islands and Mr. Sun hasn't arrived yet)of a story that Douglas Adams, creator of the Hitchhiker's Guide, told in the posthumous Salmon of Doubt. Seems he was in a train station in York with time to kill so he buys a cuppa, a newspaper, and a packet of cookies. He's got his nose in the paper when another gent sits down but he notices peripherally when this one opens the packet of cookies and eats one. At a loss what to do now, he also reaches for one. The opp number takes another, Adams takes another. There are only eight cookies but the time it takes to eat them is excruciating. The other gent then rises; Adams and he exchange a look of mutual excoriation. With the embarassing cadger gone, Adams discovers his packet of cookies under the newspaper. He thinks that somewhere in England is a man with exactly the same story as his but without the punchline.

jack

addendum later that same day: Is that "coaching" as in coach+6, Dalmation and Bouvier, footman and horn? Know it can't be softball.

Jack,
I don't want to be accused of hi-jacking this thread, talking on the cheap to pen-pals.
Coaching = Instructing Gentlefolk in the art of wingshooting.

I wouldn't worry overly about it. Some of the best & brightest have walked all over some of mine with memoirs des muscle cars. Course they use the gimmick of the analogy as in "That's analogous to . . ." or "It's sorta like . . ." There are some differences between gentlemen and downy-feathered chicks, don't ya know.

jack

OK, so what should I call these finishes? "built up" and "non-built up"? I use the terms I've seen others use in print, so if there is a most correct term that will aid in others understanding my foolish questions, I'm all ears.
Thanks.

Dave, "in the wood" and "on the wood" have a rough and ready correspondance to our thinking about finishes with few solids and driers vs. a catalyzed wonder poison which you can spray, cut down once, and then "hang" on the surface with a very fast build per coat. Our little quibbles about depth of penetration aren't with you. I have no idea how you get an "ultrathin" finish. Can't imagine anything much thinner than BL and beeswax.

jack