Oil finish - better than water based?!

[John Piwaron]

I've used plenty (for me) of water based "varnish" - it's nice. It gets the job done.

But "getting the job done" isn't what I want for my current project. So I pulled out a can of Pratt & Lambert #38. Gosh, there's nothing like an oil finish to really "pop" the grain on hard maple. The deep luster, the ripples on the quilted spots - like shimmering waves! Gosh! I need a cigarette . . . . . and I don't smoke!

Why can't a water based do that?

[Randy Goodhew]

I've used plenty (for me) of water based "varnish" - it's nice. It gets the job done.

But "getting the job done" isn't what I want for my current project. So I pulled out a can of Pratt & Lambert #38. Gosh, there's nothing like an oil finish to really "pop" the grain on hard maple. The deep luster, the ripples on the quilted spots - like shimmering waves! Gosh! I need a cigarette . . . . . and I don't smoke!

Why can't a water based do that?

Oil --------- Chatoyance.


Blessings.

[Jason Roehl]

It's the size of the molecules--the waterborne finishes don't make it as deep into the wood. However, those long chains that are in waterborne finishes do an excellent job of interlocking as the film dries and cures, making for a very tough, durable finish. Shellac is also pretty good at chatoyance. A couple coats of dewaxed shellac followed by 2-3 good coats of waterborne, sanding only just before the final coat will yield pretty much the same thing, plus you'll be done with the process while the first coat of oil would still be drying.

[John Piwaron]

Good advice - I'll try that.