hi Ken
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| KTM 9 http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=13333 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | kente777 [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Can you all tell me your experience and/or thoughts on this finish? Thanks! Ken |
|
| Author: | Wayne Clark [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
There is a lot on KTM-9 in the archives. Some like it, some hate it. I use it. You can get a nice finish out of it, even if you apply with a brush. It doesn't have toxic or explosive fumes and is easy to clean up. Lots of builders follow the Doolin schedule for applying - you can get the link at the LMI website. The trick seems to be to wait for the stuff to cure for a few weeks between your last coat and when you sand it out. |
|
| Author: | GregG [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I use it too, you can get a very nice finish with it....in a perfect world I'd love to see it dry a tad harder, but quite nice really. Greg |
|
| Author: | Ricardo [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
SM's Colortone lacquer is nice to work with. You only need to wait a week for it to cure before polishing it out. |
|
| Author: | Steve Saville [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ken, I tried it and did not like it. I am using Crystalac from McFeely's. The super premium is said to be made for instruments. |
|
| Author: | davidmor [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I also use the stewmac colortone lacquer. It is really nice to use but like other said, surface prep is very important. It builds slow and won't fill pores. I wait a minimum of 3 weeks before I start polishing. |
|
| Author: | David R White [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
As a hobbyist, I think it works pretty well as a brush on finish. It looks pretty good, but I do wish it was a little harder. I don't really share Hesh's view on it being water white, I think it provides enough colour to warm up a spruce top. |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
hi Ken
|
|
| Author: | Colby Horton [ Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've tested some waterborne finishes and I'm not crazy about them. They just don't have the glow that nitro does. It kind of depends on what you want. I decided to go back to nitro because it looks a little better, and with me, a little is a big deal. I won't settle for less than the best when it comes to the look of a finish. If your not going to be extremely picky, give it a try. Also, the reason you wait 4 weeks before buffing out a nitro finish is not really because it has to get hard enough. It's really just so you won't see any shrinkage after buffing. It gets hard pretty quick, but it does shrink for a while. I sometimes buff repairs out after 4 days and they look great. Just my cents. |
|
| Author: | JJ Donohue [ Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ken...I've used it on 2 guitars and liked it. I sprayed one and brushed the other. Both sanded and buffed out quite well after waiting 4 weeks to cure. I was mainly pleased that it did not have the bluish cast that I observed with other waterborne finishes. I'd use it again for someone who was incapable of caring for a finish or careless. My personal preference has changed to FP. I pore filled with Zpoxy and then applied the KTM-9. After 2 years both guitars look great and wear well. Is it better than Nitro...not in my opinion. Is it safer to handle in a hobbyists shop...absolutely. |
|
| Author: | kente777 [ Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=MichaelP]hi Ken Hi Michael. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|
