stripper comparison

[Farrell]

Hello Arthur. I would sure like to try your new stripper. Am I within the
first six? You have my address.

Also, when we spoke awhile back, you mentioned you were working on a
metallic/bronzing-like ?powder? or something that can be added to
water-based clearcoats for plates. What's the status with that? Any
progress? I get great-looking results with laquer, but I wonder about
longevity and laquer is soooooo soft.

Terry Farrell
Piano Tuning & Service
Tampa, Florida
mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "gutlo" <gutlo@bestweb.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 10:16 PM
Subject: Re: stripper comparison


>
>
> ----------
> > From: Greg Newell <gnewell@ameritech.net>
> > To: pianotech@ptg.org
> > Subject: Re: stripper comparison
> > Date: Sunday, December 31, 2000 2:21 AM
> >
> > Arthur,
> >     I am going to copy the post I made to both Pianotech and Master
Piano
> Tech.
> > I hope you cna take this in the spirit with which it was written. If you
> have
> > any questions or comments I will giv you my full contact info. I don't
> expect
> > to recieve a quart of your product since my post is not terribly
> flattering.
> > None the less, here it is;
> >     Greg newell
> >     Greg's Piano Forté
> >     12970 Harlon Ave.
> >     Lakewood, Ohio 44107
> >     216-226-3791
> >     216-496-3522 (mobil)
> >     Here then is the text of the message I sent to the above mentioned
> lists.
> >
> > O.K. folks for those of you who got the wrong idea from the subject
> > line, your in the wrong forum. :~) Now, I must respond to the latest
> > post from Arthur Grudko from Starhawk Labs. I'm not sure what exactly he
> > is testing or how but I have what I think is much better than what the
> > ones he is testing here. I must however admit that there is some vapor
> > to contend with though not too bad.
> >     I was somewhat skeptical when I read Mr. Grudko's post mainly
> > because of the cost of a "good" stripper compound so I tried my own
> > little test. I have for refinishing in my shop a customers 20's vintage
> > A.B. Chase grand with an old varnish seemingly not too dissimilar to
> > what Mr. Grudko describes. I just went to grab the music desk glide
> > track and some of "my choice" chemical  and stripped it to bare wood in
> > 5 , count them 5, minutes! Now I'm sure my testing wasn't nearly as
> > scientific as the lauded Mr. Grudko but ..... 5 MINUTES!
> >     Please do not misunderstand the nature of this post. I in no way
> > intend to "dis" Mr. Grudko in any way. I mentioned the name of the
> > product I found at Home Depot several weeks ago and I believe it must
> > have went ignored. For those of you who may be interested the brand is
> > Klean Strip and the product is called Klean Kutter Remover. It claims to
> > work (and seems to) on varnish, lacquer and shellac on all types of
> > wood. What I've seen it do is to literally dissolve the old finish in a
> > very short time and leave a very clean surface. I've just used an old
> > paint brush to continually apply the water like consistency chemical and
> > let the chemical drip back into a basin and before long the finish is
> > dripping off of the wood dissolved in the stripper.
> >     I'm no rocket scientist as the saying goes, but I would rather spend
> > a shorter amount of time at a much lower price than the alternative
> > suggested by Mr. Grudko. The last project I did I stripped the entire
> > lid of an average sized grand in about 20 minutes. Cool Stuff!!!
> >
> > Greg Newell
> >
> > List,.
>
> Greg's comments are appreciated and need amplificaton.
>
> The stripper he used is unknown to me, but if it worked that fast and has
a
> pronounced odor, it is probably methylene chloride based.  There are
> several problems.
> 1.  The use of mc for stripping in commercial shops has been.
> . greatly curtailed by the EPA and for good reason.  It's high evaporation
> rate and extreme toxicitiy and flammability make it very dangerous to
> humans.
> 2.  It likely contains wax to keep down the evaporation of the mc, and the
> wax must be 100% removed with more toxic "wash thinner" or risk fisheyes.
> 3..Dyna 2 is, in effect faster than mc strippers, at least for pianos.
The
> trick is take the entire piano apart, lay it out (vertically or
> horizontally), coat everything, then peel it off.  A quick wash down with
> Dyna After WAsh and paper towels does the trick.  The average baby grand
> can be done in around 4 hours> .
> 4.  If you get an MC stripper on your hands or arms, it burns.  Dyna 2 is
a
> lot more forgiving in this regard ( no burning) but it is still advised to
> wear gloves.
> 5.  A "water like consistency" is wasteful on the case-it drips down and
> lands on the floor, or newspapers that must be picked up.  This consumes
> time.  The need for constant re-application is also time inefficient.
With
> Dyna 2, it goes on once, doesn't drip, and comes right off to the bare
> wood.  No need to carry a basin around the piano.  Do the math:  is the
> money you save on stripper worth all the extra time needed to use it?
>
> Arthur Grudko, StarHawk Labs
> >
> > gutlo wrote:
> >
> > > > Date: Saturday, December 30, 2000 12:48 PM
> > > >
> > > > Arthur,
> > > >
> > > > You mentioned you would post the results of the comparisons you were
> > > > going to make between different finish strippers.  If you posted
them
> to
> > > > the list, I missed it. Have you finished your experiment?  Is the
> > > > verdict in?
> > > >
> > > > John Voigt
> > > >
> > > > Yes, John and List, the verdict is in.
> > >
> > > I tested Woodfinisher's Pride, Savogran NMP-based stripper,
Citristrip,
> and
> > > Dyna 2.
> > >
> > > The winner, by any measure, by a huge margin is Dyna 2.
> > >
> > > WP, Savogran, and Citripstrip are all gels.  They are prone to
dripping
> and
> > > sagging on vertical surfaces, must be re-applied (sometimes 3 times)
to
> be
> > > effective, and even then don't strip down to the bare wood.  They have
> a
> > > pronounced odor (especially Citristrip) and take around 1 hour for
each
> > > application to work.
> > >
> > > Dyna 2 is a heavy paste.  No matter how much you pile on, it will not
> drip
> > > or sag.  It has extremely low odor because its NMP penetrates down
into
> the
> > > coating, not evaporating into the air.  It forms a skin as it works,
> and
> > > one hour later, it peels off like a banana skin, revealing the bare
> wood.
> > >
> > > Its green color acts like an inidicator-when it starts to turn dark
> brown,
> > > it's time to test scrape with a spatula.
> > >
> > > These tests were performed on an 1876 Knabe with the original varnish
> > > finish-very thick and very hard.
> > >
> > > The savings in labor and material with Dyna 2 are significant.  The
> virtual
> > > absence of odor is important, as most of us work in small shops where
> > > ventilation in the cold weather can be a problem.
> > >
> > > Dyna 2 has been available in commercial quantities sold directly to
big
> > > industrial users.  The company has graciously allowed StarHawk Labs to
> be a
> > > sort of beta tester.  They have shipped me 6, 1/2 pint containers with
> tech
> > > data sheets to give to interested parties on the list.  If the
feedback
> is
> > > good, StarHawk will become a distributor.
> > >
> > > Dyna 2 will cost $48/gallon.  Citristrip sells in New York for
$21/half
> > > gallon.  This makes Dyna 2 an incredible bargain, at only $6/gallon
> more,
> > > for far greater performance and efficiency.
> > >
> > > The first 6 respondents to this posting will received, free of charge,
> the
> > > half pint.  I only ask that you post your opinions, good or bad.
Email
> > > your snailmail address.
> > >
> > > Arthur Grudko
> > > StarHawk Labs, Manufacturer of PianoLac, the Waterborne That Works
> >
> > --
> > Greg Newell
> > Greg's Piano Forté
> > mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net
> >
> >