Despite multiple coats and letting the stain sink in as long as (or even
sometimes longer than) recommended on the can, my stain never seems to
get nearly as dark as shown on the can or as shown in the store samples.
- I have found this both with multiple different Minwax oil stains and
with Rockler gel stains. The stain never gets nearly as dark, dense,
rich as shonw in the samples.
- For me this is true both for pine and (red) oak -- which are the types
of wood shown for example in the Minwax samples.
- It happens both on unsanded S4S wood and on wood sanded to 200 grit
- Also it happens whether or not I use a pre-stain wood conditioner.
- Finally it happens even with multiple coates (4+), even when using
very generous applications, even when kept on longer than recommended,
and even if I don't wipe it off aggresively at the end.
The only areas that stain as dark as (or darker than) the samples are
What could I possibly be doing wrong?
Try using a dye. There are water/alcohol soluble dyes available at
Woodcraft. Try TransTint (this is what I use).
The stains that you are using are made from pigments that don't
penetrate hard wood very well (large molecules). Dyes are much
smaller compounds (usually analine derivatives) that penetrate the
pours of hardwood much better.
Yeah, this is really common. I think every woodworker goes through
this. Oils stains are just exactly like you state. You can get closer
to the store colors by not wiping off so cleanly and leaving a build
of color to dry. I'm sure that is what they do but it is not so
practicle or easy to achieve on a real project.
A few ideas.
1. Learn how to use Dyes. A very very different process but much more
predictable once you learn the tricks.
2. Try some water based stains. I find the General Finishes water
based stains to have a whole lot of grit and good color lay down. But
using water based requures the extra step of raising the grain.
3. Gel stains are oil stains that have some jellified nature and poly
included. These can be much more easily used as a coating where you
can leave a film to get the deep color you want.
One approach I use on oak (and others) is a standard oil stain on the
raw wood or tung oiled, then stained. Then I put down a thin coat of
shellac. Then I use a darker gel stain to fill the grain with nice
dark lines but not filled so they are flat. You can work the gel stain
with a real saturated rag and leave behind a film as dark as you like.
I actually use it to antique the look and leave lots more in the
corners. The gel stain has poly in it so it will dry and stay on the
surface better than doing the same leave behind with standard oil
You can then lacquer over or poly over or shellac over or wax over or
my fav lacquer then wax over or just leave it. I also sometimes use
black wax for even more antiquing sometimes.
I think the idiot is the one that needs to look through all the mess to get
to the reply. Basically the one that cannot remember what he just read in
the immediate above post. Why reread each time if you have any kind of
memory. Why not for those that can keep up do we need to have the response
at the bottom?
So to in response to your probable response, If you have not read the whole
thread or your computer does not show the previous response, read the
statement below the top posted response.
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 07:33:17 -0600, the infamous "Leon"
Sorry, Kate, but I agree with David's horrible, nasty, ugly, vicious,
hateful, war-mongering response.
(See? Other folks can overreact, too, Lew. ;)
Tolerance is his virtue. I've plonked half the topposters I've read.
Why? For it to be a logical response, especially on proper
(bottom-posted, or interstitial if for multiple phrase replies like
this one) responses. It's not as bad when the original post and
answer both fit on the screen but it's still a real bother for a lot
of people. That said, yes, more people should snip their quotes to
only the relevant info. (BTW, topposters never snip anything at all,
adding unnecessary delay to Usenet use for everyone.) <sniffle>
What about those who don't have time to read the posts every day, or
just started reading the newsgroup?
For those of you who find it hard to bottom-post, get a decent
freakin' _newsreader_, fer chrissake! Usenet isn't rocket science.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 19:45:18 -0600, the infamous "Leon"
That's OK, Leon. Just so you (and other topposters) know, when the
burrs build up enough under the Usenet saddle, people start quietly
plonking the topposters and their burrs.
It's only natural. Reading Usenet posts is a hobby/pastime only until
it becomes not enjoyable. Your option, your risk.
California's 4 Seasons: Fire, Flood, Drought, & Earthquake
www.diversify.com/shades2.html * NoteSHADE(tm) Laptop Glare Guards
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.