stripper comparison

[gutlo]

----------
> 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
> 
>