DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum

DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum (http://www.diychatroom.com/)
-   Painting (http://www.diychatroom.com/f4/)
-   -   1930s Kitchen Remodel (http://www.diychatroom.com/f4/1930s-kitchen-remodel-114949/)

zeldarizona 08-22-2011 11:59 PM

1930s Kitchen Remodel
 
2 Attachment(s)
I knocked down a wall and am putting in a kitchen bar, replacing the countertops and adding some new cabinets.

I need some help with the paint for the original 1930s cabinets. I believe the current paint is oil-based over something really old (possibly lead-based), over wood. I removed all the doors, hardware, and sanded the top layer of paint.

After visiting Benjamin Moore last week, I decided to go with their new product, Advance Waterborne Interior Alkyd which is designed for kitchen cabinets and trim. I didn't purchase the paint but did purchase the recommended primer for this paint, BullsEye 123 Water-Based Primer, and primed all surfaces.

I returned to the store today to buy paint and I started to feel uncomfortable with the advice that I was given. I visited Sherwin-Williams and Dunn-Edwards to get their advice, and returned home to do some some internet research. I have decided that I would still like to go with an oil-based paint for the cabinets.

Some questions for you:

1) Given that I have a water-based primer over an oil-based paint. Should I sand and/or reprime with an oil-based primer?

2) Does anyone have any opinions on the Benjamin Moore Satin Advance Waterborne Interior Alkyd? What are the pros/cons?

3) I have read on multiple sites that Fine Paints of Europe is the top of the line for kitchen cabinets and worth every penny (about 2X-3X cost of BM Advance). Does anyone have experience with this? Should I use this product instead of the BM Satin Advance Waterborne Interior Alkyl?

Feel free to offer advice on any points. Thanks in advance for you help!!!!
Zeldarizona in Tucson

Dean CRCNA 08-23-2011 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeldarizona (Post 713285)
I believe the current paint is oil-based over something really old (possibly lead-based), over wood. I removed all the doors, hardware, and sanded the top layer of paint.

Hope you don't have kids.

Brushjockey 08-23-2011 09:12 PM

Dean- sometimes you get tiresome.

How many of us have grown up and painting and prep occurred with lead paint? Huh?
Now I know the threat is real- but it is not a nuclear winter.

TO zelda- There is a concern with the dust from lead paints. There are new laws on pros that make us do a real thourogh containment and clean up when it is present or suspected to be.

Do a bit of research into the RRP rule

Wet sanding reduces dust. But adhesion on those surfaces is important.

ltd 08-23-2011 11:20 PM

i would have used zinsser cover stain oil base primer . but you used bulls eye 123,whats done is done. a lot of painters swear by it . sherwin williams has a waterborne alkyd pro classic works very well ,and they have pro classic acrylic that's very good,both of these paint have a learning curve to them , do not over brush them. i don't know this to be the same as i don't use ben, but i'm guessing its the same thing.

Brushjockey 08-23-2011 11:58 PM

Now to reply about the finish paints-
BM Advance is a good product, but hard to use. it also recoats slow for a waterborne. tends to sag.
BM waterborne impervo is nice, but like all WB's , has a learning curve.
I use Aura Satin quite often, but it dries very quickly, and has a leaning curve.
Itd likes SW's ProClassic WB, - I think it handles OK, little light on the sheen for me.
FPE is a extra pro paint- unless you are very experienced, it will be a waste.
Repriming does not change what is touching the original surface, so nothing gained by doing it.
Zin 123 takes a couple of weeks to fully cure and get max adhesion/hardness. Will be ok I think.

jsheridan 08-24-2011 05:43 AM

In looking at those pics, I think the concern about lead is a little late. What's a little sanding dust added to that? I think I'm going to start a thread where we can have a knockdown dragout and air some things about the whole lead mess. I've got some thoughts I'd like to let fly. Let's get it out in the sunshine. I'm tired too brush, but not with Dean so much as the whole issue. Dean's only responding what's been created.

jsheridan 08-24-2011 05:53 AM

OP, what was the advice you were given that was so concerning? You shouldn't make that statement without an explanation. Don't expect that every paint store rep knows what they're talking about, even if their name tag has Mgr attached. Brush made a good analysis. Since at this point your wallowing in lead, probably, voc's should be no concern, use BM Satin Impervo oil, best job, easiest to use. That's if you can get it, as that's another victim of Chicken Little Syndrome.

Dean CRCNA 08-24-2011 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brushjockey (Post 713863)
Dean- sometimes you get tiresome.

I admit to this. It is just when someone says they may have lead based paint and then talk about sanding it ...

Dean CRCNA 08-24-2011 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsheridan (Post 714014)
I think I'm going to start a thread where we can have a knockdown dragout and air some things about the whole lead mess. I've got some thoughts I'd like to let fly. Let's get it out in the sunshine. I'm tired too brush, but not with Dean so much as the whole issue. Dean's only responding what's been created.

Doing it on PaintTalk would be better.

zeldarizona 08-24-2011 11:07 AM

Chill Pill
 
Jeez you guys. I DIDN'T sand the (supposed) lead-based paint - only the top coat oil-based paint. There are so many coats of paint it would take hours and hours to get to the bottom layers.

Brushjockey 08-24-2011 02:11 PM

Z- there is part of the rub ( oh look- punny!) that us pros have with the new regs. We may know for certain that the top layer we are carefully prepping on is recent non lead oil- but if there is a lead based paint anywhere, no matter how deeply buried, we must treat it like it's all lead.

So Just proceed with your new won caution. The law doesn't have any direct bearing on DIY, which is another point of contention.

jsheridan 08-24-2011 03:26 PM

Zelda, you've done demolition, if there's lead there it's been disturbed, and some of its dust has become airborne. Dean, the problem with discussing the issue at painttalk is that it's largely out of the gen pop view. We need the gen pop to be involved in the discussion and also to hear the views of the pros who deal and suffer under these rules. You should appreciate that because it will make your job selling it easier. Put it out there. I know your passion for it, but I can't be less sympathetic. I think it's overblown and ridiculous overkill to a problem that was largely going away on its own the further we get away from lead use. The numbers bear that out. What's the sense in airing out among the pros, whose positions on the issue are largely established and fixed. Let's get the public involved and let them decide. The government denied them the power to decide when they killed the opt out. Does that make sense, the government will allow them to do whatever work they wish with no regs or oversight, but they can't decide to confer that right to their contractor. You can poison your own kids, but you can't allow someone else to? It's not about the children, never was, never will be, it's nothing more than an intrusion into small business under a guise. It's a joke Dean, and if I wasn't crying, I'd be laughing hysterically.

Dean CRCNA 08-24-2011 05:02 PM

Sheridan,

Sounds good! Just start a post (or I can).

chrisn 08-24-2011 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsheridan (Post 714220)
Zelda, you've done demolition, if there's lead there it's been disturbed, and some of its dust has become airborne. Dean, the problem with discussing the issue at painttalk is that it's largely out of the gen pop view. We need the gen pop to be involved in the discussion and also to hear the views of the pros who deal and suffer under these rules. You should appreciate that because it will make your job selling it easier. Put it out there. I know your passion for it, but I can't be less sympathetic. I think it's overblown and ridiculous overkill to a problem that was largely going away on its own the further we get away from lead use. The numbers bear that out. What's the sense in airing out among the pros, whose positions on the issue are largely established and fixed. Let's get the public involved and let them decide. The government denied them the power to decide when they killed the opt out. Does that make sense, the government will allow them to do whatever work they wish with no regs or oversight, but they can't decide to confer that right to their contractor. You can poison your own kids, but you can't allow someone else to? It's not about the children, never was, never will be, it's nothing more than an intrusion into small business under a guise. It's a joke Dean, and if I wasn't crying, I'd be laughing hysterically.


Well, it's a little more, try a blood sucking money making scheme.:censored::censored::censored::censored::ce nsored::censored:

jsheridan 08-25-2011 06:17 AM

Thanks Chris, that goes without saying, but I'm glad you did. I'll start one this weekend Dean. I do need to get over to PT to check the latest on the lead discussion. I was there briefly the other day, much has changed.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 PM.