# Exterior house paint fail



## Happee_grrl (Feb 9, 2014)

Okay, gang. I need your help. I don't do a lot of exteriors, so I don't know how to approach this.

Tell me how, please. Cedar siding. We have the option of spraying and/or brushing.


----------



## Stretch67 (Oct 7, 2013)

Happee_grrl said:


> Okay, gang. I need your help. I don't do a lot of exteriors, so I don't know how to approach this.
> 
> Tell me how, please. Cedar siding. We have the option of spraying and/or brushing.


Scrape sand prime spray. Do trim by hand with 3/4 nap mini rollers....

Dig through my house thread from last year. Itll be similar. Find a good carwash broom.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Not easily. Everywhere the paint is loose at all you need to sand/strip it. This'll be the most crucial step in my opinion; if you leave paint on that's losing adhesion, your topcoat will fail no matter what. Feather the edges around all the pieces you take off/are already off. Clean it thoroughly. I'd probably prime the whole thing; others may recommend spot priming only the bad areas. Not sure if you have product picked, but a primer that adheres well should be your main concern for this kind of thing. If you're going to spot prime only, consider BIN. Otherwise you'll need something like Fresh Start or equivalent.

As far as application, I might spray then backroll; just spraying would probably be okay, too. You'll probably get better advice from the actual painters here for that part.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Is the wood actually in decent shape? Hard to tell from the pics but it looks pretty bad in some areas. Are they going to replace any or leave it all on as is? If the wood is bad definitely talk to them about replacing before you paint and make sure to manage expectations about what painting can and can't do for rotten wood. Like I said, it might be fine, just a couple areas look bad.


----------



## Happee_grrl (Feb 9, 2014)

I've been all over the house. Siding is in good shape, despite how it looks. It's not soft or rotten. Maybe it looks so bad in the pics because I've been picking on it?

I figured on priming the whole house. 

We're considering BM paint, but if you guys have any recommendations on products (primer and paint) I'd sure take those.


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

My first house, I still own it as a rental. I forget 1920? Around there it was built. The old cedar siding. The first time I painted it I did it the whole nine yards. Scrape sand oil prime two good finish coats. Seashore made by M.A.B. It's top line local paint here, I I think i hand tooled it all too, yeh I did. By hand. Some 20 years ago and I was into that paranoidal thoroughness at the time. It probably lasted ten years till I hit it again.

Anyhow the last time I pwerwashed it off, and blasted it with a-100. No spot prime or nothing. It's held up just as good if not better, probably half the time or less and half the material (gallons and $ wize.). Ten years old? About that. Still looks good. Really.

Aaah when you been at it long enuff to 'real test' 
I probably got one more paint job to go on that house, and then it will be somebody else's problem. But not yet. It don't close to need it. It's getting powerwashed and a-100 when it does. I did the over the top and the minimum on that house. The minimum worked as good if not better. Really.


----------



## Seth The Painter (Jun 24, 2015)

You should give this house a good pressure washing. Let it dry for 48 hours. 

Scrape and Sand house especially where it's peeling. Be sure to spot prime with mad dog where ever you sand where it's bare wood. This way it won't peel again.

Oil prime this entire house to the actual color of the house. I Iike the arbor coat oil primer. It does take longer to dry then fresh start however it's more durable and covers better. Next I would definately spray the body then paint the trim by hand with a brush and wiz roller.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

Happee_grrl said:


> Okay, gang. I need your help. I don't do a lot of exteriors, so I don't know how to approach this.
> 
> Tell me how, please. Cedar siding. We have the option of spraying and/or brushing.


I think the application mode is almost immaterial. Decisions about prep and primer are what matter. If the budget will bear it, we'd strip off all the failed paint, sand, prime with long-oil primer, finish with high-quality acrylic. Around here, that'll typically go 15-20 years.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

what Gough said.

there's a reason the adage is, "proper prep is more than half the job"

On that house it looks like it could be 75%


----------



## I paint paint (May 4, 2014)

DrakeB said:


> Not easily. Everywhere the paint is loose at all you need to sand/strip it. This'll be the most crucial step in my opinion; if you leave paint on that's losing adhesion, your topcoat will fail no matter what. *Feather the edges around all the pieces you take off/are already off.* Clean it thoroughly. I'd probably prime the whole thing; others may recommend spot priming only the bad areas. Not sure if you have product picked, but a primer that adheres well should be your main concern for this kind of thing. If you're going to spot prime only, consider BIN. Otherwise you'll need something like Fresh Start or equivalent.
> 
> As far as application, I might spray then backroll; just spraying would probably be okay, too. You'll probably get better advice from the actual painters here for that part.


I've heard some exterior guys on here don't do the feather edge. They say the heat generated from sanding to feather compromises the remaining coating. So while it looks smooth initially, it quickly fails at the feather edge.

Instead, they offer two options. Hand scrape. Or full house paint removal.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

I paint paint said:


> I've heard some exterior guys on here don't do the feather edge. They say the heat generated from sanding to feather compromises the remaining coating. So while it looks smooth initially, it quickly fails at the feather edge.
> 
> Instead, they offer two options. Hand scrape. Or full house paint removal.


We avoid feathering for the reason you mentioned, but we use a third approach. For widespread removal, we use EPRs (heat plates) and scrapers and just square up our work when we reach sound paint.


----------



## PACman (Oct 24, 2014)

The grayed areas of bare wood should be sanded completely back to good, natural looking wood. If there is any on a house this old. Gray wood fibers are dead wood fibers that can cause long term adhesion problems.

The biggest issue I have ever had with A-100 was that it wasn't very fade resistant compared to more premium products, especially in darker colors. I saw pretty noticeable fade in a medium gray on my own house after 4-5 years. This was 25 years ago so I would assume that with the new colorants it shouldn't be as bad as it was back then. Last time I used Manor Hall timeless (about 9 years ago) and it will still damn near touch up (balsam green color). Even on the south side. And you'd need a chisel to get it off the aluminum siding it's on. Of course, I was paying an employee price at the time.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

I paint paint said:


> I've heard some exterior guys on here don't do the feather edge. They say the heat generated from sanding to feather compromises the remaining coating. So while it looks smooth initially, it quickly fails at the feather edge.
> 
> Instead, they offer two options. Hand scrape. Or full house paint removal.


Yah, I've seen some people on here say that, too. It's still recommended as best practice by a lot of people, though.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DrakeB said:


> Yah, I've seen some people on here say that, too. It's still recommended as best practice by a lot of people, though.


It's certainly spec'd by a lot of painters, but I'm not sure about that "best practices" part. Fastest and cheapest, maybe.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Gough said:


> It's certainly spec'd by a lot of painters, but I'm not sure about that "best practices" part. Fastest and cheapest, maybe.


Most manufacturers recommend it in their prep guides, for what it's worth.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DrakeB said:


> Most manufacturers recommend it in their prep guides, for what it's worth.


After all, it's in their best interest to encourage practices that lead to a shorter re-paint cycle, right?:whistling2:


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Gough said:


> After all, it's in their best interest to encourage practices that lead to a shorter re-paint cycle, right?:whistling2:


Answer depends on whether or not you're willing to take greedy-manufacturer-paranoia to the extreme end of the spectrum or not. :whistling2:


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DrakeB said:


> Most manufacturers recommend it in their prep guides, for what it's worth.


Of the two brands we use, it's about 50/50. We've just been on way too many jobs where the previous outfit feathered the bare patches. The blistering in those areas is too prevalent for me to consider that as a best practice.

We've had tech reps out to our jobs and have yet for one to find fault with our prep.


----------



## PACman (Oct 24, 2014)

If you have an issue causing the peeling, feathering the edges and then painting over them isn't going to be conducive to a long lasting coat of paint. You're just repainting an area that is going to be the next failure spot. If it's peeling simply because of age, the wood itself is the problem and it should be completely stripped or sanded back to good sound (not gray) wood everywhere regardless if there is still some paint still hanging on. I am not a fan of feathering the edges, although it is true that many paint companies recommend it. Then when it peels again they can pull the old "it's someone else's paint that failed" trick. Taking it back to a good wood toned wood, priming with a long oil primer and two coats of a good 100% acrylic.

Or a .5 mil thick coat of Marquee will do the trick.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Gough said:


> Of the two brands we use, it's about 50/50. We've just been on way too many jobs where the previous outfit feathered the bare patches. The blistering in those areas is too prevalent for me to consider that as a best practice.
> 
> We've had tech reps out to our jobs and have yet for one to find fault with our prep.


That's a reason I'm more liable to accept 

From personal experience, I'm still not convinced either way. I've heard good arguments both ways.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DrakeB said:


> That's a reason I'm more liable to accept
> 
> From personal experience, I'm still not convinced either way. I've heard good arguments both ways.


I've been under the impression that feathering was done more for aesthetic than practical reasons It's always seems like a move to avoid the pockmarked look that results from spot scraping.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Gough said:


> I've been under the impression that feathering was done more for aesthetic than practical reasons It's always seems like a move to avoid the pockmarked look that results from spot scraping.


I always worry that the water from today's primers (assuming water based) will get between the extant paint and the wood and cause additional adhesion failure that way. Maybe an irrational fear- I'm fairly known for that. As I said before, I'm a pretty bad painter so I always try to make up for it by being as thorough as possible.


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

Cedar siding just isn't the best substrate for holding paint in the first place. And then a lot of them houses that were sided with the cedar they got other issues on top of it. Moisture, breathing, water runoff. I dunno. Selling to somebody a 'restoration' type job with the price tag to match, I just don't see it. Being a cost effective thing for a customer. Too apt to go bad IMHO. 10 to 15 years ur liable to be looking at the same pic of the house in the OP. Just 3 times or so more cost to get there. A waste of money I think.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Oden said:


> Cedar siding just isn't the best substrate for holding paint in the first place. And then a lot of them houses that were sided with the cedar they got other issues on top of it. Moisture, breathing, water runoff. I dunno. Selling to somebody a 'restoration' type job with the price tag to match, I just don't see it. Being a cost effective thing for a customer. Too apt to go bad IMHO. 10 to 15 years ur liable to be looking at the same pic of the house in the OP. Just 3 times or so more cost to get there. A waste of money I think.


It's all about expectations, really. Some people want a top quality job and they want it to look like a top quality job. Some people just want the wood protected until it's time for the next coat. Most people fall somewhere in between. Just gotta know what the customer wants. I'd still be willing to bet that proper prep on cedar siding is going to end in a longer lasting finish and better protection in the vast majority of cases.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

Oden said:


> Cedar siding just isn't the best substrate for holding paint in the first place. And then a lot of them houses that were sided with the cedar they got other issues on top of it. Moisture, breathing, water runoff. I dunno. Selling to somebody a 'restoration' type job with the price tag to match, I just don't see it. Being a cost effective thing for a customer. Too apt to go bad IMHO. 10 to 15 years ur liable to be looking at the same pic of the house in the OP. Just 3 times or so more cost to get there. A waste of money I think.


I forget where you are in the country, Oden, but here in the Northwest, a good paint job on clear, VG cedar will hold paint like stink. The only other thing that'll come close is Fiber-cement, well and properly installed. Most of the houses around here from before the '70s are sided with cedar and we've done those restoration jobs on a bunch of them. Typically, what we see in 10-15 years is the paint on the siding fading. When it's finally time to repaint, prep for the siding is minimal. Wooden windows, on the other hand....


----------



## thomasj (Jul 30, 2015)

DrakeB said:


> It's all about expectations, really. Some people want a top quality job and they want it to look like a top quality job. Some people just want the wood protected until it's time for the next coat. Most people fall somewhere in between. Just gotta know what the customer wants. I'd still be willing to bet that proper prep on cedar siding is going to end in a longer lasting finish and better protection in the vast majority of cases.


True. This is really one of the major issues that painter and customer simply don't listen to each other and hear the expectation prior to starting the work.


----------



## Happee_grrl (Feb 9, 2014)

I want this job to last quite awhile
As in, I don't want to be starting to think about painting it again in 9 yrs. (The last time it was painted was 5 years ago.) 

Owner will be getting gutters installed this fall.

So scrape, then sand the grey wood...but I'm not quite sure what you mean by feathering? 

Why I should powerwash? It seems hitting the siding with a lot of water would hinder adhesion, even after 48 hrs.


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

Gough said:


> I forget where you are in the country, Oden, but here in the Northwest, a good paint job on clear, VG cedar will hold paint like stink. The only other thing that'll come close is Fiber-cement, well and properly installed. Most of the houses around here from before the '70s are sided with cedar and we've done those restoration jobs on a bunch of them. Typically, what we see in 10-15 years is the paint on the siding fading. When it's finally time to repaint, prep for the siding is minimal. Wooden windows, on the other hand....


Yeh I wondered too. Maybe there is different kinds of cedar siding in other places? 
So not being critical. If u restore ur beat cedar sided house, strip it right? Then in ten or fifteen years you need a paint job with minimal prep? So how bout I minimal prep it now and paint it and in 10 to 15 I can minimal prep it again and paint it. The minimal prep IMHO the time for it is now. Lol I'm not looking at comparative pricing estimates here of course but off of the top of my head, one complete restoration? Probably like 5 minimum prep paint jobs. A lifetime. But the cost stretched out also over a lifetime.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

Oden said:


> Yeh I wondered too. Maybe there is different kinds of cedar siding in other places?
> So not being critical. If u restore ur beat cedar sided house, strip it right? Then in ten or fifteen years you need a paint job with minimal prep? So how bout I minimal prep it now and paint it and in 10 to 15 I can minimal prep it again and paint it. The minimal prep IMHO the time for it is now. Lol I'm not looking at comparative pricing estimates here of course but off of the top of my head, one complete restoration? Probably like 5 minimum prep paint jobs. A lifetime. But the cost stretched out also over a lifetime.


Western Red Cedar is what we see here. The older homes have clear, vertical-grade claps. The stuff on the newer homes (<30 years) is mostly flat-sawn junk. 

That minimal prep job now is likely going to look pretty ratty in another 10 years. We often see repaint cycles more like 5.

When I'm talking about minimal prep to repaint the restored project, I mean wash down, rinse, repaint (not powerwash). It's too soon to tell, but it's looking like the Gennex tints may have a significant impact on the repaint cycle.

The other aspect is aesthetic and that's a big one for a lot of our clients. We're using something with a sheen, typically BM soft gloss or low luster, so spot scraping, even with feathering, isn't going to past muster.

I'm guessing that your factor of 5 is probably in the ballpark.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Happee_grrl said:


> I want this job to last quite awhile
> As in, I don't want to be starting to think about painting it again in 9 yrs. (The last time it was painted was 5 years ago.)
> 
> Owner will be getting gutters installed this fall.
> ...


Are you going to be stripping the entire thing? If so, don't need to worry about feathering.

Feathering just means at the edges of the parts you strip, you give a light sand to the paint next to the bare wood until there's a gradient between the paint and wood that gives you a smooth transition (instead of just going from paint to wood at a sheer angle; this catches light and looks bad). But as was said, some painters believe feathering the edges can cause the paint there to prematurely lose adhesion. So you've got to decide what you believe and how you want it to look.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DrakeB said:


> Are you going to be stripping the entire thing? If so, don't need to worry about feathering.
> 
> Feathering just means at the edges of the parts you strip, you give a light sand to the paint next to the bare wood until there's a gradient between the paint and wood that gives you a smooth transition (instead of just going from paint to wood at a sheer angle; this catches light and looks bad). But as was said, some painters believe feathering the edges can cause the paint there to prematurely lose adhesion. So you've got to decide what you believe and how you want it to look.


I think the biggest issue is that "light sand" part. A lot of guys seem to spend too long with a grit that is too fine. That generates heat and you can often see some of the paint starting to blister and lift at that point as you're doing it. 

When we've had to feather in, we tried to use a coarse grit and not dawdle.


----------



## PACman (Oct 24, 2014)

I wonder how they would do this house away out in Idaho?


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

Well. In the OP there is a pic. 
A candidate for a full blown restoration? A complete Strip? The whole nine yards? 
And nothing to do with the siding either, the house itself. No way that house warrants anything approaching the cost of that, I'd think. 
I dunno. But IMHO selling this person more than a knock it off and paint it is not the right thing to do. On a few levels.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

Oden said:


> Well. In the OP there is a pic.
> A candidate for a full blown restoration? A complete Strip? The whole nine yards?
> And nothing to do with the siding either, the house itself. No way that house warrants anything approaching the cost of that, I'd think.
> I dunno. But IMHO selling this person more than a knock it off and paint it is not the right thing to do. On a few levels.


I've been surprised by some of our clients who want the whole nine yards right out of the gate. A lot of those bungalows are surprisingly well-built and comfortable houses, and we've had a number of owners willing to have them taken care of well.

The OP should be forewarned, though, those narrow claps can be a major time sink.


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

The whole back of the house has no gutters or downspouts.
I think they'd be better off putting the money there.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

Oden said:


> The whole back of the house has no gutters or downspouts.
> I think they'd be better off putting the money there.




If you read up thread, the HO is doing just that.


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

Gough said:


> If you read up thread, the HO is doing just that.


Not to be argumentative, the point being, the major paint fail? Was it the previous paint job or was it that there are no gutters across the whole back of the house? The front? Granted it's in shade. But it isn't failing like the back is. That whole back was a big waterfall every time it rained. That paint job didn't have a prayer of surviving in any kinda way, whatever kinda prep it had, it was doomed.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

Oden said:


> Not to be argumentative, the point being, the major paint fail? Was it the previous paint job or was it that there are no gutters across the whole back of the house? The front? Granted it's in shade. But it isn't failing like the back is. That whole back was a big waterfall every time it rained. That paint job didn't have a prayer of surviving in any kinda way, whatever kinda prep it had, it was doomed.


Absolutely. That's probably one reason that the owner is installing G&D.

The flip side is that this may be in the part of SD that gets 15 inches or less annual precipitation.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Oden said:


> Not to be argumentative, the point being, the major paint fail? Was it the previous paint job or was it that there are no gutters across the whole back of the house? The front? Granted it's in shade. But it isn't failing like the back is. That whole back was a big waterfall every time it rained. That paint job didn't have a prayer of surviving in any kinda way, whatever kinda prep it had, it was doomed.


Maybe they just took the gutters off to replace them; we don't really know.

Either way, it seems like they're committed to fixing both the paint and the gutters, and that seems like the important part rather than what happened in the past.


----------



## CApainter (Jun 29, 2007)

Feathering is only a best practice when the existing coating is sound. However, most existing coatings that require feathering are probably not sound.

Feathering has nothing to do with a coatings performance, but rather an aesthetics value. I'm sure the only reason a paint manufacturer recommends it is to have their product look as good as it possibly can.


----------



## Happee_grrl (Feb 9, 2014)

Five years ago, when the house was last painted, was perhaps one of the wettest July's South Dakota had seen in a while. I tries to tell them to hold off, but you know how you can't just get people to listen....the sad part is the paint wasn't in that bad of shape then.
And yes, she's just a boring old bungalow, built in 1914, after the original farmhouse burnt down. But the current owner moved there in 1948, and grew up in that house. He raised 6 kids there. It had always been meticulously cared for. It has all of the original millwork. The stairs are probably the most level and even I have ever seen. The plaster is in beautiful shape. It's a beautiful home to work in. It's warm and inviting.

That being said, I love working on old homes where I can still find faint finger or handprints in the plaster.

I would never sell "a knock it off and paint it" to someone unless that's what they requested.

Oden, what the house is "worth" does not matter. I want to do the best job I can, that's how I roll.


----------



## CApainter (Jun 29, 2007)

Happee_grrl said:


> Five years ago, when the house was last painted, was perhaps one of the wettest July's South Dakota had seen in a while. I tries to tell them to hold off, but you know how you can't just get people to listen....the sad part is the paint wasn't in that bad of shape then.
> And yes, she's just a boring old bungalow, built in 1914, after the original farmhouse burnt down. But the current owner moved there in 1948, and grew up in that house. He raised 6 kids there. It had always been meticulously cared for. It has all of the original millwork. The stairs are probably the most level and even I have ever seen. The plaster is in beautiful shape. It's a beautiful home to work in. It's warm and inviting.
> 
> That being said, I love working on old homes where I can still find faint finger or handprints in the plaster.
> ...


As much as these older homes with character, charm, and history, instill a sense of admiration and care from a painter, a lot of the original paint practices don't hold up given the construction methods used in the past. And although a best practice on wood siding would seem to be oil primer followed with an oil finish, technology and engineering advances have determined that insulation. or a lack there of, including ventilation, can contribute to exterior coating failures. Some more premature than others.

That's why I wouldn't be too quick to ignore some of the waterborne paint technologies that allow a house the ability to ventilate properly. Even some of these primer finish products may do the job, although I wouldn't recommend them. 

And as far as prep, you can put in as much as you're getting compensated for, or as much as you're passionate about.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

CApainter said:


> As much as these older homes with character, charm, and history, instill a sense of admiration and care from a painter, a lot of the original paint practices don't hold up given the construction methods used in the past. And although a best practice on wood siding would seem to be oil primer followed with an oil finish, technology and engineering advances have determined that insulation. or a lack there of, including ventilation, can contribute to exterior coating failures. Some more premature than others.
> 
> That's why I wouldn't be too quick to ignore some of the waterborne paint technologies that allow a house the ability to ventilate properly. Even some of these primer finish products may do the job, although I wouldn't recommend them.
> 
> And as far as prep, you can put in as much as you're getting compensated for, or as much as you're passionate about.


For a long while, best practice on wood siding, especially Western Red Cedar, has been long-oil primer followed by acrylic top coats. That's what's been called out by agencies like the NPS ( in their Preservation Brief series) and the Forest Products Lab for at least 35 years.


Short of failure due to bulk-water intrusion, we haven't seen paint failure using that system where we've done widespread paint removal during the prep.


If we could find a waterborne primer that would reliably stop tannin bleed on WRC, we'd consider switching. So far, everything we've tried has come up short.


----------



## CApainter (Jun 29, 2007)

A lot of the SF exterior repaints I did in the 80's employed an oil primer and acrylic semi gloss finish over the existing oil base paint. This became the standard for years. 

While most held up well over a respectable period of time, many had shorter life cycles as the Bay Area micro climates provoked a lot of morning and evening moisture from fog, followed by sunny Southern exposures at noon, which was typical in areas like Noe Valley and the Mission District. 

Coastal areas, like Daly City Ca., seemed to hold up better because, in my opinion, the typically longer foggy days didn't have the dramatic temperature and humidity range in a given day as other parts of the Bay Area, including the Penninsula.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

CApainter said:


> A lot of the SF exterior repaints I did in the 80's employed an oil primer and acrylic semi gloss finish over the existing oil base paint. This became the standard for years.
> 
> While most held up well over a respectable period of time, many had shorter life cycles as the Bay Area micro climates provoked a lot of morning and evening moisture from fog, followed by sunny Southern exposures at noon, which was typical in areas like Noe Valley and the Mission District.
> 
> Coastal areas, like Daly City Ca., seemed to hold up better because, in my opinion, the typically longer foggy days didn't have the dramatic temperature and humidity range in a given day as other parts of the Bay Area, including the Penninsula.


How did that shorter life cycle manifest itself? Was it peeling to bare wood or to earlier oil topcoats? If it's the former, it's hard to fault the latest primer/topcoat system, since you're going over multiple costs of oil. For the latter, that would seem to be an argument for a different primer. For going over sound exterior oil topcoats, we've preferred acrylic printers for years, they seem to bond much better.


----------



## CApainter (Jun 29, 2007)

Gough said:


> How did that shorter life cycle manifest itself? Was it peeling to bare wood or to earlier oil topcoats? If it's the former, it's hard to fault the latest primer/topcoat system, since you're going over multiple costs of oil. For the latter, that would seem to be an argument for a different primer. For going over sound exterior oil topcoats, we've preferred acrylic printers for years, they seem to bond much better.


Perhaps it was the bare siding after scraping and power sanding, or the fact that an oil base product was a better surface tolerant choice with its great wetting and penetration properties, that we went with that system.

As far as premature coating failure, I believe they developed first by fracture, and then undercutting due to moisture intrusion. Here are some thoughts:

1. Oil base continues to harden as it's exposed to air, causing it to become brittle

2. Can an oil base exterior undercoat be exposed to air under a permeable coating like acrylic, and is it important to build up that waterborne top coat over an oil?

3. Col Tar Epoxy is an organic solvent bitumastic coating. It is recommended that all of the vehicle solvents have been adequately dissipated prior to putting into service. Which typicall, is submersion. The coating performs great as long as there are no breaches in the coating. It is intended to be applied as a thick build barrier coating. 

However, once that coating is exposed to air for extended lengths of time, it can become brittle. It would seem that being immersed in water contributes to some flexibility.

4. In other words, do cool coastal climates, that provide higher year round humidity and percipitation, allow an oil base to be more flexible and longer lasting?

5. Does constant solar heat contribute to oil base failure.


----------



## I paint paint (May 4, 2014)

Gough said:


> How did that shorter life cycle manifest itself? Was it peeling to bare wood or to earlier oil topcoats? If it's the former, it's hard to fault the latest primer/topcoat system, since you're going over multiple costs of oil. For the latter, that would seem to be an argument for a different primer. *For going over sound exterior oil topcoats, we've preferred acrylic printers for years, they seem to bond much better.*


What's one of the better acrylic exterior whole house primers on the market for going over oil topcoats?


----------



## Oden (Feb 8, 2012)

Happee_grrl said:


> Five years ago, when the house was last painted, was perhaps one of the wettest July's South Dakota had seen in a while. I tries to tell them to hold off, but you know how you can't just get people to listen....the sad part is the paint wasn't in that bad of shape then. And yes, she's just a boring old bungalow, built in 1914, after the original farmhouse burnt down. But the current owner moved there in 1948, and grew up in that house. He raised 6 kids there. It had always been meticulously cared for. It has all of the original millwork. The stairs are probably the most level and even I have ever seen. The plaster is in beautiful shape. It's a beautiful home to work in. It's warm and inviting. That being said, I love working on old homes where I can still find faint finger or handprints in the plaster. I would never sell "a knock it off and paint it" to someone unless that's what they requested. Oden, what the house is "worth" does not matter. I want to do the best job I can, that's how I roll.


Naaah I think it's a nice little house not for nothing. My first place was the circa 14's too, like I said I still own it. The paint job on it now I powerwashed, knocked off the loose, spotted with the a100 and finished with the a-100. Got to be 10 years old, still looks good, no major problems. 

I did it in a weekend, two of us, I may have spent a grand. Labor and material, Ten years for a grand maybe and a weekend of my time. Versus a full some kinda restorative strip?
And not for nothing but u work alone or close to no? Realistically. What are you able to deliver here? Really. 
And not for nothing but the house has been scraped and painted at intervals since 1914! That is one hundred years! Haha
Think about that for a few. Really,


----------



## CApainter (Jun 29, 2007)

I agree with Oden. There's is no obligation for a painter to perform the work that, although justified for a lot of these homes, has no ROI in terms of compensation or reward for time and or interest put in. It's either a hobby or a job.

And frankly, as Oden points out, a lot of these houses get by well with the most minimal of attention in terms of paint. 

For example, I want to build a boat. But I find out you're not really saving any money unless you are building something unique and likely huge. So it's pretty impractical. But I'm going to do it anyways because I want to as a hobby.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

CApainter said:


> Perhaps it was the bare siding after scraping and power sanding, or the fact that an oil base product was a better surface tolerant choice with its great wetting and penetration properties, that we went with that system..


I guess I misunderstood. From your earlier post (#44), I thought you were going over existing oil topcoats. For bare wood, especially WRC, I understand the reasons for going with oil primers.

One of the crucial points with the oil primer is to apply it in a very thin coat, which minimizes the issues with hardening/cracking. From what I understand, that's different with acrylics, which bond better with thicker films. 

Not sure about the performance in coastal /wet versus arid areas. Nearly all of our experience has been in the latter.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

CApainter said:


> I agree with Oden. There's is no obligation for a painter to perform the work that, although justified for a lot of these homes, has no ROI in terms of compensation or reward for time and or interest put in. It's either a hobby or a job.
> 
> And frankly, as Oden points out, a lot of these houses get by well with the most minimal of attention in terms of paint.
> 
> For example, I want to build a boat. But I find out you're not really saving any money unless you are building something unique and likely huge. So it's pretty impractical. But I'm going to do it anyways because I want to as a hobby.


I agree that a painter is under no obligation to perform work to such a high level of prep, but I disagree about the ROI/compensation. It's not a mass market, but there is a segment of the population that want that...and are willing to pay for it.


----------



## CApainter (Jun 29, 2007)

Gough said:


> I agree that a painter is under no obligation to perform work to such a high level of prep, but I disagree about the ROI/compensation. It's not a mass market, but there is a segment of the population that want that...and are willing to pay for it.


I suppose with the baby boom generation retiring at the level that they are, and with the social security, pensions and retirement plans they have at their disposal, many may in fact be savvy enough to understand the costs of good maintenance. Particularly, after many will have experienced near misses on ladders and roof tops. This will no doubt satisfy the sensibilities and the pocket books of painters who make prepping and painting their passion.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

CApainter said:


> I suppose with the baby boom generation retiring at the level that they are, and with the social security, pensions and retirement plans they have at their disposal, many may in fact be savvy enough to understand the costs of good maintenance. Particularly, after many will have experienced near misses on ladders and roof tops. This will no doubt satisfy the sensibilities and the pocket books of painters who make prepping and painting their passion.


I don't think any of our clients over the last 35 years fall into that demographic. 

From my vantage point as an owner, I just wanted to operate away from the great middle.


----------



## CApainter (Jun 29, 2007)

Gough said:


> I don't think any of our clients over the last 35 years fall into that demographic.
> 
> From my vantage point as an owner, I just wanted to operate away from the great middle.


I suppose there are the working thirty something professionals that wouldn't know what to do with a roller or a brush even if you wrote a code for an algorithm that simply allowed them to push enter to paint.


----------



## Happee_grrl (Feb 9, 2014)

Did I mention I have lots of free labor on this job? Lol.


----------



## I paint paint (May 4, 2014)

Happee_grrl said:


> Did I mention I have lots of free labor on this job? Lol.


No, you did not mention that.

What's your secret to getting lots of free labor?


----------



## Happee_grrl (Feb 9, 2014)

It's my folks' place. So I've got the siblings, their spouses, and 7 kids, ages 16-20. And we all work hard. We just want to do it right.

My mom got screwed on that last job. If I could get a hold of that guy.


----------



## PACman (Oct 24, 2014)

Happee_grrl said:


> It's my folks' place. So I've got the siblings, their spouses, and 7 kids, ages 16-20. And we all work hard. We just want to do it right.
> 
> My mom got screwed on that last job. If I could get a hold of that guy.


Oh I learned my lesson on having friends and family help paint a house! Don't serve the beer until AFTER the house is painted!

And to find "that guy", I would start looking in southern Idaho.


----------



## artgenta (Aug 13, 2015)

*proper prep, proper materials*

power wash, 1500+ psi 15 degree tip (yellow), be aggressive around lifting edges of paint to remove all u can, plan on scraping some more where visuals show lifting edges. let dry thoroughly, moisture will bubble later. prime bare wood with tannin blocking water-based primer, or oil-based (like zinsser cover-stain) mask windows walkways etc. (prior to priming too) top coat with fully acrylic flat-enamel on siding, use the very best acrylic on trim and fascia (stay with low-sheen) 2 coats on sun-facing fascia, and u should be good...


----------



## lilpaintchic (Jul 9, 2014)

Scrape, sand down the facias and some of that lower stuff to bare wood, bondo the rough edges. (vs. Feather sanding alone...it'll look better and leave the solid stuff in tact). You're probably dealing with some really old finishes (the kind no one likes to talk about) so be prepared on all fronts and know that the scraping can be ENDLESS. a little qd caulk and some bondo will help. Slow oil, 2 coats A100 low sheen on the body, (or flat superpaint ... its dumb to get too crazy as its old and whatevet isnt failing now will eventually due to checking and chalking beneath the surface..)satin on the trim. We bag the glass, shoot the trim and back mask on old homes. (Double hung windows and such.) Unwrap and BAM! saved a few days labor (especially on a serious color change) and down to punch.


----------



## lilpaintchic (Jul 9, 2014)

You mentioned kids in your last post. I would strongly suggest reading up on lead. I'd put $ on its presence on your project. Here is the Lead info #1.800.424.LEAD (5323).


----------



## chrisn (Jul 15, 2007)

both of you late responders using FLAT paint on an exterior


----------



## zellerman2001 (Apr 15, 2013)

I live in Tallahassee Florida, and here in Florida, we deal with a lot of mold and mildew. I first look to see how much mold, mildew and dirt is on the house. If all the above is visible, I pressure wash first, which also helps me knock off any loose paint and provides me with a clean surface to ensure proper adhesion of product being applied. If, need be, I'll scrape and wire brush as needed. As for the application... Spray and back roll. Also, use a mini roller to do your trim, as suggested in a earlier post. Everyone has pretty good ideas... You should do well!


----------



## zellerman2001 (Apr 15, 2013)

Flat paints are pores, they break down and start to fail within 5 to 7 years. A good satin would last longer.


----------



## Willwham1 (Jun 7, 2012)

Well I can put in my 2 cents....Use California® Paints, they are by far the best for the $...BM is ok but WAYYYY overpriced now.
Theres only a few reasons to full prime now, cedar bleed or tannins, severe adhesion issues and other particular issues but here I would only spot prime with California or BM quick dry oil....then you can spray or brush/back brush finish....

but...PREP PREP PREP!!!...let me reiterate, if you will not prepare the surface properly DO NOT BOTHER TO PAINT!!
1. Power wash ALL SURFACES, use 10-1 mixture of liquid hydrochloride and Tri-sodium phosphates then rinse with low pressure to clea, protect all vegetation during this step!
2. Use a circulating tip on the power washer to remove loose and failed paint, this is a step to keep a distance between the tip and surface until you know the power of the tip...it will save much time...TEST FOR LEAD PAINT!!!! This can contaminate all your water and soil without knowing if its lead.

3. Scrape all surfaces you didnt get with the tip. Catch all chips if lead present.
4. Sopt prime.
Hope this helps, ppl think painting is easy its not. I have 30 years in and still learning!!! The PDCA has all the education you need!


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Keep in mind TSP is not available in many parts of the country now. Usually best to offer an alternative on boards that span a lot of geography like PT.


----------



## ColorConnoisseur (Sep 10, 2014)

We work on milwaukee's east side, right by Lake Michigan. Our practice has long been to sand to a feather edge. We guarantee our paint jobs for five years, and have yet run into a problem with this practice. In fact, not sanding to a feather edge will leave unsmoothed areas on the substrate between where it was scraped and where it was not. This will lead to future peeling where the rough edge meets the bare wood. The heat generating problem is solved by letting the surface cool prior to painting.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

ColorConnoisseur said:


> The heat generating problem is solved by letting the surface cool prior to painting.


You've misunderstood their arguments about the heat- they think that the heat causes the existing coating to weaken and delaminate, not that residual heat causes problems with the new coating.

Personally, I'd argue that unless you're going at it with an angle grinder (hyperbole) you're probably not generating enough heat to make any difference. Especially hand sanding, you're not going to get it much hotter than it would in the direct sunlight anyways.


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DrakeB said:


> You've misunderstood their arguments about the heat- they think that the heat causes the existing coating to weaken and delaminate, not that residual heat causes problems with the new coating.
> 
> Personally, I'd argue that unless you're going at it with an angle grinder (hyperbole) you're probably not generating enough heat to make any difference. Especially hand sanding, you're not going to get it much hotter than it would in the direct sunlight anyways.


For S&G, I should bring one of our thermal imagers along next chance we have to feather some edges.


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Gough said:


> For S&G, I should bring one of our thermal imagers along next chance we have to feather some edges.


Maybe I'll do a test, too. That way I can do it really slowly and with no concern for production time to make sure it looks like I'm right :whistling2:


----------



## PACman (Oct 24, 2014)

DrakeB said:


> Maybe I'll do a test, too. That way I can do it really slowly and with no concern for production time to make sure it looks like I'm right :whistling2:


Oh lord am I going to have to post the laws of thermodynamics AGAIN!


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

PACman said:


> Oh lord am I going to have to post the laws of thermodynamics AGAIN!


Do it, we'll see who's right


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

PACman said:


> Oh lord am I going to have to post the laws of thermodynamics AGAIN!


Don't forget the Zeroth! Or was that discovered after your time?:jester:


----------



## Wildbill7145 (Apr 30, 2014)

Forum has a very 'sciencey' feel to it today. Very nice.


----------



## SemiproJohn (Jul 29, 2013)

Wildbill7145 said:


> Forum has a very 'sciencey' feel to it today. Very nice.


I don't know if "nice" is the word I would have used to describe it. I think I would have chosen the phrase "obscured by clouds."


----------



## DrakeB (Jun 6, 2011)

Depends on your perspective!


----------



## Seth The Painter (Jun 24, 2015)

PACman said:


> Oh lord am I going to have to post the laws of thermodynamics AGAIN!


Lol this place cracks me up PACman is like the paint police around here. He keeps pulling people over for some bullish


----------



## Gough (Nov 24, 2010)

DrakeB said:


> Maybe I'll do a test, too. That way I can do it really slowly and with no concern for production time to make sure it looks like I'm right :whistling2:


Ah, the PT version of "dry labbing". Nice,


----------



## PACman (Oct 24, 2014)

Seth The Painter said:


> Lol this place cracks me up PACman is like the paint police around here. He keeps pulling people over for some bullish


Hey do you have a front plate on that van?


----------



## Seth The Painter (Jun 24, 2015)

No my dog ate it


----------



## PACman (Oct 24, 2014)

Seth The Painter said:


> No my dog ate it


Maybe you should buy him a bowl or something? Or at least an empty Behr can?


----------



## Wildbill7145 (Apr 30, 2014)

PACman said:


> Or at least an empty Behr can?


Why u no love dog?


----------



## Seth The Painter (Jun 24, 2015)

PACman said:


> Maybe you should buy him a bowl or something? Or at least an empty Behr can?


My dog took a shi! In the behr can ! Now it covers better lmfao 
😭


----------

