# Duration - Prime/Finish or Finish/Finish



## Tonyg (Dec 9, 2007)

Just curious. My exterior coatings of choice (residential) are Duration and Aura which are both "self priming". My SOP when applying a one coat finish I still spot prime where needed and any vulnerable areas and when applying two coats I spot prime and 2 finish coats. I have a small house with T111 that I had planned a coat of A100 and one coat of Duration. Existing coating is marginal. 

No room for 3 applicatuions. Primer is cheaper than Duration. Prime coat would give a good surface for finish to do its thing but 2 coats of Duration and we are talking 5mil. Two coats of Duration or Aura will give a very solid coating. Would you trust the "self priming" abilities and go for the mil's or bet on the bonding of the primer? If you had a choice...


----------



## NEPS.US (Feb 6, 2008)

I prefer the bonding primer and a top of Duration.


----------



## HomeGuardPaints (Jan 17, 2008)

I was told that durations warranty is only good if you use it as its own primer. so that prob means they don't think it would hold up as well. But I would still use the primer first,based on cost.


----------



## PrecisionPainting (Feb 3, 2009)

I painted couple rooms before with duration and just put two coats on it never had a problem


----------



## DeanV (Apr 18, 2007)

PrecisionPainting said:


> I painted couple rooms before with duration and just put two coats on it never had a problem



interior vs. exterior in the original post, so not the same thing.


----------



## Mantis (Aug 4, 2008)

Duration/Duration never steered us wrong on exteriors thus far


----------



## DeanV (Apr 18, 2007)

Whenever I am needing a primer, it is usually over raw cedar and I would not trust duration or aura exterior to even attempt to hold back tannins, even the label does not recommend them I believe.


----------



## Tonyg (Dec 9, 2007)

DeanV said:


> Whenever I am needing a primer, it is usually over raw cedar and I would not trust duration or aura exterior to even attempt to hold back tannins, even the label does not recommend them I believe.


Their pat answer is that the first coat traps the stain and the second covers it but for heavy tanins they recommend the A100 oil. In this case the stain blocking is not necessary. 

I am more concerned with longevity.


----------



## Dave Mac (May 4, 2007)

NEPS.US said:


> I prefer the bonding primer and a top of Duration.


This is what I prefer as well, it is also more cost effecient


----------



## slickshift (Apr 8, 2007)

Although I like the Duration/Aura for their (IMO "additional insurance") "self-priming" abilities, and will use that on bare wood in specific, hard to reach, small, areas of re-coating (like that surprise slight flaking you find when on the end of a 40' when you are up there with a bucket expecting to top coat) However, if the bare wood is any more than tiny, or there are any other issues (chalking, tannins, stains, etc....), I defer to the actual primer, as the company's name and money (if it fails) is on the line

Though I like both products mentioned, and they are both great with the "self-priming", I'd never "not prime" a project with (for example) 25% bare wood
I'd break out the primer

Both companies will also suggest actual primer in anything other than straightforward apps

The "self-priming" officially and realistically doesn't include sealing tannin bleed, chalky paint, or any project that needs a penetrating or sealing primer


----------



## Primer Guy (Apr 20, 2007)

Peel Bond for T-111 is the best 1st coat. It does a much better job of penetrating and filling the checks in T-111. Note- do not recoat 1 coat of Duration or Peel Bond with a heavy topcoat of Duration in anything less than the 24 hours. Doing so can potentially cause the topcoat of Duration to slide down the wall.


----------

