# 123 vs 123 Plus



## futtyos

Anyone here have any opinions regarding the difference between Zinsser 123 Primer and the newer 123 PLUS Primer? I didn't find too much about 123 PLUS on the net. It doesn't seem to be burning up the market. Here are links to each product:

https://www.rustoleum.com/product-c...mer-sealers/bulls-eye-1-2-3-water-base-primer

https://www.rustoleum.com/product-c...er/primer-sealers/bulls-eye-1-2-3-plus-primer

I am curious as to whether the PLUS is worth the extra couple of bucks.

futtyos


----------



## Wildbill7145

As much as I love the regular 123, the stain blocking claims in the TDS are pretty exaggerated. I have yet to see the 123+ around here, so I can't comment. Maybe it does a slightly better job that the regular 123, but I'm gonna assume it's stain blocking properties are probably exaggerated as well.


----------



## Epoxy Pro

I used it the other day but didn't pay much attention since it was pretty much spot priming some trim.


----------



## CApainter

After reading both TDS', the original 123 is a styrenated acrylic resin, where the 123 plus is a "modified" acrylic resin. Which makes me think it has an alkyd component to the resin structure. It would make sense that this would improve stain blocking properties.


----------



## CApainter

I actually expected the 123 plus to have a higher VOC measurement, but it is less than <25g/l compared to <100g/l for the original 123 formula. Which makes me think that 123 vehicle solvents were modified to allow the alkyd to perform as a stain killer while keeping the VOC low. How else can a stain killer work without having an alkyd or shellac resin? 

And as well as 123 has performed for me over the years, I too never counted on it to be an adequate stain killer.


----------



## PACman

depends on how cheap you need it to be.


----------



## CApainter

PACman said:


> depends on how cheap you need it to be.


You've got to explain that just a little bit further. Please.


----------



## PACman

well, do you suppose professional chefs ever go to Walmart and wonder which spaghetti sauce is better?

Kinda like that, but different.


----------



## CApainter

PACman said:


> well, do you suppose professional chefs ever go to Walmart and wonder which spaghetti sauce is better?
> 
> Kinda like that, but different.


I guess I'm forced to decipher your cryptic reply.

You think Zinsser 123 is an inferior waterborne primer product, but have yet to reveal another waterborne primer that provides a better stain killing ability. And by the way, the discussion never implied that 123 was a preferred stain killer. I think most professionals are aware of this.

However, as a waterborne primer, Zinsser 123 has been an adequate workhorse in the industry for most interior and exterior applications, and has been accessible and reasonably priced for many painters and contractors.

Perhaps there are other waterborne primers that are better suited for drywall, plywood, interiors, exteriors, etc. But as an all around stable performer in the painter's tool kit, Zinsser 123 has maintained its credibility in this industry.

I also think it's unfair to mis represent a product just because it's parent corporation decided it made good business sense to sell in a wide market. Even if that meant suppplying the likes of the well known big box beasts of capitalism.


----------



## PACman

CApainter said:


> I guess I'm forced to decipher your cryptic reply.
> 
> You think Zinsser 123 is an inferior waterborne primer product, but have yet to reveal another waterborne primer that provides a better stain killing ability. And by the way, the discussion never implied that 123 was a preferred stain killer. I think most professionals are aware of this.
> 
> However, as a waterborne primer, Zinsser 123 has been an adequate workhorse in the industry for most interior and exterior applications, and has been accessible and reasonably priced for many painters and contractors.
> 
> Perhaps there are other waterborne primers that are better suited for drywall, plywood, interiors, exteriors, etc. But as an all around stable performer in the painter's tool kit, Zinsser 123 has maintained its credibility in this industry.
> 
> I also think it's unfair to mis represent a product just because it's parent corporation decided it made good business sense to sell in a wide market. Even if that meant suppplying the likes of the well known big box beasts of capitalism.


Oh yes! Yes I have! (Cali Stainkiller)
I never ever said anything about it's stain killing abilities in my response.
If you are momma June and have a busload of honey boo-boos to feed.....that 3 gallon jugs of Ragu will do fine.
My point is that the "value" of a primer depends on what is expected of it. If you are just worried about how cheap it is then........
If you are paying $25 for a plate of spaghetti and find out the chef is using Ragu on the other hand, chances are you aren't going to be dining at that restaurant again.

And after a recent meeting with a former Zinsser rep, I doubt if I believe a single claim on any of their labels. But if it works and the price is good for you then fine. But as far as I'm concerned if I am paying a painter thousands of dollars to paint my multi-million dollar home, I better not find any cans of paint from Walmart laying around, if you know what I mean. It depends on the "value" you and your customer expect.

Anyone remember when you could actually sand 123 worth a crap?


----------



## CApainter

PACman said:


> Oh yes! Yes I have! (Cali Stainkiller)
> I never ever said anything about it's stain killing abilities in my response.
> If you are momma June and have a busload of honey boo-boos to feed.....that 3 gallon jugs of Ragu will do fine.
> My point is that the "value" of a primer depends on what is expected of it. If you are just worried about how cheap it is then........
> If you are paying $25 for a plate of spaghetti and find out the chef is using Ragu on the other hand, chances are you aren't going to be dining at that restaurant again.
> 
> And after a recent meeting with a former Zinsser rep, I doubt if I believe a single claim on any of their labels. But if it works and the price is good for you then fine. But as far as I'm concerned if I am paying a painter thousands of dollars to paint my multi-million dollar home, I better not find any cans of paint from Walmart laying around, if you know what I mean. It depends on the "value" you and your customer expect.
> 
> Anyone remember when you could actually sand 123 worth a crap?


Well first off, Cali stain killer is a dispersion alkyd with a 2 hr recoat time. You have to come up with something that compares to Zinsser 123. Zinsser Smart prime might be more comparable to Cali.

Secondly, Cali is no where near as accessible as Zinsser 123. You have to remember, for the majority of painters convenience and expediency are a huge value.

And finally, most painters, in my opinion, aren't providing service where so called high end products are always specifically required. In other words, many a folk may not be eating at high end Italian restraunts, but they're not necessarily settling for Spaghetti-O's either.

BTW, 123 was never designed to be a preferred sanding sealer. It was designed to be an all purpose primer that happened to comply with strict VOC Regs. And on that point, 123 Plus beats cali by 100%.


----------



## Wildbill7145

I'd have to drive two hours both ways to get to a store that sells Cali. I can drive less than 5 minutes here and go to 4 places that sell 123 right here in town. I've been using it for 13 years and I don't remember ever having a problem with it.

I just don't get why I'd care if a painter who's painting my million dollar home was using a widely recognized, well regarded primer that happens to be sold at a box store as opposed to a gourmet primer. If it works well, does it's job and is sold at lots of places, why would I care?

If I wanted a gourmet primer, I'd say that speaks more to me than any primer.

Edit: ..and here we've completely taken poor Futyos' thread completely off track. Sorry man.


----------



## CApainter

I agree Bill. In general, Zinsser products have been the hammer available to drive the nails of most painting operations. And frankly, the primer TDS indicate their limitations in terms of no full priming on exteriors, or no application where constant moisture is present. But as an all purpose primer to set that perverbial nail, the Zinsser product lines were there to save the day.

In any trade that encompasses a variety of options, like painting, there is a range of acceptability within the margins of best practices. And until I have experienced a Zinsser product that doesn't perform within it's intended purpose, I will refuse to be labeled as a Honey Boo Boo.


----------



## Wildbill7145

Well, doing a bit of peeking around the www regarding this subject I agree with Futyos in that it isn't exactly burning up the web. Not too many mentions of 123+.

A few I did find mentioned that it's fairly expensive compared to 123, took a fair bit longer to dry compared to what it said on the can, didn't exactly cover stains as well as described. It's definitely no replacement for BIN. Can't comment on the validity of these reviews though.

However, that being said, I did find a few others who commented as PAC has insofar as 123 having gone downhill over the years! Again, can't comment on the validity of these comments as I have no opinion of the knowledge base from whence they came. But it was out there in the wild.

Just found it odd. I haven't noticed a difference over the years. Still smells the same, sticks the same, looks the same, same sheen, etc. etc. Anyhoo, thought I'd throw it out there that there are some who agree with PAC, some who don't.


----------



## Jmayspaint

The Plus does seem to be a little better at blocking than the regular 123. I used it several times when it first came out. Tested it once on some knotty pine and it held. 

One thing weird about it though is it did that curdling thing. Primer left in a work pot overnight, or even a partially used gallon for longer periods, got "chunky" like cottage cheese. It would break up with stirring for the most part, but kinda annoying. I saw it with multiple gallons. Several of us saw a similar problem with the Bin Advanced. Perhaps that bug has been worked out since the initial formulation, I haven't used it in years. 

As far as sand ability, I pretty much gave up on dry sanding acrylics on the whole. Wet or damp sanding works so much better, and no dust. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CApainter

Jmayspaint said:


> The Plus does seem to be a little better at blocking than the regular 123. I used it several times when it first came out. Tested it once on some knotty pine and it held.
> 
> One thing weird about it though is it did that curdling thing. Primer left in a work pot overnight, or even a partially used gallon for longer periods, got "chunky" like cottage cheese. It would break up with stirring for the most part, but kinda annoying. I saw it with multiple gallons. Several of us saw a similar problem with the Bin Advanced. Perhaps that bug has been worked out since the initial formulation, I haven't used it in years.
> 
> As far as sand ability, I pretty much gave up on dry sanding acrylics on the whole. Wet or damp sanding works so much better, and no dust.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nice job "Momma June" Keepin'the Ragu alive!


----------



## futtyos

*Plus*



Wildbill7145 said:


> I'd have to drive two hours both ways to get to a store that sells Cali. I can drive less than 5 minutes here and go to 4 places that sell 123 right here in town. I've been using it for 13 years and I don't remember ever having a problem with it.
> 
> I just don't get why I'd care if a painter who's painting my million dollar home was using a widely recognized, well regarded primer that happens to be sold at a box store as opposed to a gourmet primer. If it works well, does it's job and is sold at lots of places, why would I care?
> 
> If I wanted a gourmet primer, I'd say that speaks more to me than any primer.
> 
> Edit: ..and here we've completely taken poor Futyos' thread completely off track. Sorry man.


Wildbill, I was starting to cry crocodile tears. Then I saw that you mentioned that my track had been derailed. I started to feel better, but then I saw you misspelled my name with only one "t" and that just set me back to balling my eyes out! Anyway, in the spirit of Christmas, all of you have a great one while I continue to ponder whether 123 Plus has enough merit to pruchase and use.

futtyos

P.S. Thank you, Jmayspaint, for your Xmas eve input on 123 Plus! It is turning out to be a wonderful life, after all.


----------



## Wildbill7145

futtyos said:


> Wildbill, I was starting to cry crocodile tears. Then I saw that you mentioned that my track had been derailed. I started to feel better, but then I saw you misspelled my name with only one "t" and that just set me back to balling my eyes out! Anyway, in the spirit of Christmas, all of you have a great one while I continue to ponder whether 123 Plus has enough merit to pruchase and use.
> 
> futtyos
> 
> P.S. Thank you, Jmayspaint, for your Xmas eve input on 123 Plus! It is turning out to be a wonderful life, after all.


Being a spelling nit, I did notice that after a while. I'd hoped you wouldn't notice it. You're a great poster Futtyos! You go into great detail, and explain yourself thoroughly. Way more than myself. If I'd known you'd have shed a tear, I would have corrected it. I know you're kidding. I'm lazy sometimes.

Anyhoo, hope you have a great xmas. Keep posting Sir. Your posts are always well thought, and greatly appreciated. Great information.

Thanks again Futtyos. Wildbil7145.


----------



## slinger58

futtyos said:


> Wildbill, I was starting to cry crocodile tears. Then I saw that you mentioned that my track had been derailed. I started to feel better, but then I saw you misspelled my name with only one "t" and that just set me back to balling my eyes out! Anyway, in the spirit of Christmas, all of you have a great one while I continue to ponder whether 123 Plus has enough merit to pruchase and use.
> 
> futtyos
> 
> P.S. Thank you, Jmayspaint, for your Xmas eve input on 123 Plus! It is turning out to be a wonderful life, after all.


Speaking of spelling, I assume you meant "_bawling_ your eyes out".

Otherwise.......well, never mind.


----------



## PACman

Ok so we all agree that 123 is a better primer then the $9.99 gallon of flat paint you would normally use.......Is the 123 plus any better? Probably better then using a $11.99 gallon of flat paint as a primer. Is it worth the extra money to get a few more performance statements printed on the can? Guess that's up to you.

123 had been my go to primer for 30 years. I never hesitated to sell it. Until about 2 years ago when i started to realize how badly this product, and all off Zinssers products for that matter, have been stripped of the quality they had had for years so they could be sold profitably by the box stores. My conversations with a former 25 year employee of that company just re-enforced my opinion. At 123's current quality level I will not and can not in good conscious recommend it for anything other then a between coat primer. I have in the last year seen with my own eyes way too many failures of this product for me to accept any liability buy selling it. If I had a no questions asked complaint credit agreement in place like Menard's, Home depot, Lowe's, True Value, etc. do then I still wouldn't sell it. 

To paraphrase Leah Rimini- do you really think I wanted to find out that a product i believed in and gladly sold my entire career has turned to crap? Don't think so. But that is a fact as I see it.

Now, back to the craps table.


----------



## PACman

another fact you have to keep in mind when you are talking about the Zinsser product line is that the cost of the product is actually dictated to them by the box stores. When Home depot goes to Rustoleum, and says "we will only sell bullseye 123 if our cost is $10 a gallon" and the current cost is $15 a gallon, what do you think happens? Do they not sell 2/3 of their annual production to Home Depot and Lowe's? Or do they cheapen the product so they can do it and maintain some kind of profit? Think people. There is no way they can retail 123 for $17 a gallon if the cost is $15. It's probably closer to $8.50 in reality. More than likely the 123 Plus is just the old, un-cheapened product being sold at a retail price that justifies a $15 cost. This is basic business 101 people. There is absolutely no way that they are making almost no profit on it.


----------



## Wildbill7145

Is it seriously $17/gal down there at HD?


----------



## CApainter

PACman said:


> another fact you have to keep in mind when you are talking about the Zinsser product line is that the cost of the product is actually dictated to them by the box stores. When Home depot goes to Rustoleum, and says "we will only sell bullseye 123 if our cost is $10 a gallon" and the current cost is $15 a gallon, what do you think happens? Do they not sell 2/3 of their annual production to Home Depot and Lowe's? Or do they cheapen the product so they can do it and maintain some kind of profit? Think people. There is no way they can retail 123 for $17 a gallon if the cost is $15. It's probably closer to $8.50 in reality. More than likely the 123 Plus is just the old, un-cheapened product being sold at a retail price that justifies a $15 cost. This is basic business 101 people. There is absolutely no way that they are making almost no profit on it.


Well, if the point you're making about 123 is in reference to a possible cheapened version of it sold at the big box stores, then there may be a case for that. But what if you're purchasing 123 from a reputable independent supplier like your self? Which I do. Are you still getting a watered down version? To believe that, you'd have to argue that Zinsser has intentionally cheapened their 123 product across the board at the expense of their reputation. I just don't buy that.

Is 123 subject to formula alterations in order to comply with the EPA VOC regulations, like most manufactuerers have to who want to sell in states like California? Unfortunately, yes, despite how much it may veer from it's former performance. But you can't hold the manufacturer responsible for that. We, as painters, have to make adjustments in terms of dry times, usability, storage, etc.

And if your customers can't handle that, I say to hell them. Because driving all over Timbucktoo to get a can of Cali Stain Killer is ridiculous. Especially considering the logistical costs. Besides, we're simply talking about an all purpose primer that we all know has its limitations. 

At the end of the day, I don't think adding 123 to the painters tool kit is going to harm the industry much.


----------



## PACman

CApainter said:


> Well, if the point you're making about 123 is in reference to a possible cheapened version of it sold at the big box stores, then there may be a case for that. But what if you're purchasing 123 from a reputable independent supplier like your self? Which I do. Are you still getting a watered down version? To believe that, you'd have to argue that Zinsser has intentionally cheapened their 123 product across the board at the expense of their reputation. I just don't buy that.
> 
> Is 123 subject to formula alterations in order to comply with the EPA VOC regulations, like most manufactuerers have to who want to sell in states like California? Unfortunately, yes, despite how much it may veer from it's former performance. But you can't hold the manufacturer responsible for that. We, as painters, have to make adjustments in terms of dry times, usability, storage, etc.
> 
> And if your customers can't handle that, I say to hell them. Because driving all over Timbucktoo to get a can of Cali Stain Killer is ridiculous. Especially considering the logistical costs. Besides, we're simply talking about an all purpose primer that we all know has its limitations.
> 
> At the end of the day, I don't think adding 123 to the painters tool kit is going to harm the industry much.


what are you paying for it at the independent dealer? Unless you are in the upper twenty dollar range you are probably getting the exact same product the box stores are selling at $17. And that independent retailer is still lucky if they are making a dime off of it. For the independents selling it is very much a losing proposition. I can't buy it for under Menard's everyday retail price. Even if I buy 1000 gallons at once. If i were in a buyers group i would still only be able to make a few cents a dollar at $20 a gallon. just be aware that the 123 will fail you and cost you money or labor. It's just a matter of time.


----------



## PACman

Wildbill7145 said:


> Is it seriously $17/gal down there at HD?


Menard's everyday retail price is $17.98. It usually is sale priced at $16.99 or so at Home depot, Lowe's, Ace, True Value and the like. It was $16.97 at Walmart this morning. AND several times a year they have a $5 factory rebate on it. So, that means they can retail it as low as $11.97 if they want too. No one is going to ever lose money selling anything regardless of what they tell you. If they weren't going to make anything off of it, they would send it back or dispose of it and take the tax right-off. The box stores have an agreement that they can send it back for full credit for ANY reason. All pf the Zinsser and Masterchem primers are that way. That's why they push them so much.


----------



## PACman

I have a customer right now in the middle of a nightmare with Coverstain. He's been using it for 40 years. Now he has an entire 5 bedroom house, doors, cabinets, and trim that is bubbling and peeling down to the wood. Topcoated with Advance. After a month you can still scrape it down to the bare wood. The Advance flakes off like the primer never cured, yet he let the primer dry for a week and was able to sand it before he topcoated it. This is not an isolated case of this, as there have been people commenting on this even on this site.


----------



## PACman

And fyi, the fact checking on this site sucks! Mamma June would NEVER buy spaghetti sauce! She ALWAYS make her own. Just melt some margarine and stir in ketchup to taste! That's REAL I-talian!


----------



## futtyos

*Question rephrased*



futtyos said:


> Anyone here have any opinions regarding the difference between Zinsser 123 Primer and the newer 123 PLUS Primer? I didn't find too much about 123 PLUS on the net. It doesn't seem to be burning up the market. Here are links to each product:
> 
> https://www.rustoleum.com/product-c...mer-sealers/bulls-eye-1-2-3-water-base-primer
> 
> https://www.rustoleum.com/product-c...er/primer-sealers/bulls-eye-1-2-3-plus-primer
> 
> I am curious as to whether the PLUS is worth the extra couple of bucks.
> 
> futtyos


The purpose of my original post was to get opinions on how Zinsser Bullseye 123 PLUS works in the real world. I also asked how it compared to the original 123. The only one here with any actual hands-on feedback so far is Jmayspaint. Perhaps the PLUS is not such a great product if there are so few opinions on such an available product. I welcome any more input on how the 123 PLUS actually performs. 

The purpose of my asking has to do with a certain application of primer, but for sake of clarity, I will start a new thread so as to avoid confusion.

futtyos


----------



## Wildbill7145

Wow. Regional differences. $39/gal retail where I get it. Just checked HD site, $40/gal.

Jeepers. Price being paid to live in Canada I guess.


----------



## PACman

it's the same price as kilz2 at HD if that means anything.


----------



## PACman

CApainter said:


> Well first off, Cali stain killer is a dispersion alkyd with a 2 hr recoat time. You have to come up with something that compares to Zinsser 123. Zinsser Smart prime might be more comparable to Cali.
> 
> Secondly, Cali is no where near as accessible as Zinsser 123. You have to remember, for the majority of painters convenience and expediency are a huge value.
> 
> And finally, most painters, in my opinion, aren't providing service where so called high end products are always specifically required. In other words, many a folk may not be eating at high end Italian restraunts, but they're not necessarily settling for Spaghetti-O's either.
> 
> BTW, 123 was never designed to be a preferred sanding sealer. It was designed to be an all purpose primer that happened to comply with strict VOC Regs. And on that point, 123 Plus beats cali by 100%.


I threw cali stain killer out there because I was called out to name a waterbased stain killer that sealed stains better the 123. availability of the product was NOT part of that request. Nor was the price. If that is the primary concern......Mcdonald's is my kind of place, it's such a happy place......


----------



## PACman

CApainter said:


> Well first off, Cali stain killer is a dispersion alkyd with a 2 hr recoat time. You have to come up with something that compares to Zinsser 123. Zinsser Smart prime might be more comparable to Cali.
> 
> Secondly, Cali is no where near as accessible as Zinsser 123. You have to remember, for the majority of painters convenience and expediency are a huge value.
> 
> And finally, most painters, in my opinion, aren't providing service where so called high end products are always specifically required. In other words, many a folk may not be eating at high end Italian restraunts, but they're not necessarily settling for Spaghetti-O's either.
> 
> BTW, 123 was never designed to be a preferred sanding sealer. It was designed to be an all purpose primer that happened to comply with strict VOC Regs. And on that point, 123 Plus beats cali by 100%.


and BTW, 123 sure as hell was a sandable primer! It was one of it's main selling points 25 years ago. It was one of the first halfway sandable water based primers. Now it doesn't say sandable anywhere on the can.


----------



## CApainter

PACman said:


> I threw cali stain killer out there because I was called out to name a waterbased stain killer that sealed stains better the 123. availability of the product was NOT part of that request. Nor was the price. If that is the primary concern......Mcdonald's is my kind of place, it's such a happy place......


The arguements against 123 are too week to spearhead a boycott. And you can dress Cali up all you want, but she'll still need better marketing campaign to hit the big time in actual California.


----------



## CApainter

PACman said:


> and BTW, 123 sure as hell was a sandable primer! It was one of it's main selling points 25 years ago. It was one of the first halfway sandable water based primers. Now it doesn't say sandable anywhere on the can.


I'm likely older than you PAC, and in as many years as I can remember 123 being on the market, I've never known it to be a decent sandable primer compared to an actual enamel undercoater.


----------



## futtyos

*Call to Zinsser*



Jmayspaint said:


> The Plus does seem to be a little better at blocking than the regular 123. I used it several times when it first came out. Tested it once on some knotty pine and it held.
> 
> One thing weird about it though is it did that curdling thing. Primer left in a work pot overnight, or even a partially used gallon for longer periods, got "chunky" like cottage cheese. It would break up with stirring for the most part, but kinda annoying. I saw it with multiple gallons. Several of us saw a similar problem with the Bin Advanced. Perhaps that bug has been worked out since the initial formulation, I haven't used it in years.
> 
> As far as sand ability, I pretty much gave up on dry sanding acrylics on the whole. Wet or damp sanding works so much better, and no dust.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I called Eric Jannusch at Rustoleum to ask about 123 PLUS. He said the main differences between Plus and regular are: the PLUS is better at stain blocking as well as being sandable. He agreed with me that the PLUS has not seemed to catch on as far as sales.

I am still interested in real life experiences with PLUS, so if anyone besides Jmayspaint has any thoughts on using it, I would be interested.

Since I brought up the aspect of sandability, does anyone have a favorite primer that is comparable to regular 123, but is sandable?

futtyos


----------



## PACman

CApainter said:


> I'm likely older than you PAC, and in as many years as I can remember 123 being on the market, I've never known it to be a decent sandable primer compared to an actual enamel undercoater.


back in the late 80's i sold it by the skid to a couple of cabinet companies because no one else had a San Diego voc compliant (water-based) primer that would sand without balling up like crazy. And fyi, if you look very closely at the current data sheet for the regular 123 it does say it is sandable. Does it sand as well as a lacquer primer/surfacer? Nope. In fact on the little yellow stripe on the front of the can it used to highlight that it was sandable. It never was the "best" sandable primer, but early in the voc game it was one of the only options.


----------



## PACman

futtyos said:


> I called Eric Jannusch at Rustoleum to ask about 123 PLUS. He said the main differences between Plus and regular are: the PLUS is better at stain blocking as well as being sandable. He agreed with me that the PLUS has not seemed to catch on as far as sales.
> 
> I am still interested in real life experiences with PLUS, so if anyone besides Jmayspaint has any thoughts on using it, I would be interested.
> 
> Since I brought up the aspect of sandability, does anyone have a favorite primer that is comparable to regular 123, but is sandable?
> 
> futtyos


The current 123 data sheet from the Rustoleum website specifically says that it "sticks to all surfaces and sands easily"
The current 123 plus data sheet from the rustoleum website does not mention the word sandable. Anywhere.
The major differences i see are the resin types and the voc levels.
I might be wrong but i'm pretty sure I can read at a third grade level.

And like i said, 123 "regular" doesn't sand for 5hit anymore. Once, it did. Now, it doesn't. You can disagree with me but you would be wrong.


----------



## CApainter

PACman said:


> back in the late 80's i sold it by the skid to a couple of cabinet companies because no one else had a San Diego voc compliant (water-based) primer that would sand without balling up like crazy. And fyi, if you look very closely at the current data sheet for the regular 123 it does say it is sandable. Does it sand as well as a lacquer primer/surfacer? Nope. In fact on the little yellow stripe on the front of the can it used to highlight that it was sandable. It never was the "best" sandable primer, but early in the voc game it was one of the only options.


So as an all purpose primer, it's sufficient, as I mentioned earlier. But it was never a preferred enamel undercoater. Will we have little choice but to use acrylic resin undercoaters going into the future? Perhaps. Will they sand out as well as oils and alkyds? Probably not. Does that mean that Zinsser and other manufacturer's products are getting worse, intentionally? No.


----------



## PACman

CApainter said:


> So as an all purpose primer, it's sufficient, as I mentioned earlier. But it was never a preferred enamel undercoater. Will we have little choice but to use acrylic resin undercoaters going into the future? Perhaps. Will they sand out as well as oils and alkyds? Probably not. Does that mean that Zinsser and other manufacturer's products are getting worse, intentionally? No.


Zinssers yes. And i can prove it. At least the main product lines.


----------



## PACman

Here's a new test result;pencil hardness
after a thirty day cure period
Bullseye 123-H (not good, not good at all.)
Glidden Gripper-2H
Cali Grip Coat-5H

You definitely don't want to put a topcoat such as Advance (which i haven't tested yet but is pretty hard after a thirty day cure) over the 123. Not with it being that soft.


----------



## futtyos

PACman said:


> The current 123 data sheet from the Rustoleum website specifically says that it "sticks to all surfaces and sands easily"
> The current 123 plus data sheet from the rustoleum website does not mention the word sandable. Anywhere.
> The major differences i see are the resin types and the voc levels.
> I might be wrong but i'm pretty sure I can read at a third grade level.
> 
> And like i said, 123 "regular" doesn't sand for 5hit anymore. Once, it did. Now, it doesn't. You can disagree with me but you would be wrong.


PACman, I was almost going to disagree with you on the sandability of original 123. I primed a bedroom with 123 as per GC. Several days later (and after reading your post above) I sanded an area and got sanding powder on my hand. This lead me to think you were in error.

After that, I spackled the dings and blemishes with Easy Sand (the GC normally uses easily sandable USG Blue Top which dries yellow) and sanded all my patching smooth. My first impulse was to go over all the spackled areas with Gardz to seal the porous surface, but the GC was not enthusiastic about that, so I just went over everything with another coat of 123. I noticed that the stipple was pronounced over the Easy Sand patches, something that did not go unnoticed by the GC. I tried sanding down the stipple by hand, but that was a no go.

I suppose that I could have sanded the spackled areas down with an orbital sander, but I am guessing that with the right primer I should not have to do that.

I am wondering if the fact that 123 can stick to non-porous surfaces is a factor in making it non-sandable.

futtyos


----------

