product review, Ultraseal Version #2

Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad

Rifleman1776

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2004
Messages
7,330
Location
Mountain Home, Arkansas, USA.
Those of you who read my review about Ultraseal, version #1, know there was considerable unhappiness with the product. Essentially, it never really cured or set-up despite even heat treating beyond the specified required amount of time and temp.
A few days ago, I received a sample of Ultraseal, version #2 to try.
Since my review of #1 had been negative, I was anxious to test this. My reviews are honest but I don't really take pleasure in knocking a product.
This test was planned to be on maple. But, I had a couple dried corn cobs on hand that were just begging to be stabled. So, I turned those down to get rid of soft material that would just soak up and waste the Ultraseal solution.
I put the blanks into a glass container in my paint pot, closed tight and proceeded to pull 23 inches for 45 minutes. My plan had been to pull for 30 minutes, about ten longer than recommended. But, I got distracted with another chore and they stayed in vacuum for the 45 minutes.
I released the pressure and allowed them to 'soak' for a while. Personally, I don't think this 'soaking' makes a whit of difference. If the solution didn't penetrate under pressure, it sure isn't going to all by itself.
I then took the wet blanks to our oven, which had been pre-heated to 225 degrees and let them 'cook' for nearly an hour. Note: This is a heat curing product, not an air cured or dried solution.
When I removed, there still were some fumes gassing off and I got a serious snoot full. I would not recommend you trying this. Bad news.
By the way, this version has the same 'orange' aroma as version #1 but not as pungent and it didn't linger in the kitchen as long.
After they cooled, I took a good look. The blanks, both cob and maple did not change appearance. The US #1 test considerably darkened my Redbud test blanks.
In fact, they did not look affected or changed at all. Except on the bottom where excess solution had puddled before it cured and hardened. You can see this in the attached photo.
The cobs were, no doubt, very hard even though their appearance was no different than a non-stabled cob.
OK, at this point, I still didn't know if the stable test had been successful. The solution did seem to cure as it was supposed to, unlike version #1, which, to this day, is still tacky.
So, I chucked up one of the maple blanks and turned a portion of it to round and down a bit.
It turned OK, a bit hard but this didn't tell me anything because maple is quite hard. The appearance didn't give a clue either, just looked like maple. That is good because, if it stables as it should, you have a predictable product and your wood will look like the wood you started with.
But, I still didn't know if the stable went all the way through the wood and did it's job.
So, I sanded the turned portion. First with 220, then 320 then all the way through the Micro Mesh grits. The last few grits gave the blank a distinctive sheen. Finally, I polished with a hunk of wool blanket, a technique which may be unique to me.
The result is a fairly shiny piece of wood. It looks very good and I believe the looks are the result of the stable solution penetrating completely. But, the appearance is so identical to a non-stabled wood that I have to play it conservatively and not make a flat-out statement that the solution penetrated completely.
I even center drilled the turned blank and caught the dust on a clean piece of paper. From appearance, I still couldn't make a decision whether the solution had penetrated and I couldn't tell by feel or smell either. I tried.
Don't interpret this as me saying it did not penetrate. I simply don't know definitively. It may have and the quality of not affecting appearance (that is a good thing) is what might be the cause of the confusion.
I'm sure the cobs are penetrated completely. Put it this way, don't put them in the outhouse, the family will get real mad at you.
At this point, I will say that version #1 can be classed as an El Floppo. I wouldn't use it under any circumstances.
Version #2 appears to be a good product, provided it does penetrate completely. I'm curious to see what other reviewers have to say about their experiences.
Prices for the product have not been published. So, for now, it can only be said that this product should be attractive because it is ready to use. Many who do home stabilizing mix up their own concoctions, mostly Plexiglas dissolved in Acetone. That takes time and not everyone has access to scrap Plexi. So this product, quite possibly, has a market waiting.
 

Attachments

  • stable blanks.jpg
    stable blanks.jpg
    39.6 KB · Views: 207
  • turned stable blank.jpg
    turned stable blank.jpg
    32.9 KB · Views: 204
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad

GouletPens

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
1,449
Location
Ashland, VA
I tested #1 and actually found it to be satisfactory. It did darken up the woods a bit, that is one thing. It seems like I didn't have many of the problems you did on it. I just got a quart of the new stuff and I have yet to try it, but I was pretty impressed with version#1. I tested it on spalted maple, red palm, quilted maple, bubinga, and koa. All of them dried for me just fine and I've turned the red palm and bubinga and there is a noticeable difference to me, esp. the red palm which has given me problems with cracking in the past.

I've tried stabilizing in the past with poly, acetone and plexi, and wood hardener, and the Ultraseal seems better than all of them, even the first version which apparently has some flaws.
 

RBoutin

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
53
Location
Ann Arbor, MI
Moisture certainly can affect curing. It's best if moisture content is down below 7-8%. As you get higher than that, the water will begin to inhibit the chemical reaction required to harden the stabilizer.

Is the ultraseal affected by moisture or humidity? Perhaps if the blanks are not completely dry, the stabilizer might act differently?
 

maxwell_smart007

Lead Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
6,705
Location
middle of nowhere in the great, white North
I'm thinking that that might have been Frank's trouble with the first batch, esp. since so many people seemed to have success with it...

This is essentially a good stabilizer for dry wood then, but not freshy cut, eh?

I suppose it's like CA finishes too then, where doing them in high humidity can lead to troubles.

Andrew
 

GouletPens

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
1,449
Location
Ashland, VA
I think it can safely be said that wood must be dry to be able to do ANYTHING effectively.....whether it's finishing, gluing, casting, stabilizing, etc. The wood just has to be dry.
 

mel dunlap

Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
5
Location
Dover, PA.
This Ulraseal product is the solution to a lot of problems. You can certainly tell when a piece is not penetrated completly. The sanding and buffing finish is the proof. Unpenetrated wood subjected to the stabilization will come out with a dull, matte finish, where as the penetrated wood will come out with a glossy sheen. If you are worried that it is not penetrating, take a blank and split it down the middle. go thru the sanding process like any other piece, and see what you get. We have been using this product, and will not go back to any, ANY of the other guy's stuff. We have been doing a lot with maples, a lot of spalted stuff, but have been testing with Indian Rosewood, Red wodd Burls, Boxelder Burls, and just about any other North American hardwood that is out there, and all turn out better, far better than any of the OTHER GUY'S stuff. It is new, but give it a chance. You may have to change processes slightly, but nothing that will break the bank.

Keep up the good work, turners, and Ultrseal
 

td

Banned
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
275
Location
Dallas, TX, USA.
Mel,
I had been working with John Driscoll for the last several months and we too have tried Ultraseal on more than 2 dozen different woods with very good results. The partnership we started with John, Rudy and myself will go on. There is not a day that goes by that we don't think of John and how excited he was with the results we were getting. We're just about ready to go public with product and are looking forward to AAW in June. And we will continue to use Ultraseal.

We'll be talking to you soon.
 

sbell111

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
3,465
Location
Franklin, TN
This Ulraseal product is the solution to a lot of problems. You can certainly tell when a piece is not penetrated completly. The sanding and buffing finish is the proof. Unpenetrated wood subjected to the stabilization will come out with a dull, matte finish, where as the penetrated wood will come out with a glossy sheen. If you are worried that it is not penetrating, take a blank and split it down the middle. go thru the sanding process like any other piece, and see what you get. We have been using this product, and will not go back to any, ANY of the other guy's stuff. We have been doing a lot with maples, a lot of spalted stuff, but have been testing with Indian Rosewood, Red wodd Burls, Boxelder Burls, and just about any other North American hardwood that is out there, and all turn out better, far better than any of the OTHER GUY'S stuff. It is new, but give it a chance. You may have to change processes slightly, but nothing that will break the bank.

Keep up the good work, turners, and Ultrseal
There's another guy?
 
Top Bottom