Shopsmith Forums

Sooooo it seems that a lot of you prefer the old Durham's to the new stuff on the block dispirit the fact you haven't tried it?? Seem fair.

BTW I've used and still use Durham's, since the late 1950's.

Here is a can from 10/2003 and yes it is still useable and I often add liquid latex to it. But that is another subject.

[ATTACH]18005[/ATTACH]

So you all have a good night now.

Ed

Same good experience here but I am wondering what you can do adding latex!'

reible wrote:Sooooo it seems that a lot of you prefer the old Durham's to the new stuff on the block dispirit the fact you haven't tried it?? Seem fair.

I didn't read anywhere where any of us said that we were against the new stuff or wouldn't try it...
We were just saying that we liked the Durham's better than anything we have tried so far.
Most of the time I use very little wood filler and a can will usually last me for many years. If a joint will not fit close I will keep cutting until it does.
If I start reading that the new product is far superior to Durham's and can do things for me that Durham's can't then I may try the new stuff but see little reason to dash out and buy another product when I have what may be a lifetime supply of a product that I am satisfied with...


As an aside... A major blemish I would probably fill with stick shellac and a hot blade. As I said above, I use very very little wood filler 98% of the time and most of the time none.
I used to have a very good friend (now deceased like many of my older friends) who made a very good living for several years making and selling "handmade" grandfather clocks. He used a product like "Wood-dough" or similar in a can about the size of a large shoe polish can and I swear that he must have used at least half a can per clock.
He was a very good friend and he made beautiful clocks (as long as you stood at least 25' back). He was a much better friend than clockmaker... Some of his miters (there are a lot of miters on a grandfather's clock) had up to 1/8" of filler in the joints and it showed pretty plainly. Some how it didn't seem to bother he or his customers either one. > shrug < He sold a lot of clocks... It's hard telling how many he might have sold though if his workmanship had been better.

An aside on the aside... My wife and I have worked side by side daily since 1974 (got married in 1963) and still do. Most of the time we go out to feed the horses together or about anything else we do like wood cutting or even while working on our old van. One time my old friend above and I were chatting (he was dying of cancer) and he told me that he had always been very envious of what my wife and I had. He told me that he loved his wife very dearly but that in their daily lives they had absolutely nothing at all in common and that they had never done much of anything together in all of the years they were married. He worked his job and she worked her's. They had almost no good friends in common. I always felt a little sad for them...


.

http://waterputty.com/

Site for Durham's

I have used the Famowood and I like it but I prefer Dunham product based on:
Price, Shelf life, Ease of use, ability to adjust consistenacy although I have thinned the Famowood product an it seemed to be uneffected strenght wise, hardness, ability to accept finish, and the absolute abuse I have put the Dunham product through.

In fact unless we are talking of the new product that I wasn't aware of I believe I was using Famowood water bases wood filler long before I found the Dunham product. So to me the Famowood is the old product and the Dunham is the new.

Well Farmer, your Aside on an Aside will probably trigger some personal self evaluations amongst some of the members here today:)

Ed in Tampa wrote:I have used the Famowood and I like it but I prefer Dunham product based on:
Price, Shelf life, Ease of use, ability to adjust consistenacy although I have thinned the Famowood product an it seemed to be uneffected strenght wise, hardness, ability to accept finish, and the absolute abuse I have put the Dunham product through.

In fact unless we are talking of the new product that I wasn't aware of I believe I was using Famowood water bases wood filler long before I found the Dunham product. So to me the Famowood is the old product and the Dunham is the new.

I have used Duram Rock Hard Water Putty for over 60 years. I have never attempted to 'color' it and usually use it to repair plaster walls or wood that is painted. HARD is the word. Drywall mud is much easier to work with, but no where near as smooth as DRHWP. It really does not shrink!!! Trowel over a plaster wall patch and it will never show under paint(yes that smooth!).

BTW work fast! It sets quite quickly.

I never use 'spackling compound'.

I think I learned about Durham's Water putty in junior high school shop class about a half century ago, then forgot about it until a couple years ago when I needed a grain filler & was going to use 4F pumice but couldn't get any around here. (Pumice when rubbed with BLO turns translucent & is a great grain filler) I was looking to substitute something & tried Durham's, dry...not mixed with water & rubbed with BLO. When you don't add water, it stays as a powder, not soluble in BLO & works much like pumice as a grain filler. The result on the oak cabinet top was great.

Also, I keep small bottles of artist type acrylic paints in several shades of tans, browns etc & add a drop or 2 to my water putty mix when I'm mixing it as a filler to match the wood color.

[ATTACH]18010[/ATTACH]
Additionally, coloring it (any color) & mixing it the regular way with water, but a bit thin, & wiped over coarse grained woods like oak, let to dry & sand off the excess can give some interesting results.
And I haven't event dented my supply. You don't need much. That canister will probably be a lifetime supply.

With Durham's, do you have to sand to bare wood to use for a repair?

I've only used it on unfinished wood. With its water base, so that it won't chemically "bite" into finishes, you'd have to rely on a physical bond so that a good scuff of the surface might work, but I really wouldn't plan on it.