Restoration question: teak oil or tung oil differences

[Heespharm]

I have some teak oil laying around but do you think I should buy tung oil??? What is the difference

[TheDeardorffGuy]

Why would you use either? Shellac, Varnish or Lacquer only! French polish too

[Trooper]

Tung oil should work fine. The difference is that Teak will soak into the wood but not necessarily provide a hard nor water resistant finish that Tung or Linseed would. Tung oil will be extremely slow in application because of the drying times. You can somewhat accelerate the drying time and decrease the viscosity by adding some mineral spirits, creating simple varnish.

I have a few beautiful rifle stocks I finished with tung oil. They took months of application, drying, buffing, and reapplication of the oil, but I think they are worth it. If you are sensitive to poison ivy, make sure you use gloves when dealing with tung--it contains urushiol which is the active ingredient in poison ivy.

[el french]

Tung oil and teak oil are marketing terms for pretty much identical products. The oil is absorbed into the wood then it polymerizes. This means that a small dents, dings, and scratches in the surface won't ruin the protection provided. Shellac and lacquer are surface finishes that only protect as long as they are intact. Oil will give the wood more luster but lower gloss. Shellac and lacquer will give a higher gloss but lower luster. One of the really nice properties of shellac is that it can be applied over virtually any other finish, which leads to my favorite method: shellac over multiple coats of oil.

The choice of finish also depends on why you're doing the refinishing. If you want to keep a vintage camera as close as possible to the original, then you'll need to do the research to find how it was done.

p.s. French Polish is (just) an application method for shellac

[Graybeard]

Tung oil and teak oil are marketing terms for pretty much identical products. The oil is absorbed into the wood then it polymerizes. This means that a small dents, dings, and scratches in the surface won't ruin the protection provided. Shellac and lacquer are surface finishes that only protect as long as they are intact. Oil will give the wood more luster but lower gloss. Shellac and lacquer will give a higher gloss but lower luster. One of the really nice properties of shellac is that it can be applied over virtually any other finish, which leads to my favorite method: shellac over multiple coats of oil.

The choice of finish also depends on why you're doing the refinishing. If you want to keep a vintage camera as close as possible to the original, then you'll need to do the research to find how it was done.

p.s. French Polish is (just) an application method for shellac

Use some caution with the drying oils. Oxygen in the air initiates the polymerization which, in turn, generates a bit of heat. No problem on the camera but the rag which you used to apply the oil can start to burn after you've tossed it into the trash.



The best thing is to burn the rags. An alternative is to put them someplace harmless, like a metal bucket outdoors, for a couple of days. The rag will be as stiff as cardboard when the polymerization is complete.

[Louie Powell]

Tung oil and teak oil are marketing terms for pretty much identical products. The oil is absorbed into the wood then it polymerizes. This means that a small dents, dings, and scratches in the surface won't ruin the protection provided. Shellac and lacquer are surface finishes that only protect as long as they are intact. Oil will give the wood more luster but lower gloss. Shellac and lacquer will give a higher gloss but lower luster. One of the really nice properties of shellac is that it can be applied over virtually any other finish, which leads to my favorite method: shellac over multiple coats of oil.- - -p.s. French Polish is (just) an application method for shellac

There is a difference in appearance - tung oil is nearly colorless, while teak tends to be amber, and will emphasize grain.

[goamules]

French polish with shellac dissolved in alcohol and mineral spirits will take the longest time. Much rubbing and quite a bit of technique. Tung oil made for finishing is polymerized, and can create a glossy finish in as few as 3 coats. The trick is to put it on thick the first time or two, as it soaks in, keep adding it to your rag so there is a liquid layer on top. Then when you buff-sand it down before the next coat, just barely do so. Just enough to knock off the little dust specs and such, and to fill the pours with a little powder. Use 0000 steel wool. I've done a lot with Tung Oil and it looks great in just a few coats, which around here can dry in a few hours. Some people make it sound too difficult.

[N Dhananjay]

Bob Flexner has said that most teak oils and tung oils are actually wiping varnishes i.e., an oil-varnish blend thinned with something like turpentine.

Wiping varnishes are fair products but their most attractive attribute is the ease with which you can apply and repair them - use a rage or brush to slop it on, wait for five minutes or so till it stops being absorbed and then wipe off the excess and let it cure for about 24 hours at room temperature (please note what was mentioned above - oils harden by polymerization i.e., absorbing oxygen from the air, which produces heat and can sometimes result in the rags spontaneously catching fire).

The varnish added does not significantly increase the moisture resistance or abrasion resistance but it is easy to apply and easy to repair. It cures to a thin and soft surface finish, So it can be repaired by sanding lightly and reapplying another layer.

So, it is a fair product but the industry has unnecessarily romanticized and mystified these products with claims such as 'protects from inside the wood' and calling them 'antique oil', 'danish oil' etc etc - apparently sometimes something labelled tung oil is a linseed oil based wiping varnish etc. Not that there is anything wrong with that but these examples are often used (when talking of finishing products) as an example of egregious marketing.

As far as a finish for cameras go, it is a perfectly good finish - easily applied and easy to repair. If you are rough with your cameras, you may like a finish with more abrasion resistance. But really, with wooden view cameras, I would say pretty much any finish would be fine - it will serve as a simple first layer of protection but no finish will protect against really violent handling of the camera.

Cheers, DJ

[Drew Wiley]

Commercially, nearly all these kinds of products are modified blends, so you rarely
know what is really in them. Besides, raw versions of either oil would be nearly worthless and probably wouldn't even dry. Some brands are good, some are crap.
All true oils have some amber effect and will further amber with age. On mahogany
camera wood I personally use a marine-grade product called Cetol 1, which is more
hi-tech and contains extremely fine transoxides. If I did use a teak oil it would be
a high-quality Northwest brand called Dalys. I don't know what brands are sold in the South. Home center brands like Minwax and Watco are relatively low quality.

[TheDeardorffGuy]

Great replies everyone. I guess my question is why not go with the original finish?
I've had to re refinish many tung oil cameras. I was not impressed with it. Is this because it was a low quality product improperly applied? With Deardorffs there were two finishes. Shellac and lacquer. I've done many early cameras making my own shellac. Not with shellac flakes but with the damn Lac Beattles. I will not post here how its done. Just google it. Its very authentic and really a nice finish

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Just to add my .02 on this subject. The three cameras and two walnut tripods I have made were all finished with Danish oil. I would dry sand to 120 and then wet sand with oil using diamond hand pads to 1200. A couple of coats of paste wax and you are done. Takes a lot of work but the finish is hand rubbed and looks quite nice. At least I think so. Never liked the plastic look of the varnishes, but that is just me.