Archive for the ‘wear layer thickness’ Category

Apples to apples floor finish

I do a number of estimates for my floor business and I am always perplexed by the lack of information other floor companies are providing for the homeowner. Let me bring about a few real world points for people in order to dispel the myths surrounding the “bidding” process.

1) Two coats versus three coats versus coverage rate

Honestly this is a six versus one half dozen comparison. Your average floor finish has a recommended coverage rate for application. Some finishes have an optimal application range of 300 square feet per gallon where others are at 500. This has a big impact on the “mil thickness” (durability) of the finish. Three thin coats will actually be less durable than a quality two finish coat job. Cheap contractors stretch finish thin when applying it. Three coats sounds like a better thing, but is only a repeat visit and more work for the contractor if the coverage is less than adequate.

2) Resins and solids content

This is a real hidden point of discussion for some floor companies, particularly low priced companies and large outfits. Waterborne finishes have a protective resin suspended in water that is the “thing” that provides durability. The chemical composition of this resin has a tremendous impact on durability. Cheap floor finishes have weak resins and are “watery” with coverage rates near 600-700 square feet per gallon.  They are lower in solids (the resins that provides durability).

3) Two component versus one component waterbased finish

One component floor finishes have minimal scuff and scratch resistance. They rely simply on oxygen to link the finish resins. Two component finishes rely upon a chemical crosslinker to “matricize” the finish resins and form a really tough scuff resistant floor. In talking with several finish chemists during NWFA schools, I have found that two component finishes fare almost twice as well in taber abrasion tests that test durability. For a perspective single component finishes can be about $25-50 per gallon, where a quality two component waterborne ranges from $80-110 per gallon.

CHEAP  ONE COMPONENT FLOOR FINISH

mega

DURABLE TWO COMPONENT FLOOR FINISH

Dura Seal

My Point!!!!

Ask your contractor about these points. Why? Because if they don’t have an answer they are NOT a professional. They are a “guy with a sander” who can multiply a square foot price and use a tape measure. Please make a fair comparison when evaluating floor refinishing estimates. Otherwise you will be taken for a ride by a snake oil salesman and have a worn out floor in two years.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Hardwood floor refinish, floor refinishing portland oregon, hardwood floor finish, hardwood floor refinishing prices, waterbased finish, wear layer thickness | No Comments »

How long will it last?


The title of this blog in my opinion should be the first question out of your mouth if you are a consumer or remodeler who preaches sustainability. The beauty of wood flooring is that it has the ability to last for well over 100 years depending on the wear layer thickness of the material.

Let us define wear layer as the surface of a flooring product that is in contact with foot traffic that can tolerate gradual removal of material without compromising the integrity of the flooring fastening system. Wear layer is a tremendously overlooked factor for people who are purchasing products. A minimum wear layer thickness for product that is serviceable through recoating or refinishing should be 3/16″. The wear layer of a typical 3/4 solid hardwood floor is 5/16″. That means that you may be able to refinish the floors typically 8 times. Some of the houses in Portland have fir flooring with a wear layer thickness that may have once been close to 1/2″ or 8/16″ in my estimate. That’s pretty amazing for longevity.

We recommend that in addition to the cost and the color, the primary consideration of your flooring material should be serviceability over time.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Hardwood floor durability, Portland fir floor, wear layer thickness | No Comments »

|