Buffing

[JMB]

Went out in the shop today and buffed a few (old) pipes I been meaning to do for a long time. I noticed right away they seem to smoke a lot better this time around. They say a car drives better after it has been washed. Guess it's true with pipes too. Didn't do anything to the insided, just buffed them.

[Nick]

Hmmm, wonder if the buffing made the pipes "breath" easier. Still not convinced on briar breathing, but its a theory.

As a side note, I read in PSE that Kent Rasmussen uses laquer on his pipes.

[JMB]

Nick wrote:
"I read in PSE that Kent Rasmussen uses laquer on his pipes."

I am not going to knock anyones way of doing things, but I have a problem with both laquer and shellac finish's on pipes. While I think they are great for furniture, just think it's not right for pipes. I have three Peterson Kinsale pipes that are coat. They smoke just the same as my other Peterson's, I just don't get the same feeling when I hold them. There is something about buffing & waxing a pipe "myself" that gives enjoyment to a smoke. Also if or when you nick or dent a pipe that has been coated it's hard to refinish. You will never get it right again. There is "no" amount of sanding that will carry it back to the un-finished state.

Nick wrote:
"wonder if the buffing made the pipes "breath" easier"

"breath" as in the way we breath, in & out, huff & puff the answer is No. IMO it does breath in that it must have "air" to keep it from "rotting" from the inside out. The best example is Red Wood, if you paint "BOTH Sides" it it will rot in know time. Yet if you leave it plane it will last "almost" forever.
On another thred they are talking about "coating" the inside. IMO if you coat the inside and laquer or shellac the outside you have one screwed up pipe. On top of that if you get a dent in it, you have a ugly screwed up pipe.

[KurtHuhn]

If you lay on a thick coat of lacquer or shellac and seal a pipe, I think I agree. However, the amount of shellac used in finishing a high-grade (or hopeful high-grade) pipe is enormously small. It is a thin cut to begin with, and only applied for a matter of seconds before being wiped off.

The goal is to stabilize the stain and protect the wood, while leaving the pores open. You're not laying it on like paint. If you try that, you'll notice failure the first time you smoke it. The shellac or lacquer will bubble up from the surface and become downright fugly.

Search for Todd's description of the process (too lazy to look at the moment). If you haven't tried it, or seen a pipe finished using this procedure, you need to. The difference in the finished piece is amazing, and it lasts quite a long time. It's also easy to bring back to a shine.

Denting a pipe? Wether it's finished with plain carnuba or with wiped down with shellac, a dent in a pipe is going to require sanding. You can pop *some* dents with a hot soldering iron and a wet cloth, but they're still going to require sanding. How much sanding is largely dependent upon how deep that dent is.

As for shellac not allowing the briar to breath, that's just pure bunk. If you do it right, the briar will breathe just as well when shellac is included in the finished pipe as if it weren't. My own experimentation proves this sufficiently for me. Your mileage may vary, but I'm quite satisfied with the results of my experiments.

(hoping Todd chimes in here)

[JMB]

Kurt wrote:
"The goal is to stabilize the stain and protect the wood, while leaving the pores open. "

The main purpose of "lacquer or shellac" is to seal the "wood". IMO even if a small amout is use it will seal the pipe making hard as "H" to sand down with out screwing up the "shape" should you need to at a later date. IMO I see no value in adding steps to making a pipe, when just buffing/waxing will get you the same results. We know this will work.

[KurtHuhn]

The main purpose of "lacquer or shellac" is to seal the "wood". IMO even if a small amout is use it will seal the pipe making hard as "H" to sand down with out screwing up the "shape" should you need to at a later date.

False, and false - with explanation. When applied to wood in a traditional fashion, shellac and lacquer will seal wood. This "traditional fashion" is in thick layers and left to harden into a solid shell with a uniform surface.

That is not how you apply shellac or lacquer to a pipe.

And I just realized that you need to be a member of the private area to read Todd's post on the subject. I'd cut and paste it here, but I'd rather it came from Todd, or at least get the "all clear" from him.

In a nutshell, the shellac is a thin mix, so that it is diluted. You apply it to the entire pipe *quickly* and wipe it off *quickly*. Grand total of 5-10 seconds. The closer to 5 seconds the better. Let it dry. You've already stained the pipe to whatever color you like. At this point you have a somewhat shiny pipe, but when you buff with white diamond (as I do) your pipe takes on a luster that is unmatched. Also, during buffing, you don't muddy the layers of color together. Contrast is incredible, variegation is enhanced, and birdseye grain positively jumps out at you. After you buff *lightly* with white compound (and I do mean *lightly*) you're ready to apply carnuba and buff it one final time.

The difference is in the strength of the shellac solution, the amount of time it stays on the pipe, the method of application, and the absence of a hard shell exterior.

You are not sealing the wood entirely. You are protecting the wood, but not sealing the all-important pores. The briar still "breathes", and it won't go rancid.

As far as sanding off, yes you can. Remember, we're talking about a layer of shellac that isn't even a micron thick. This isn't some magical coating analogous to Adamantium or something. It's just shellac. A small bit of work with 400-grit sandpaper will take it off faster than you can say "attention deficit disorder". I know, I recently had to do that to a pipe that I clumsily dropped right after final buffing (another entry for The Adventures Of the Galacticaly Stupid?). It's no big deal at all.

IMO I see no value in adding steps to making a pipe, when just buffing/waxing will get you the same results. We know this will work.

The simple truth is that it will *not* give you the same results. The finish is more lustrous, has more depth, more contrast, and lasts much longer. The use of the shellac gives you a much more robust finish, and there's a reason why the world's most sought-after pipemakers employ it's use.

[JMB]

Kurt, I am going to leave it alone now. I'm not real good with words and my opinions will will hurt some feelings. Don't want to get started, what is going on in another thread. If it works for you, do it. It does nothing for me, so I will keep on doing it the old way.

[Leus]

Shellac will make a pipe shine last longer. I don't have an opinion regarding sealing or no, thought this makes sense:

The point of the lacquer is, according to Bo, that it should enter the wood so that it does not sucks up sweat from the hand and other impurities with which the pipe comnes into contact. The idea is thus not to create a shiny layer on the surface. A comparison between a lacquered and a non-lacquered pipe shows that the only visible difference is that the lacquered pipe has a deeper black colour.

(From this page.)

[ToddJohnson]

Kurt, I am going to leave it alone now. I'm not real good with words and my opinions will will hurt some feelings. Don't want to get started, what is going on in another thread. If it works for you, do it. It does nothing for me, so I will keep on doing it the old way.

JMB,

Discretion is always wise especially in hind-sight. I also don't want to start another bile slinging match here, but I am curious as to whether you've ever tried the method Kurt laid out so well in his previous posts. You said that it "does nothing for you" and I'm interested to know what precisely it "didn't do." It sounds like you have an idiological objection to the method (which is perfectly fine), but if the procedure itself actually failed you I'm interested to hear how. Or have you just found that you're able to achieve better results differently?

Best,

Todd

[JMB]

Todd, I am speaking as a "buyer" not as a pipe maker. The pipes I make are for me only. I am just trying to learn to make the standard shapes for now.

Speaking as a "buyer" of pipes, IMO pipes that are "lacquer or shellac" & with the bowl coated, look "machine made" or "cookie cuter". Looks like the maker is turning them out as fast as he/she can. If I am going to pay "My" bottom dollar for a top dollar pipe I want to know it's "hand" made and that the "maker" took his/her time. Not something he/she could do it there sleep. Again let me say this is "My" opinion only, I am not talking about "anyone" Pipe Maker, on this board or not. [/b]

[Tyler]

Let me commend everyone in this thread for excercising discretion. This can be as touchy a topic as bowl coatings! 8O

JMB,

To address your objections, my suspicion is that you are using the terms lacquer and shellac in ways differently than most on this board use them. I have seen and agree with you about pipes that are essentially plastic-coated, that they are terrible in all ways. They look fake and smoke terribly. However, the methods that many use with shellac in this forum (including myself) is far from the plastic coating of basket pipes. It is simply a fine way to protect the stain and have a more perfect finish. If what you desire is an more matte finish in order to highlight that a pipe is handmade, that is great. I prefer a flawless shine and shellac is an excellent means to that end that does not negatively affect the smoke.

I will also note that you might be surprised at the number of makers that use shellac. One interested data point is this: if you pay $500+ for a pipe the likelihood that it is shellaced is VERY high.

Tyler

[JMB]

Tyler, you must be a good Preacher. You gave me a easy out. So I will take it. lol

Yes, this is what I was thinking. " plastic coating of basket pipes."