Possibly stupid Xymol/finish questions

steve_hershberger · Post by **steve_hershberger** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:07 am

Besides the usual play-wear and some dents and dings (none through to the wood), my '92 FG 360/12v64 has some areas where the finish has simply flaked off. Not in areas of normal wear either - it's just like the clearcoat has basically "fallen off" my guitar in various spots.

For instance - there's some major cracks along where the edge of the binding around the bottom side where the strap attaches. Nowhere near where the strap would rub on the guitar body edge. So it's not "playing wear" at all

Another area where I recently noticed this "flaking" was on the headstock alongside of where some of the tuners attach. As far as I know, the tuners have never been removed and reinstalled - and certainly not by me. But there are chunks of the finish that are gone. Those flake-offs are down to the wood, but didn't remove any of the red fireglo stain.

Never noticed that when I first got the guitar last year, but they might've been there at the time. There is a circular "flake-off" (that IS down to the wood) on the back of the neck at the second fret area, but I figure that was from a previous owner using a capo, or maybe from guitar stand damage.

Anyway, my questions are these: If I used Xymol or any other wax on these areas, how would that affect a possible future refinish?

Is it possible to only refinish the very top clearcoat and leave the FG color and aged bindings intact?

I'll tell you, the fireglo red and aged looking center parts of the front and back od this guitar are absolutle perfect to me, and I don't want to change that at all. Don't care about the discolered "dot" on the back of the neck too much either. But I am kind of concerned about why/how the finish just kind of "fell off" around the tuners.

Guess I'm mostly asking is if I used some Xymol or another wax, would it make a future refinish harder to do? I mean if I used it on the parts that clearly would get absorbed into the wood...

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:47 am

At least three questions here, deserving answers.

First, we need to distinguish between Zymol and "any other wax" (to use your words).

Zymol is the only wax I'm aware of that uses all natural oils (carnauba can be in oil or particle form; we know there's coconut oil in there from the scent, they claim a whole passel of natural ingredients) in a water base.

Every other wax I've tried (and I have BOXES of different waxes in my studio in Brasil...) has a base of petroleum distillate.

Why distillate?

Because it dissolves the solid ingredients better than water--water and oil is an emulsion (a blend with both components in suspension), whereas oils actually dissolve in petrochemical solvents, making a more stable solution.

Upon application, the petrochemical solvents in most waxes, also re-dissolve the previous layer of wax, so you don't get waxy yellow buildup when you reapply wax.

Zymol CAN be built up, and it won't yellow: these are its outstanding benefits.

Many so-called "waxes" also contain silicones, but don't say so. Additionally, polymeric coatings like "Nu-Shine" aren't silicones, but are just as dangerous to a refinisher.

Hence I use Zymol. If anyone else, BTW, knows of a water-based, all-natural ingredient wax besides Zymol, let me know, and I'll try it!

OK, on to the next question: Don't use anything at all on an area from which the conversion varnish has flaked, or any bare wood is exposed. Even Zymol will soak into the wood's pores, and could possibly interfere with refinishing efforts.

WD-40: The worst refinishes I've ever attempted were on areas of a bass that had been sprayed with good old WD-40. It soaked into the wood, and it took lots of solvent wiping and bleaching to get the area to a point where it wouldn't resist sealer or paint.

Armor-All: Don't use Armor-All anywhere on a guitar. Try to keep it off the case, too, if you can.

Last question:

It is not possible to only remove the clearcoat and leave the color intact, at least not reliably. The cost of a refinish is affected very little by the actual application of color...this is only an hour or two at most out of a 30-40 hour project. So I strip to the bare wood, and go from there.

The issue of the clearcoat "falling off" certain areas is almost certainly caused by thermal shock.

lyle_from_minneapolis · Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:22 am

Paul, it surprises me that it is best to not use anything at all on bare wood. My bass looks A LOT better than this picture from its worst days, but the "smashed-off" part remains as you see it, and I worry about all that exposed wood. I do not intend to address this problem anytime in the near future. Should I still leave it as is, or should the wood be occasionally oiled or moisturized somehow?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:50 am

Leave it. And get it fixed ASAP.

Those of you with buckle rash going down to bare wood, spray some sort of spray can clear lacquer onto the area, to seal it and keep dirt from getting a foothold. Then get it refinned as soon as time and funds permit.

beatlefreak · Post by **beatlefreak** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:23 pm

And remove your belt, or at least move the buckle around to the side.

kcole4001 · Post by **kcole4001** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:13 am

I have a mild buckle rash on the back of my 4080, but it only goes down to the color coat, not to the wood. A small spot about 3 inches in diameter.
Should it be sprayed with clear as well? I'm assuming yes.

Thanks for your ever-helpful advice, Paul!

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:35 am

Color coat is porous. Seal it. Use a spray can lacquer. Don't use clear enamel or something like Krylon Crystal Clear...they won't protect properly and are not too scuff-resistant.

Stew Mac #3881 (Clear Gloss) is pretty good for this purpose, if you don't have spray equipment. They also sell this in quarts.

Lay the guitar or bass flat and spray light coats; don't go for 100% coverage with each coat...more like 20% or so. Lay on several coats until the area looks nice and glossy, waiting about 5 minutes between coats. Allow the whole job to dry for a couple of hours minimum.

After a couple of days you can apply wax.

rickenbrother · Post by **rickenbrother** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:33 am

Mark, I'd have Paul repair the damage to the headstock of that 4001!

lyle_from_minneapolis · Fri Dec 29, 2006 11:07 am

No foolin. But the true refinish needs to go much deeper than just the headstock, deeper than these pockets can afford for the next year or two. I've got a long backlog of to-do's in that price range, and family-wise this here bass will have to wait.

But when I can, I'm calling Paul.

dr_wahnsinn · Post by **dr_wahnsinn** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:40 pm

Originally posted by Beatlefreak:
"And remove your belt, or at least move the buckle around to the side."

And don't forget to remove the rivets from those Levis. Easy to do and the jeans wont fall apart without them. Your instruments will thank you.

melibreits · Post by **melibreits** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 4:49 pm

Oh darn! You mean I can't wear my cool-looking studded rock'n'roll chick belt?

Just kidding.... For me, nothing else is cooler looking than a Ric, anyway!

Ouch, what happened to your bass, Mark?

lyle_from_minneapolis · Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:06 pm

Hi Melissa. I've told this bass's story on a few threads here and there, but why would I stop talking about it? It's a '72 4001 and I bought it in this condition in 1988 or '89 for $150. I bought it from a burnout who was in worse shape than the bass. He told me it used to be Tommy Stinson's (The Replacements). I believe that's true---a lot of us Minneapolis musicians intersected back then. I don't remember ever meeting Tommy, but I shared plenty of beers and smoky conversations at parties and in siderooms at gigs with members of Husker Du, the Wallets, the Suburbs, Babes In Toyland, Semisonic (they were Trip Shakespeare then), the Jayhawks...blah blah...they're just people, and some get famous and some don't. Anyway, I still wonder whether it was Tommy or the burnout who banged up my poor bass. If you go on YouTube and watch the Replacements on Saturday Night Live in 1985 ("Bastards of the Young" and "Kiss Me On The Bus") you are probably looking at this very Ric, and it looked okay then. They did thrash like crazy, though...

But you know what? The neck is straight and true, and it sounds gorgeous. One of these days I will finish my amateur improvements, and it will look a whole lot better. Except for that headstock...

Thanks for asking!

melibreits · Post by **melibreits** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:24 pm

Cool story.... I'm sure that bass has plenty of stories of its own to tell!

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:48 pm

Mark, I believe you told that over on the RIC forums - I remember that story. You should consider walnut wings on her, or even having the maple on that side replaced.

lyle_from_minneapolis · Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:37 pm

I need to learn about walnut wings. I'm assuming it's not Paul McCartney's favorite dessert. Are walnut wings a way of displaying a two-tone variety of woods on the headstock, or does it provide a different tonal quality? If it's a cosmetic thing, I'm a Burgundyglo fan where this bass is concerned.