Thread: ESP (Easy Surface Prep) -- really no sanding required??

Hi Lisa,
My dad used to use ESP when he had to paint on glass and other materials that were difficult to get paint to stick to.

It would be classified as a miricle if it smoothed out faults in the surface as well as promote adhesion. If it did, it would sound more like something one may find at the cosmetics counter at DJ's or Myer.

Basically, if you want to see the bumps and bruises leave them, but for a little prep work it makes the job so much better.

Maybe apply the 2 metre rule, if it is not really noticable from 2 mtr away let it go.

I don't think ESP negates the need for sanding. I always sand down first, then wipe over with ESP. If the wood is new, then perhaps a decent primer after sanding should be your first step instead.

http://woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=35525

cheers
Michael

It is good on glass, melamine and laminates and no sanding is required on those only cleaning.

I don't know how the price compares (I have never used ESP), but on the jobs I paint commercially we have great success with Taubmans 3 in 1 (primer, sealer, undercoat) on all our woodwork.

No sanding required (even on high gloss enamel), just a clean of dirty bits and a reasonably good (but not necessarily 'perfect') dust/wipedown.
Of course imperfections show through, so it has nothing to do with that- if you wanto fix them then you gotta fill and sand them- but them only.

If you get the Taubmans 3 in 1 tinted the same as your topcoat, and use a reasonably good enamel (personally I am pretty happy with Dulux super enamel)- and of course can put on good nice even coats- then you can get a superb finish with only one enamel topcoat.

We find the increased price of the 3 in 1 to more than pay for itself in saved labour time.

My schedule for fast (re-)painting is often
1. Taubmans 3 in 1 on all the woodwork (overcutting onto walls)
2. Base-coat and then topcoat(s) on walls and ceilings (the same, saving time by over-cutting a little onto woodwork)
3. Topcoat(s) of enamel on woodwork- cutting in sharp for the first time (aside from ceiling/wall line)

Compared to some of the old ways I have done it, with sharp cut-ins on every single coat, multiple coats of enamel with days of sanding prep before, this saves sooo much time.
We don't do this on every job, but so far have never had a problem with this method.

handsp77 has it right on the money...if your stained woodwork has varnish on it, and you paint it with a dark enamel, then any part that is in direct sunlight will blister...so the lighter the colour the less it may blister...giving the skirtings etc a light sand never hurts and is cheaper than ESP..60 or 80 grit sandpaper. 1/2 a mtr goes along way cost about $2.00

Thanks everyone. This forum is great.

Would you mind taking a look at my conclusions, and more questions?

• Since my trims are stained wood and no gloss/enamel on it, no need to use ESP, since the whole point of it is to make paint stick to glossy surfaces (and even that claim is questionable).
• Doing a light sand doesn't hurt. Think I will use the 2 metre rule suggested by Alan. I think the sandpaper I bought was 120-grit on recommendation of a guy at Bunnings... but Slobba you recommend 60 or 80-grit? That's coarser, right?
• Then do a quick clean/dust after sanding.
• Then use a 3-in-1 primer/sealer/undercoat as suggested by hansp77. I'm thinking of using Wattyl i.d 3-in-1, because according to promo material i.d. products don't smell. Is it a good product, or do you think Taubmans is better?
• Then doing 1 coat of Wattyl i.d enamel Satin finish.

Any comments on above would be great! Thanks so much

Sorry, another question. Just noticed on the Wattyl brochure they also have i.d. gloss acrylic enamel, which is water based. The i.d. enamel I mentioned in my earlier post is alkyd based (does that mean oil based?). Is one any better than the other?

I like the idea of water based because it's so much easier to clean.

I haven't tried the Wattyl version yet- it's been a case of when you are on something good- stick to it. I have talked to the sales people at my local Wattyl trade center about their product (which btw they don't actually market as a 3 in 1 product- just claim that it will do the same thing)
Dulux do a similar product as well but the Taubmans has much better adhesion.
With the Wattly unproven to me, my money would go on (and continues to at the moment) the taubmans- and that is the only product that I can actually recomend. IT WORKS.

To me, smell is not a major issue. I actually like the smell of a freshly painted house (acrylic that is), and as you are talking undercoat here, then it really doesn't matter- its gonna get covered anyway. If you believe the promo that the Wattyl oil based enamel doesn't smell- well give it a try. Maybe it might smell a little less... maybe just different.
Again, I am a creature of habit, and haven't yet tried the water-based enamel.
So long as you try to do all your enamel in one or two big hits, then I don't find clean up much of an issue.

About the sanding, a lot of skirting boards I have seen with old varnish have those sort of raised burrs or spikey bits of grain coming out. You will difinately wanto remove any of these high spots as they will stand out a lot. I would have both 120 and 80 at hand, it can't hurt. With low spots and holes, well, that is where judgement and the two meter rule might have to come in- just remember that one particular hole or bump is going to look a lot nicer at 2 meters in a dark varnish that it will in a white high gloss enamel. The level of gloss in your enamel often does dictate the level of prep- obviously high gloss is going to want a lot more prep work (I would be more inclined to a semi-gloss- but just re-read that you are using satin- so that is nice and forgiving). Whatever you do, do not skip your gap-filling along the top of skirtings, and other woodwork joins (for that matter, any cracks in corners such as ceiling features).

I use the Nordsjo fillers.
The wood filler for wood, the Uni filler or Fine filler for walls/ceilings (and then just any old gap-filler for cracks)
Don't think about getting talked into some wonder product filler that is quick dry, and/or can be used to fill everything... they are without exception in my experience a huge waste of money and a huge waste of time. I helped a mate paint his fathers house a few months ago, and in a moment of stupidity (he knew better) he used a wonder filler that apparantly could be used on anything. It never dryed properly, sanded like chewing gum, clogged up and ruined your sandpaper and tore out in chunks (requiring re-filling) and seriously turned what would have been a half days work for two into over two days of painfully redoing it.

When you say

Then do a quick clean/dust after sanding.

I should clarrify what I meant.
For the old way of lots of sanding prep, oil based primer and enamel topcoats, after the sanding we would have to religiously clean and sand- everywhere, everything. Sweep and dust out the whole place completely, probably twice after the air settled again, then we would go around all the woodwork with a pile of turps wettened rags and thoroughly wipe down the lot. If it dried with dust still on it after a wipe test, we would have to do it again...
so compared to that, I describe it as 'not necessarily perfect'... I would not describe it as a 'quick clean/dust after sanding'....
this 3 in 1 coat, is after all the thing that is sticking your new paint to your old surface.
A thorough though not extremely-anal dust and wipe down would be a better description.


Anyway, good luck with it all.

Originally Posted by unsure74

Is one any better than the other?

YES. The finish on oil based gloss is absolutely better than water based. I gave it a try because I thought they may have progressed somewhat, but the difference is still huge. Oil based for gloss finish wins every time.

Originally Posted by unsure74

I like the idea of water based because it's so much easier to clean.

I thought that too, but in the end I found I still needed to wash the brushes with acetone to get them properly clean. It isn't that much more effort cleaning brushes etc to use oil based. I use 2 jars of turps, and a final rinse with acetone, followed by a rinse with soap under the tap. Works well.

Originally Posted by unsure74

Thanks everyone. This forum is great.

Would you mind taking a look at my conclusions, and more questions?

• Since my trims are stained wood and no gloss/enamel on it, no need to use ESP, since the whole point of it is to make paint stick to glossy surfaces (and even that claim is questionable).

turps based undercoat-will stick

• Doing a light sand doesn't hurt. Think I will use the 2 metre rule suggested by Alan. I think the sandpaper I bought was 120-grit on recommendation of a guy at Bunnings... but Slobba you recommend 60 or 80-grit? That's coarser, right?

we use 60 80 & 120, with 80 being the medium, i find 80 being easier

• Then do a quick clean/dust after sanding.

yep

• Then use a 3-in-1 primer/sealer/undercoat as suggested by hansp77. I'm thinking of using Wattyl i.d 3-in-1, because according to promo material i.d. products don't smell. Is it a good product, or do you think Taubmans is better?

either one will do the same job. i mainly use solver PSU if i need acrylic undercoat, but i'm still in favor of turps based General purpose undercoat, & low odor turps for all woodwork trimmings

• Then doing 1 coat of Wattyl i.d enamel Satin finish.

correct, but tint your undercoat to the same colour your finish coating will be.

BRUSH to use on skirting is a sash cutter..has a long yellowish handle, made by rokset 50mm should be easy for you
Any comments on above would be great! Thanks so much

cheers

Q9 - thanks, will use oil-based enamel.

Hansp77 - the old way sounds so tedious... no wonder painters charge a fortune . I always look for the easy way but will remember to do a thorough dust and wipe-down after sanding.. thanks.

Slobba - thanks for the tip, will look out for the Rokset sash cutter.

OK, I feel like I'm equipped with enough knowledge to tackle the job. Thanks again to everyone for responding.