Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units, still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window frames
are now deteriorating.

Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it be
feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC single
glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

Terry D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1804 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

Terry D wrote:
Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units, still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window frames
are now deteriorating.

Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it be
feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC single
glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

Terry D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1804 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!


Don't see why not...I assume its the outer windows that are deterioating?

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Terry D wrote:
Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units, still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window
frames
are now deteriorating.

Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would
it be
feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC
single
glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

Terry D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1804 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!


Don't see why not...I assume its the outer windows that are deterioating?

I suppose you would fall foul of FENSA regs if you replaced that which
adjoins the brickwork. But would anyone care? Perhaps if you left 1mm of
the original frames in place, you could class it as a repair

Stuart Noble wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Terry D wrote:
Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units,
still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window
frames
are now deteriorating.

Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units,
would it be
feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC
single
glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

Terry D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1804 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!


Don't see why not...I assume its the outer windows that are deterioating?

I suppose you would fall foul of FENSA regs if you replaced that which
adjoins the brickwork. But would anyone care? Perhaps if you left 1mm of
the original frames in place, you could class it as a repair

Well get the BCO involved then

As long as the insulation value is not compromised, you can do what you
like..

This FENSA things is a total scam anyway.

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 09:27:19 GMT, "Terry D"
wrote:

Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units, still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window frames
are now deteriorating.

Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it be
feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC single
glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

The cost difference between single glazed and double glazed pvc
windows isnt significant especialy if you are paying for insulation.
Double glazing will reduce condesation and improve insulation, but yes
keep the secondary glazing for the sound insulation, then you will
have triple glazing.



Terry D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1804 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 09:27:19 GMT Terry D wrote :
Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it
be feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC
single glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

Legally no, because the new windows would be subject to Part L and not reach
the required U-value, even with the secondary glazing. And I don't know
whether the average PVC window firm stocks the correct glazing beads for
single glazing.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

On 18 Apr, 10:27, "Terry D" wrote:

Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units, still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window frames
are now deteriorating.

because of the secondary glazing.


Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it be
feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC single
glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

but the same thing would happen.

Frequently people condemn wood windows when theyre fairly easy to
repair. If this applies to you, then you can use a decissant in the
cavity to prevent recurrence.


NT

wrote:
On 18 Apr, 10:27, "Terry D" wrote:

Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units,
still in excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the
wooden window frames are now deteriorating.

because of the secondary glazing.


Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units,
would it be feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either
wood or PVC single glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing,
hopefully without disturbing it. This presumably would be much
cheaper and also the soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap
between panes.

but the same thing would happen.

Frequently people condemn wood windows when theyre fairly easy to
repair. If this applies to you, then you can use a decissant in the
cavity to prevent recurrence.


NT

The original wooden frames are deteriorating from the outside, not the
inside. There is practically no condensation on the inside. I think that I
will get my ladder out and try to make good by filling & painting. Paint
has flaked off the sills and the wood is grey in parts, although not
rotten - what's the best treatment?

Terry D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1812 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

On 18 Apr, 16:59, "Terry D" wrote:

The original wooden frames are deteriorating from the outside, not the
inside. There is practically no condensation on the inside. I think that I
will get my ladder out and try to make good by filling & painting. Paint
has flaked off the sills and the wood is grey in parts, although not
rotten - what's the best treatment?

Terry D.

If grey wood, peeling paint & no rot are the only issues, you just
need to paint it. Is this all that's up?


NT

Terry D wrote:
wrote:
On 18 Apr, 10:27, "Terry D" wrote:

Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units,
still in excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the
wooden window frames are now deteriorating.
because of the secondary glazing.


Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units,
would it be feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either
wood or PVC single glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing,
hopefully without disturbing it. This presumably would be much
cheaper and also the soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap
between panes.
but the same thing would happen.

Frequently people condemn wood windows when theyre fairly easy to
repair. If this applies to you, then you can use a decissant in the
cavity to prevent recurrence.


NT

The original wooden frames are deteriorating from the outside, not the
inside. There is practically no condensation on the inside. I think that I
will get my ladder out and try to make good by filling & painting. Paint
has flaked off the sills and the wood is grey in parts, although not
rotten - what's the best treatment?


If paint has peeled, the chances are it will do so again. I'd firm up
the surface with "wood hardener" (or fibreglass resin). You'll notice
the difference when you apply the paint i.e. it won't soak in as much,
and will form a film as it should.

wrote:
On 18 Apr, 10:27, "Terry D" wrote:

Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units, still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window frames
are now deteriorating.

because of the secondary glazing.

Why are you such an arrogant ****? Try the odd "possibly" or "IMO". Once
again your definitive diagnosis would appear to be way out and based on
nothing but prejudice


Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it be
feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC single
glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

but the same thing would happen.

Frequently people condemn wood windows when theyre fairly easy to
repair. If this applies to you, then you can use a decissant in the
cavity to prevent recurrence.

A what? As Google would say, "did you mean desiccant?"

Tony Bryer wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 09:27:19 GMT Terry D wrote :
Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it
be feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC
single glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing, hopefully without
disturbing it. This presumably would be much cheaper and also the
soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap between panes.

Legally no, because the new windows would be subject to Part L and not reach
the required U-value, even with the secondary glazing.

I take issue with that statement on three counts.

Firstly, I would say that they would reach the U value, and secondly,
there is still no absolute requirement in the building regulations that
windows SHOULD have a specific U value, merely a recommendation and a
requirement for OVERALL insulation levels, and thirdly repairs are NOT
subject to FULL building control regulation: 'Like with like and at
least no worse' is the rule IIRC..


And I don't know
whether the average PVC window firm stocks the correct glazing beads for
single glazing.

Where did PVC come from? he was talking having new wood frames made..

Terry D wrote:
wrote:
On 18 Apr, 10:27, "Terry D" wrote:

Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units,
still in excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the
wooden window frames are now deteriorating.
because of the secondary glazing.


Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units,
would it be feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either
wood or PVC single glazed windows, retaining the inner dual glazing,
hopefully without disturbing it. This presumably would be much
cheaper and also the soundproofing is excellent due to the 100mm gap
between panes.
but the same thing would happen.

Frequently people condemn wood windows when theyre fairly easy to
repair. If this applies to you, then you can use a decissant in the
cavity to prevent recurrence.


NT

The original wooden frames are deteriorating from the outside, not the
inside. There is practically no condensation on the inside. I think that I
will get my ladder out and try to make good by filling & painting. Paint
has flaked off the sills and the wood is grey in parts, although not
rotten - what's the best treatment?

Scrape down to bare wood, use one of thosee 'soak in and set' resins for
any punky stuff, and use car body filler to patch the holes.

Then do a proper paint job. You could do worst than coat the whole thing
with a load of polyester (fiberglass) resin..as a primer :-)

Terry D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1812 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:20:33 +0100 The Natural Philosopher wrote :

Firstly, I would say that they would reach the U value, and secondly,
there is still no absolute requirement in the building regulations that
windows SHOULD have a specific U value, merely a recommendation and a
requirement for OVERALL insulation levels, and thirdly repairs are NOT
subject to FULL building control regulation: 'Like with like and at
least no worse' is the rule IIRC..

2 panes of glass will achieve a U-value of 3.3 - you can't have coated
glass except in a sealed unit. L1B 32 refers to Table 2 which requires a
U-value of 2.0 (or equivalent) for replacement windows. It's true that
this is not mandatory but if you are replacing windows then it is very
hard to argue that it is unreasonable to meet this requirement (an
exception might just be if you were required to have small pane Georgian
style windows for aesthetic reasons).

Where did PVC come from? he was talking having new wood frames made..

" However, the wooden window frames are now deteriorating.

Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it
be feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC
single glazed windows, "

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

Tony Bryer wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:20:33 +0100 The Natural Philosopher wrote :

Firstly, I would say that they would reach the U value, and secondly,
there is still no absolute requirement in the building regulations that
windows SHOULD have a specific U value, merely a recommendation and a
requirement for OVERALL insulation levels, and thirdly repairs are NOT
subject to FULL building control regulation: 'Like with like and at
least no worse' is the rule IIRC..

2 panes of glass will achieve a U-value of 3.3 - you can't have coated
glass except in a sealed unit.

And the airgap? Now add that.. If the unit is sealed reasonably well, a
4-6" airgap is going to be a LOT better than a double glazed unit.


L1B 32 refers to Table 2 which requires a
U-value of 2.0 (or equivalent) for replacement windows. It's true that
this is not mandatory but if you are replacing windows then it is very
hard to argue that it is unreasonable to meet this requirement (an
exception might just be if you were required to have small pane Georgian
style windows for aesthetic reasons).


A few years back this situation came up with the builders I used
then..they successfully argued that as part of the refurbishment they
had added so much extra wall insulation that the overall heat loss from
the extension they were refurbishing was well below what it had been anyway.

I successfully installed single glazed leaded lights by making the
OVERALL HOUSE conform in insulation standards to the regulations. (2000
regulations)


Where did PVC come from? he was talking having new wood frames made..

" However, the wooden window frames are now deteriorating.

Instead of replacing the whole lot with PVC double glazed units, would it
be feasible to simply replace the wooden frames with either wood or PVC
single glazed windows, "

Ah..I missed the 'or PVC SINGLE glazed'

On 18 Apr, 18:16, Stuart Noble
wrote:
wrote:
On 18 Apr, 10:27, "Terry D" wrote:

Six windows of my house are fitted with Everest secondary units, still in
excellent condition after over 20 years. However, the wooden window frames
are now deteriorating.

because of the secondary glazing.

Why are you such an arrogant ****?

I could respond in kind, but is this behaviour necessary or
constructive?


Try the odd "possibly" or "IMO".

Why, who elses opinion did you think it was?

What else did you think ng posts were if not possibilities to check
for?

Why do you want me to state the obvious?


Once
again your definitive diagnosis would appear to be way out

Yes, everyone gets it wrong now and then. Only a fool has an issue
with that. Sensible people accept this and learn as they go along.

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.


If this applies to you, then you can use a decissant in the
cavity to prevent recurrence.

A what? As Google would say, "did you mean desiccant?"

If you have a problem with typos then I'm afraid newsgroups are going
to be tough going for you. Why not stick to the sensible points.


NT

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.

I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:36:09 +0100 The Natural Philosopher wrote :
And the airgap? Now add that.. If the unit is sealed reasonably well, a
4-6" airgap is going to be a LOT better than a double glazed unit.

No, because once the gap gets beyond a certain figure (around 16-20mm)
convection currents within the gap cancel out the effect of the extra
space.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

On 19 Apr, 12:22, Stuart Noble
wrote:

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.

I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.

There is currently a real shortage of materials in the known universe
with zero flexibility. Putty will bend as much as the wood frame does,
ie very slightly. The fact you can snap it does not change this.


NT

wrote:
On 19 Apr, 12:22, Stuart Noble
wrote:

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.
I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.

There is currently a real shortage of materials in the known universe
with zero flexibility. Putty will bend as much as the wood frame does,
ie very slightly. The fact you can snap it does not change this.

Dried putty does not "bend", not even slightly. Wood does, often a lot
more than slightly. The two materials are fundamentally incompatible,
but I guess a conservationist wouldn't see that

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:03:52 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

wrote:
On 19 Apr, 12:22, Stuart Noble
wrote:

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.
I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.

There is currently a real shortage of materials in the known universe
with zero flexibility. Putty will bend as much as the wood frame does,
ie very slightly. The fact you can snap it does not change this.

Dried putty does not "bend", not even slightly. Wood does, often a lot
more than slightly. The two materials are fundamentally incompatible,
but I guess a conservationist wouldn't see that

I suspect that putty was designed to be painted with linseed oil paint
which kept it from drying out completely. And that since linseed oil
paints were replaced by mineral oil paints about 50 years ago putty
has not been nearly so satisfactory for sealing windows. I'm testing
this theory on my house and will let you know in 10 years time how the
putty + linseed oil paint combination performs

Anna
PS Its doing fine after 9 months ...

Tony Bryer wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:36:09 +0100 The Natural Philosopher wrote :
And the airgap? Now add that.. If the unit is sealed reasonably well, a
4-6" airgap is going to be a LOT better than a double glazed unit.

No, because once the gap gets beyond a certain figure (around 16-20mm)
convection currents within the gap cancel out the effect of the extra
space.

16-20mm is more than most DG units have though.

Anna wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:03:52 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

wrote:
On 19 Apr, 12:22, Stuart Noble
wrote:

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.
I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.
There is currently a real shortage of materials in the known universe
with zero flexibility. Putty will bend as much as the wood frame does,
ie very slightly. The fact you can snap it does not change this.
Dried putty does not "bend", not even slightly. Wood does, often a lot
more than slightly. The two materials are fundamentally incompatible,
but I guess a conservationist wouldn't see that

I suspect that putty was designed to be painted with linseed oil paint
which kept it from drying out completely. And that since linseed oil
paints were replaced by mineral oil paints about 50 years ago putty
has not been nearly so satisfactory for sealing windows.

Mineral oils don't dry, so wouldn't be a good basis for paint!

I'm testing
this theory on my house and will let you know in 10 years time how the
putty + linseed oil paint combination performs

Anna
PS Its doing fine after 9 months ...

A lot depends on the thickness of the putty. On a casement window you
often have quite a deep rebate, but on sliding sashes it's usually
shallow (about 5mm round here). That amount is unlikely to stay soft,
especially on a south facing window. IME it's the main cause of rot in
this type of window, and has done the double glazing industry a huge
favour.

On 19 Apr, 23:03, Stuart Noble
wrote:
wrote:
On 19 Apr, 12:22, Stuart Noble
wrote:

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.
I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.

There is currently a real shortage of materials in the known universe
with zero flexibility. Putty will bend as much as the wood frame does,
ie very slightly. The fact you can snap it does not change this.

Dried putty does not "bend", not even slightly. Wood does, often a lot
more than slightly. The two materials are fundamentally incompatible,
but I guess a conservationist wouldn't see that

Again you miss the point to such an extent that you can not offer
anything useful to the conversation.


NT

wrote:
On 19 Apr, 23:03, Stuart Noble
wrote:
wrote:
On 19 Apr, 12:22, Stuart Noble
wrote:

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.
I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.
There is currently a real shortage of materials in the known universe
with zero flexibility. Putty will bend as much as the wood frame does,
ie very slightly. The fact you can snap it does not change this.
Dried putty does not "bend", not even slightly. Wood does, often a lot
more than slightly. The two materials are fundamentally incompatible,
but I guess a conservationist wouldn't see that

Again you miss the point to such an extent that you can not offer
anything useful to the conversation.

The point being what exactly?

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:47:22 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

Anna wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:03:52 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

wrote:
On 19 Apr, 12:22, Stuart Noble
wrote:

You otoh make a life of it. The level of ignorance in your comments
about putty flexibility left me gobsmacked.
I said that dried putty has zero flexibility. If you can stop it drying
by regular painting, that's another matter but, unless you want to be up
a ladder every couple of years, acrylics are a better bet.
There is currently a real shortage of materials in the known universe
with zero flexibility. Putty will bend as much as the wood frame does,
ie very slightly. The fact you can snap it does not change this.
Dried putty does not "bend", not even slightly. Wood does, often a lot
more than slightly. The two materials are fundamentally incompatible,
but I guess a conservationist wouldn't see that

I suspect that putty was designed to be painted with linseed oil paint
which kept it from drying out completely. And that since linseed oil
paints were replaced by mineral oil paints about 50 years ago putty
has not been nearly so satisfactory for sealing windows.

Mineral oils don't dry, so wouldn't be a good basis for paint!

ok perhaps I didnt mean to say mineral oil. What I mean is modern oil
based paint, which I have always assumed are based on oil from an oil
well

Modern oil based paints form a plastic film on the surface but linseed
oil soaks in to some extent. Manufacturers recommendation is to
freshen up linseed oil paint after 5 years by wiping down with plain
linseed oil, so I assume the paint continues to be slightly permeable
to oil so the putty gets reoiled and doesnt dry out


I'm testing
this theory on my house and will let you know in 10 years time how the
putty + linseed oil paint combination performs

Anna
PS Its doing fine after 9 months ...

A lot depends on the thickness of the putty. On a casement window you
often have quite a deep rebate, but on sliding sashes it's usually
shallow (about 5mm round here). That amount is unlikely to stay soft,
especially on a south facing window. IME it's the main cause of rot in
this type of window, and has done the double glazing industry a huge
favour.

Mineral oils don't dry, so wouldn't be a good basis for paint!

ok perhaps I didnt mean to say mineral oil. What I mean is modern oil
based paint, which I have always assumed are based on oil from an oil
well

That's the trouble with you conservationists. Facts just get in the way
of the message :-)
They're still mostly alkyds, made from good old fashioned vegetable oils
and only slightly removed from linseed. Once you boil linseed to change
its properties, you're already halfway down the road to a "synthetic"
resin. Progress is about using the beneficial properties of a material
like linseed and improving the downsides, like its lack of strength,
tendency to yellow, and slow drying.


Modern oil based paints form a plastic film on the surface

Try telling that to someone who's spilt some on their carpet

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:25:15 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

Progress is about using the beneficial properties of a material
like linseed and improving the downsides, like its lack of strength,
tendency to yellow, and slow drying.

Bull****

Strength is not an advantage with paint. Tendency to peel (like modern
oil paint) is a distinct disadvantage which happens when the paint
bonds better to itself than to its substrate. Show me the modern white
paint that doesnt yellow

Slow drying I will grant you and indeed it is the big problem with
linseed oil paint

Modern paints have been modified to make them more idiot proof (drip
less easily, will more or less stick to any substrate etc) and to
provide patents for the manufacturers who will then be able to justify
the investment in advertising. Modern paint is more expensive than
linseed oil paint. Odd that isnt it?

And now you have got my back up I will point out that I am not a
conservationist. Conservationists look after bits of land for the RSPB
and the like. Conservator is the word you are looking for

Anna

Anna wrote:
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:25:15 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

Progress is about using the beneficial properties of a material
like linseed and improving the downsides, like its lack of strength,
tendency to yellow, and slow drying.

Bull****

Strength is not an advantage with paint.

Depends where you're using it. Skirtings etc need to be resistant to
abrasion.

Tendency to peel (like modern
oil paint) is a distinct disadvantage which happens when the paint
bonds better to itself than to its substrate.

A bad substrate will always produce a bad finish. You can't blame the paint.

Show me the modern white
paint that doesnt yellow

Any acrylic, although they have other disadvantages.

Slow drying I will grant you and indeed it is the big problem with
linseed oil paint

Which restricts its use outdoors. One of the reasons alkyds were
developed in the first place.

Modern paints

Your blanket term "modern paints" means nothing.


have been modified to make them more idiot proof (drip
less easily

Yes, the public likes "one coat" gunk but that is produced with
extenders and is nothing to do with the basic paint. You can still buy a
litre of "liquid gloss", and it is the cheapest (and best) paint on the
shelves.

, will more or less stick to any substrate etc) and to
provide patents for the manufacturers who will then be able to justify
the investment in advertising. Modern paint is more expensive than
linseed oil paint. Odd that isnt it?

It would be odd if it were true. A litre of white alkyd is under a fiver
in any shed. The Green Shop is offering a linseed version for £30
http://www.greenshop.co.uk/acatalog/...ml&CatalogBody



And now you have got my back up I will point out that I am not a
conservationist. Conservationists look after bits of land for the RSPB
and the like. Conservator is the word you are looking for

Crusader might be better