I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

that was from a time things did their job rather than care for the
environment ...like creosote and creocoat ...

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

You can still get good oil based paints even today for a price but only
from specialist shops not from the DIY sheds.

ICI last made Dulux paint back in 2010 when Akzo Nobel took them over
but I suspect the paint you have dates from even before that. They kept
the brand name Dulux but made by International Paint.

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

The only slight catch might be that the resins will have gone off a bit
and it may never quite cure properly remaining slightly tacky forever.
Or if you are really unlucky never dry at all and need scraping or
burning off.

Somewhere there will be an enthusiasts site with paint tins through the
ages that will allow you to date it.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 08:36:07 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

You can still get good oil based paints even today for a price but only
from specialist shops not from the DIY sheds.

ICI last made Dulux paint back in 2010 when Akzo Nobel took them over
but I suspect the paint you have dates from even before that. They kept
the brand name Dulux but made by International Paint.

Thanks. The copyright notice is dated 1994 but this is not
necessarily the production date of course.

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

The only slight catch might be that the resins will have gone off a bit
and it may never quite cure properly remaining slightly tacky forever.
Or if you are really unlucky never dry at all and need scraping or
burning off.

I have just looked and it is totally dry - not only touch dry but it
can be rubbed with a finger.

Somewhere there will be an enthusiasts site with paint tins through the
ages that will allow you to date it.

I did see one claim that the shelf life is 40 years if unopened and
nearly as good if opened and properly sealed. The advice seems to be
if it does not mix properly or has an odd smell it is 'off'.

I had a new tin of red oxide primer for the fence that was off. The
component at the bottom had solidified and no amount of mixing would
mix it in properly. What remained had a plasticy feel and was lumpy.
My suspicion is that air got into the can.

(This was the same can that I dropped on the concrete in another
thread, where it proved easier than I expected to clean up the mess. I
wonder if this was because the paint was off?)

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Scott" wrote in message
...
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.

I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.

On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.

I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.

Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.


NT

On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:07:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.

I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.

Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.

No new technological developments to compensate then? That's what I
wondered.

On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 13:10:13 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:07:21 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.

I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.

Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.

No new technological developments to compensate then? That's what I
wondered.

If technological developments solved all the issues there would be no reason to legislate out some ingredients. Legislation inevitably (usually) bans ingredients that have an advantageous balance of properties. And yes, I accept that in some areas that's not what happens (plastic flakes & pesticides spring to mind) but normally it is.


NT

On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

I'm using some 2 pack polyurethane vehicle paint dated use before 1994.

It still seems to work as intended.

Mike

On 07/07/2020 17:23, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI.Â* Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

that was from a time things did their job rather than care for the
environment ...like creosote and creocoat ...


except that creocote does not do the job. Utter waste of time
using it.

On 08/07/2020 13:42, wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 13:10:13 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:07:21 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.
I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.
Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.

No new technological developments to compensate then? That's what I
wondered.
If technological developments solved all the issues there would be no reason to legislate out some ingredients. Legislation inevitably (usually) bans ingredients that have an advantageous balance of properties. And yes, I accept that in some areas that's not what happens (plastic flakes & pesticides spring to mind) but normally it is.

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

Andy

On 08/07/2020 13:42, wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 13:10:13 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:07:21 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.
I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.
Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.

No new technological developments to compensate then? That's what I
wondered.
If technological developments solved all the issues there would be no reason to legislate out some ingredients. Legislation inevitably (usually) bans ingredients that have an advantageous balance of properties. And yes, I accept that in some areas that's not what happens (plastic flakes & pesticides spring to mind) but normally it is.

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

Andy

On 08/07/2020 13:42, wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 13:10:13 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:07:21 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.
I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.
Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.

No new technological developments to compensate then? That's what I
wondered.
If technological developments solved all the issues there would be no reason to legislate out some ingredients. Legislation inevitably (usually) bans ingredients that have an advantageous balance of properties. And yes, I accept that in some areas that's not what happens (plastic flakes & pesticides spring to mind) but normally it is.

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

Andy

On 08/07/2020 13:42, wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 13:10:13 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:07:21 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.
I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.
Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.

No new technological developments to compensate then? That's what I
wondered.
If technological developments solved all the issues there would be no reason to legislate out some ingredients. Legislation inevitably (usually) bans ingredients that have an advantageous balance of properties. And yes, I accept that in some areas that's not what happens (plastic flakes & pesticides spring to mind) but normally it is.

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

Andy

On Thursday, 9 July 2020 16:32:44 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 08/07/2020 13:42, tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 13:10:13 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:07:21 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 11:54:29 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:18 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Yes well there must be tons of the stuff still stuck to things our there so
I doubt's if your tin would add much to the total amount even if it has got
something now considered dodgy in it.
I understand that, but I was wondering if the paint was better before
restrictions were imposed on some of the ingredients.
Yes, else they would not have been using those ingredients.

No new technological developments to compensate then? That's what I
wondered.
If technological developments solved all the issues there would be no reason to legislate out some ingredients. Legislation inevitably (usually) bans ingredients that have an advantageous balance of properties. And yes, I accept that in some areas that's not what happens (plastic flakes & pesticides spring to mind) but normally it is.

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

Andy

cheaper is better


NT

wrote:
cheaper is better

Just as a hypothetical example[1], "cheaper, but contains
unecessary and dangerous levels of cadmium, arsenic,
lead, and plutonium" would probably not be widely considered
as "better". Cheaper is certainly cheaper, which indeed
can often be a good thing, but this is not always true.

[2] Other examples might also be constructed: "cheaper, but voted
remain/brexit/greta" would no doubt be amusingly controversial
in these parts.

#Paul

On Saturday, 11 July 2020 21:32:06 UTC+1, #Paul wrote:
tabbypurr wrote:

cheaper is better

Just as a hypothetical example[1], "cheaper, but contains
unecessary and dangerous levels of cadmium, arsenic,
lead, and plutonium" would probably not be widely considered
as "better".

No, because it's not just cheaper it's cheaper & more toxic. Your brain might be cheaper but it's not such good value.

Cheaper is certainly cheaper, which indeed
can often be a good thing, but this is not always true.

well, there are perverse results in the world, but a given item being cheaper is fundamentally a good thing

[2] Other examples might also be constructed: "cheaper, but voted
remain/brexit/greta" would no doubt be amusingly controversial
in these parts.

#Paul

Voting for remain, brexit then Greta would probably indicate insanity.


NT

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 20:41:23 +0100,
(#Paul) wrote:

wrote:
cheaper is better

Just as a hypothetical example[1], "cheaper, but contains
unecessary and dangerous levels of cadmium, arsenic,
lead, and plutonium" would probably not be widely considered
as "better". Cheaper is certainly cheaper, which indeed
can often be a good thing, but this is not always true.

[2] Other examples might also be constructed: "cheaper, but voted
remain/brexit/greta" would no doubt be amusingly controversial
in these parts.

As an aside, I was out with the a couple of CID officers when they
asked if I smoked (which I don't) then said to look inside the glove
compartment, which contained a couple of packets of American
cigarettes. Being American, all the hazardous materials were
individually listed. They said these were for the neds, who believed
that because they had all these extra ingredients they must be better.

On 10/07/2020 02:34, wrote:
On Thursday, 9 July 2020 16:32:44 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

cheaper is better


If white paint goes yellow in a year that's pretty bad. I don't care how
cheap it is I won't want it again. Show me another paint that keeps its
colour indefinitely (or at least several years) and I'll take it. Even
if it's more expensive.

To me the white paint that stays white is better than one that quickly
goes yellow, even if it is more expensive.

Andy

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 21:08:26 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 10/07/2020 02:34, wrote:
On Thursday, 9 July 2020 16:32:44 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

cheaper is better


If white paint goes yellow in a year that's pretty bad. I don't care how
cheap it is I won't want it again. Show me another paint that keeps its
colour indefinitely (or at least several years) and I'll take it. Even
if it's more expensive.

To me the white paint that stays white is better than one that quickly
goes yellow, even if it is more expensive.

Can oil-based paint stay white? A painter told me that the
restrictions on volatile organic compounds (VOC) meant that all oil
based paints will yellow over time, and only water based paint will
stay white.

On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 17:21:49 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
On 07/07/2020 17:23, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI.Â* Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

that was from a time things did their job rather than care for the
environment ...like creosote and creocoat ...


except that creocote does not do the job. Utter waste of time
using it.

I have found it to be OK Apparently it's based on diesel oil.
Certainly improves the life of fence posts if applied before erection.

On Wednesday, 8 July 2020 09:13:38 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 08:36:07 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

You can still get good oil based paints even today for a price but only
from specialist shops not from the DIY sheds.

ICI last made Dulux paint back in 2010 when Akzo Nobel took them over
but I suspect the paint you have dates from even before that. They kept
the brand name Dulux but made by International Paint.

Thanks. The copyright notice is dated 1994 but this is not
necessarily the production date of course.

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.

The only slight catch might be that the resins will have gone off a bit
and it may never quite cure properly remaining slightly tacky forever.
Or if you are really unlucky never dry at all and need scraping or
burning off.

I have just looked and it is totally dry - not only touch dry but it
can be rubbed with a finger.

Somewhere there will be an enthusiasts site with paint tins through the
ages that will allow you to date it.

I did see one claim that the shelf life is 40 years if unopened and
nearly as good if opened and properly sealed. The advice seems to be
if it does not mix properly or has an odd smell it is 'off'.

I had a new tin of red oxide primer for the fence that was off. The
component at the bottom had solidified and no amount of mixing would
mix it in properly. What remained had a plasticy feel and was lumpy.
My suspicion is that air got into the can.

(This was the same can that I dropped on the concrete in another
thread, where it proved easier than I expected to clean up the mess. I
wonder if this was because the paint was off?)

Store your paint tins upside down to avoid lots of problems.

On Sunday, 12 July 2020 21:08:28 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 10/07/2020 02:34, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 9 July 2020 16:32:44 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

cheaper is better


If white paint goes yellow in a year that's pretty bad. I don't care how
cheap it is I won't want it again. Show me another paint that keeps its
colour indefinitely (or at least several years) and I'll take it. Even
if it's more expensive.

To me the white paint that stays white is better than one that quickly
goes yellow, even if it is more expensive.

Andy

Next you'll be telling us that water is wet.

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 02:19:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sunday, 12 July 2020 21:08:28 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 10/07/2020 02:34, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 9 July 2020 16:32:44 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:

Possibly the advantage of the old banned ingredients was that they were
cheaper, not better.

cheaper is better


If white paint goes yellow in a year that's pretty bad. I don't care how
cheap it is I won't want it again. Show me another paint that keeps its
colour indefinitely (or at least several years) and I'll take it. Even
if it's more expensive.

To me the white paint that stays white is better than one that quickly
goes yellow, even if it is more expensive.

Andy

Next you'll be telling us that water is wet.

I suppose that is more PC than the usual reference to the spiritual
leader of the Roman Catholic Church :-)

On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.


I have old tins of Red Lead Oxide ..... won't get lead paints anywhere
any more, but a great primer.

On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 13:57:08 +0100, rick
wrote:

On 07/07/2020 16:20, Scott wrote:
I found a very old tin of paint in the garage, oil-based undercoat
made by Dulux when it was part of ICI. Does this mean it will contain
higher levels of volatile organic compounds and therefore be much
better :-)

After much time taken to remove the lid, it mixed perfectly with the
consistency of a tub of single cream and was a pleasure to use.


I have old tins of Red Lead Oxide ..... won't get lead paints anywhere
any more, but a great primer.

I thought I read somewhere that you could buy them as long as the
stated purpose was for a boat.