Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Gunsmithing Pro-Custom Oil vs. Permalyn Finish/Sealer

Has anyone here used either of these stock finishes, Pro-Custom Oil and Permalyn Finish/Permalyn Sealer?

My son and I have several factory stocks that we would like to re-shape/re-configure and re-finish...

Could you share your experiences and procedure?

Thanks!

Roland

I've used the pro custom spray from Brownells with very good results..

I like the finish much better than anything I've ever done with tru-oil

I use the semi gloss


I'd use another product for a sealer prior. cuts way now on your # of coats and time.

I've used Pro Custom Oil a lot, as well as several others [a long time ago, I started with Linspeed] Of all the finishes I've tried, Pro Custom is by far my favorite..

I have used rub on Pro-custom oil. Works really good even with Laminates. It was reall easy to get a good finish.

I tried Permalyn years ago when it first came out and was not impressed. I seem to remember that is was reformulated sometime after, but I never went back. I have used Pro Custom Oil and like it very much. However, I now use Minwax Wipe-on Poly( oil base) and like it better because it dries fast, hard and self levels nicely. It is available in gloss or satin and can be found at most hardware stores and big box home building suppliers. Fine WoodWorking magazine did a test of about 15 or 20 finishes a year or so ago and MWOP was the overall winner.

RAN

Thank you everyone for your contributions...I can visualize it now

I appreciate your efforts here!

Happy New Year!

Aloha!

Ro

I use Permalyn on several rifles. I like it very much. It is a really tough finish that looks very good.

Here is one of my rifles.


It has also been used by well known Guild gunsmiths (Stephen Dodd Hughes, Doug Mann).

It's good stuff that takes a beating and keeps on working.

Brent

I've used both. Pro oil is much easier to get a good streak and run free finish with. Both products are much better than an oil finish, and both produce a nice finish.

As stated earlier-use a good sealer.

Both can be hand rubbed to a satin sheen.

I found that diluting the final coat makes working to the desired finish a little easier.

oldmodel
Both finishes ARE oil finishes. Neither is particularly waterproof, but both are fine for most applications.

I would consider the Pro-Custom Oil quite a bit easier to work with, but the finish is quite a bit less waterproof in tests.
art

I can't speak for Custom Pro, but Permalyn is an oil-based polyurethane that is pretty darn waterproof, though Art and I continue to disagree on this point.

In comparison to non-poly finishes, it is quite a bit more waterproof. But then I live and hunt in places where wetness is only every day water, not special water

I understand that both pro-oil and permalyn are polymer modified oils. they seem to me to be more durable than a linseed or tung oil based finish.
they apply easier and self level better, but I really can't speak as to how waterproof they are.
They stand up well to Northern Minnesota's cold and wet weather-but I sure haven't submitted them to a marine type enviornment.

oldmodel
A polymer modified oil finish IS an oil-based finish. It has resins ultimately linked by oil. The oil retains its hygroscopic character.
art

Brent
The last thing I am going to say is that the finish is not a good finish... Too many centuries of plain oil finishes prove otherwise. Further, I am not saying there is any point in doing more to waterproof your wood if "enough" is truly "enough" for you.

But in controled tests it is extremely easy to show water gets through those finishes pretty easily.
art

Many of those centuries with lesser finishes than Permalyn have done a remarkable job of preserving the wood in incredibly adverse conditions. The fact is, oil finished rifles, centuries old, are still up and running. Still in the hunt. I have several of them that are well over 120 yrs old, one as old as 180 - original finish. Still going strong.

Brent

LateBloomer,

I have had great results using just the Permalyn Sealer only.

I use a brush and coat the stock every day until it will not take anymore. Then I wet sand it in with fine wet sandpaper and Permalyn Sealer making small circles creating a sllury. I then wipe of the excess and let it dry for a day or two. I repeat this until I get the pores filled and get the finish I want.

This make for a great looking finish and easy to repair minor scratches.

Headache

With you all the way to "...incredibly adverse conditions." There your argument flounders.

How could one possibly know if the original finish is still intact?

I have known age guns that had the checkering worn smooth in a single generation. Going to 180 years AND original finish AND "IAC" is saying something different, no?
art

Well Art, I guess you just have to be there with me. I'm still using them, so did the previous owners.

Is it original? on three of them as far as anyone can know, yes.

The fact that oil finishes work is simple enough to understand, there are plenty of old guns still tickin' out there without any epoxy on them at all.

Brent

Brent
Plenty of wood/water issues drove the need for better finishes... To deny history and physics is foolhardy. Further, the use of better finishes has allowed the use of many woods which would simply not survive reasonably mild conditions... Further yet, good woods can be used with less caution about durability, long curing and stress relief.

The survivors are most likely those blanks which were treated the best, stablized and cured the longest, and started out as the densest and finest-grained. On the many that failed it can be argued the wood failed the finish, as much as the other way around...
art

Well, you may think so, and for some folks that can't even bother to clean their rifles after shooting, you may be right.

But the thing that REALLY drove the need for newer (not necessarily better) finishes is economy. Cheap, easy, idiotproof finishes are, without question what drives the common market.

Meanwhile, walnut is still walnut and for the most part, that's what we are talking about. Walnut, english, black, thin shell, french, turkish, whatever. Walnut.

The Survivors (of the finishing industry) were those that were dirt cheap to produce in little or no time, look like a cheap street corner trollop. The wood is still walnut anyway you slice it.

FWIW, most of the walnut used by Winchester came out of Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma. It is not esp high grade but it still works some 125+ yrs later. I have some. I haven't done a damn thing to it but hunt and shoot. Can't say the same about the rest of the rifle. It is obvious that the owner didn't take good care of some of these rifles and I have had to replace barrels, well up pits and recolor or blue actions, but the wood keeps on a truckin'. Works pretty well for me.

Brent

Now you are going too far afield...

Cheap was NOT what drove finish technology. The finish used by the major manufacturers most affected by cost is far more expensive today than in the days of oil and later varnish. The bowling ball finishes and then conversion lacquers are far more expensive to purchase and apply. The finish allows several things to happen very reliably though; there are fewer accidents during production requiring stock replacement, in plant; Color can reliably added to make all uniform; there are fewer return problems as a result of warped wood, usually the result of rushing the wood through the process. All of that saves money, but not by being cheaper finish.

Grade slide has affected walnut more than any other wood... enough so they use an entirely different system, JUST for walnut. Today's walnut is NOT just like walnut from 125 years ago. Further compromising today's walnut is kiln schedule technology putting less and less stable wood out all the time.

Next, you toss all walnut in the same basket and that is dead wrong. If your 180 year old stock were American black walnut it would be far less likely to have survived. Pore size is vastly different requiring much more out of the oil finish.

Various European walnuts can be mixed more easily but that is not what American factory rifles have been sporting except in very rare cases. Even within them there are failure-prone examples.

As to source states for factory black walnut there was a pattern generated by MO as the hardwood hub. That shipping pattern still exists, but the wood came from different areas over time. I grant the early years were as you said, but it shifted radically as cut-over forests regrew and were cut again. PA, NY, IL, and IN likely produced a far larger total for stocks than the four you listed though. But virtually all of it would have gone by way of MO...
art