Author Topic: The Big One That Got Away - Take 2  (Read 4897 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Peter Halle

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 12055
  • Magnum - My new little boy
The Big One That Got Away - Take 2
« on: August 10, 2008, 02:19 PM »
This my second attempt to positing this - due to operator error (me) I accidentally dealeted the previous attempt while previewing just before posting.

Here we go again:


This posting could go into several places within this forum, so Matthew please feel to move it to the best spot.

I am a self employed carpenter who specializes in exterior repairs and wood replacements primarily with long-life products.  This year has seen much more trim work than in prior years, but the exterior stuff is my bread and butter.  The following information is about an experiment that I did for one of my best commercial customers - a customer since 2001 - in the middle of July.

Before I go on I would like to state that Bob Marino sold me the RAS 115, the abrasives, the abrasive systainer, and an extra pad.  I already owned the CT22 - having purchased that thru McFeeleys.  I called Bob the day before the Kapex debute and explained my situation.  He asked questions that were focused on helping me accomplish my task - not about selling me product.  He was a little bit surprised when I told him that the Rotex hadn't worked on this project and he went thru suggestions.  We finally decided on the RAS 115 and the accessories.  Please note - this was going to be a hectic day for him with the Kapex looming, working on his new store, etc.  At no time did I feel rushed.  That my friends is how it should be done.  Professionalism with a capital P.  Then he did what I never expected - he shipped that day.  Well Bob, if you read this, thank you and we will do business again.

The experiment:

The pergolas that you will see were built in 1983 out of pressure treated pine.  They have at least 8 coats of paint on them - the original 2 were oil based and the rest latex.  Every time they are repainted there is more peeling - most of it down to the original wood.  The painting prep work done at the time of repainting is done the old fashioned way - pressure washing and scraping.  Pressure washing blows chips all over the place and the scraping is dull boring work that is usually done by less than enthused individuals pretending to be painters.  I admit that I wouldn't want to do it either

So the offer was made:  Why don't we try using the Ras 115 with the CT22 and see if that is a better solution?  Well as they say, pictures are better than my many words.  The question to be answered :  How much paint can an RAS 115 eat if the Rotex didn't want to eat paint?

Before - the bare spot had been sanded with the Rotex for 5 minutes with 24 grit saphir paper hooked up to the CT22 - now do you understand Bob's skepticism?

10623-0


5 minutes later - 24 grit saphir speed at 3

10625-1

15 minutes into the fun - still 24 grit - speed at 3

10627-2


The tool in action - look how big the job could be

10629-3

My personal conclusions:

The RAS 115 will eat paint that the Rotex didn't want to eat.  It ate a lot of paint.  It ate enough paint and spit it into the CT22 over 2 hours that it got full.  That being said, more paint was removed and spit out onto the dropclothes and me.  I don't attribute that to a fault of the machine.  This sander does have a learning curve to learn the technique of swivelling the shroud.  Also, I was working on vertical surfaces and much of the sanding was at an edge.  I found that an effective way of picking up the excess flying chips was to sweat and then place my body in the way of the flying chips.  I did look like a balding snowman by the end.  Once again - my fault not the tools.  This was the first time that I had even plugged the tool in.

I went thru 3 24 grit disks during that 2 hours.  There was very little paint buildup on the disks.  Keeping the speed down so as to not melt paint onto the disks but rather to work on abrading it off the surface is a major requirement. The disks don't really change in appearance - they just get duller.  Changing disks more often would have allowed me to cover more ground - but hey this was an experiment.

I took on this experiment because I knew that the tool could be returned if it didn't work out to my expectations.  My wife predicted that it would never see the inside of a return shipping box.  Bob can attest to the fact that it didn't go back.  It is not a tool that I will use every day.  In fact I don't have an immediate use for it unless I use it to cope crown molding instead of using my trusty 4 1/2 angle grinder.

The outcome:  I thought the experiment was a success.  The tool did what I thought it should do.  The customer was happy, but due to time estimates and monetary constraints decided not to go forward.  I did get paid for my time.  I invested into another green tool and slid a little further down the slippery slope.

Thank you for putting up with my attempts at humor.  Sometimes I take life too seriously and have to revolt against myself.

Respectfully,


Peter Halle









Festool USA does not pre-approve the contents of this website nor endorse the application or use of any Festool product in any way other than in the manner described in the Festool Instruction Manual. To reduce the risk of serious injury and/or damage to your Festool product, always read, understand and follow all warnings and instructions in your Festool product's Instruction Manual. Although Festool strives for accuracy in the website material, the website may contain inaccuracies. Festool makes no representations about the accuracy, reliability, completeness or timeliness of the material on this website or about the results to be obtained from using the website. Festool and its affiliates cannot be responsible for improper postings or your reliance on the website's material. Your use of any material contained on this website is entirely at your own risk. The content contained on this site is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice.


Offline Les Spencer

  • Posts: 487
Re: The Big One That Got Away - Take 2
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2008, 09:36 PM »
Peter,

I'm a little confused, nothing unusual there. ::)  In the text for the first picture you mention sanding with the Rotex. Is that the RO150 or was it the RAS115? Are you using the RAS in the rest of the pic's?
Les (near Indy) XL

Offline ryansmythe

  • Posts: 38
Re: The Big One That Got Away - Take 2
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2008, 09:49 PM »
I think he did the first little patch with the rotex and the rest with the ras 115.

Offline Peter Halle

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 12055
  • Magnum - My new little boy
Re: The Big One That Got Away - Take 2
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2008, 10:06 PM »
I did the first patch with the rotex 150.  It didn't like it very much.  Yes it was on the aggresive mode.

Peter

Offline Bill Wyko

  • Posts: 821
Re: The Big One That Got Away - Take 2
« Reply #4 on: August 11, 2008, 02:16 AM »
Thanks Peter for getting the learning curve on the speed and the grit. Mathew has a great post on this topic somewhere too. I'll be doing this type of project pretty soon so you've made my job a little easier. I don't even know how many layers of paint are on my house but I'll find out soon enough.  ;D
The bitterness of poor quality, lingers long after the cheap price is forgotten.

Offline garnet_steen

  • Posts: 12
Re: The Big One That Got Away - Take 2
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2010, 11:26 AM »
Peter,

Great post! I was wondering if you think the RAS could take the wood from its very rough initial state down to a moderately-sanded level where a finer sander like the ETS could take over without excessive time required by the ETS on the intermediate sanding levels where the switch is made from RAS to ETS.