Zinsser Gardz

[JGH]

Hi all I'm looking for some help. I'm on my first wallpapering project. The walls wasn't perfect so I've lined them with 1000 grade lining paper. I was told to then size the walls with zinsser Gardz to give me a nice surface to wallpaper over. I have done exactly this but now it looks like a mistake. My wallpaper is paste the wall then hang the paper. I have now been told that water based paste will jot penertrate the Gardz thus won't stick. I have heard I can sand the Gardz back a bit then wallpaper ( I don't want to do this) I have also read a strong ready mixed paste will be fine to go straight over the gardz with is adhered to the lining paper then hang the paper.
I'm looking for an experience decorater who knows what they are talking about to give me some advice please on the best and easiest way to proceed to hanging the wallpaper and tips on the best paste to use.
Thanks in advance.

John.

[dynamod]

Gardz over lining paper is indeed bad practice I'm adraid. The partial absorbency of the pulp is what helps bond the finish paper and Gardz is a hard shell finish. It's a problem solving primer/solution, not a wall size.

If you have access to an orbital sander or a sanding pole, a good once over should undo some of the damage.

Beyond doing this, I'd follow up by using yellow top Beeline ready mixed adhesive for the top paper. It's for vinyl papers strictly speaking, but the extra grab it has should keep your paper from doing anything untoward.

Don't, under any circumstances have heat on during the drying of the finish paper, though as a non-woven (paste the wall) paper it doesn't expand or contract, at least in theory. Most are pretty well behaved in this respect, so it won't likely be an issue in reality.

Hope this helps

[dynamod]

Just to clarify.

Gardz tends to be recommended for all manner of things it's just not designed to do. It's a plasterboard sealer. That's all. It's not a size or a bridge coat for emulsion.

Lining paper does occasionally get Gardz, but ONLY in commercial situations where a finish paper might be getting changed regularly. It protects the liner during stripping and reduces costs for future wallpaper installations.

[Tom d'Angler]

It's a plasterboard sealer. That's all. It's not a size or a bridge coat for emulsion.

While Gardz should not have been used in this instance, what you said it not strictly true.

From Zinsser's own website:

"A unique water-based sealer for porous and potential problem surfaces. Gardz® is formulated to deeply penetrate and dry to a hard, moisture resistant film that seals and binds down porous, chalky and crumbling surfaces, paints and textured finishes. Gardz® takes the "problem" out of problem surfaces. Deeply penetrating, it dries to a rock-hard, water-resistant finish; this protects surfaces from damage during the next redecorating project. Gardz® is recommended for damaged drywall, new drywall, spackling and joint compound skim coats, plaster, calcimine, uncoated wallpaper, wallcovering adhesive residue, textured paint and more."

[JGH]

What I'd like to know is this...using red top Beeline wallpaper adhesive will it go up at stay up ? I've called Zinsser myself explaining the situation, the guy told me it won't be a problem. I had previously emailed zinsser and there response came back after I'd spoke to them on the phone..the email response was..its not recommended! Hence the reason for this post.

[dynamod]

Gardz is a problem solving primer/solution. That much is correct... but it's getting used and recommended in situations where other more appropriate products/techniques should be used

Is it a wall size? No. Thinned paste is far more suitable (and cheaper). 50/50 Gardz/water will work, but I wouldn't be comfortable in a paid situation knowing thinned paste is more appropriate. Unless the surface was friable it's expensive and may cause issues down the road.

Is it a bridge coat for silk? No. Though it does work, using a mid-sheen emulsion, or sanding a shiny surface down to a dull finish is the correct procedure. Textured silk surfaces, on the basis of being textured, would experience little dispersion or adhesion issues anyway. A flat surface can just be abraded. It's a solution to a problem that can already be addressed without resorting to an expensive product.

Is it a stain block? No. It will stop very minor staining, but Bullseye, Coverstain or BIN are proprietary stain blockers and should be used.

My point is quite simple. There is always a correct, specific product for any situation, though many others can be used, it's just easier and safer to not get creative in these instances.

To the OP.

Red Top is extremely strong and is quite specific to certain papers. It's overkill and may cause problems by itself. Yellow Top has a better viscosity for application and will be easier during hanging. I'd leave Red Top on the shelf. I've only used it a handful of times in over 35 years it's so specialised.

[JGH]

Good morning..thankyou for your detailed response you have been very helpful.
I'll get myself some yellow top. Wallpaper goes up this week so fingers crossed all should be OK.

Thanks again

[Tom d'Angler]

Is it a bridge coat for silk? No.

Zinsser themselves say it is.

[dynamod]

https://www.zinsseruk.com/core/wp-conte ... /Gardz.pdf

Where on the datasheet does it specifically say it's a bridge coat for silk?

Anyway, you're ignoring something glaringly obvious. Why, when you can go round the average room in half an hour with an orbital sander would you do a third coat with a watery solution (which isn't cheap)that's liable to go everywhere?

Before Zinsser came out with their product range, correct preparation always worked fine. They make some excellent products which do make life easier, but so often one of these primers isn't even needed. A clean correctly prepared surface will accept paint fine. It always did.

BTW - Zinsser recommend it for alkaline substrates and fresh plaster. That's just marketing as any decorator mist coats with contract matt at 20% dilution and if alkaline bleed is present then alkali resisting primer (ARP) would be used. Again, using a more task-specific product would be used.

[dynamod]

The whole drive of what I'm saying is quite simple:

1. A correct product always exists for any job, though others may work well, I would personally go with the most suitable one for peace of mind.

2. The advent of problem solving primers/solutions is all well and good, but it has created a culture of 'skip the preparation and whack on one of these primers'.

None of this is a criticism of other peoples methods, but more an attempt to sift through the vast (and it is vast these days) amount of different products that exist and encourage use of specifics for whatever job is being done. A perfect example of what I mean is how old distemper gets handled. You could Gardz the whole thing, or you could wash the stuff off to a clean surface and size/prime the wall underneath. It's a short-cut in many instances (some perfectly acceptable) but care in judgement needs exercised IMHO.

I can remember guys sealing friable plaster surfaces with varnish/turps at 50/50. That's bordering on rough, but it worked.

[Tom d'Angler]

Where on the datasheet does it specifically say it's a bridge coat for silk?

It may not specifically mention silk it on their datasheet but I called their helpline the first time I had crazing matt over silk and they said Gardz is the ideal primer to use. In addition, not only does it say "Gardz® is recommended for damaged drywall, new drywall, spackling and joint compound skim coats, plaster, calcimine, uncoated wallpaper, wallcovering adhesive residue, textured paint and more." on thwie website, but in the past you yourself have recommended Gardz for jobs other than "It's a plasterboard sealer. That's all."

Fabric conditioner is designed to condition fabrics in the wash but it has been recommended, including on this forum, many times as an ideal additive to warm water when removing old wallpaper.

Anyway, you're ignoring something glaringly obvious. Why, when you can go round the average room in half an hour with an orbital sander would you do a third coat with a watery solution (which isn't cheap)that's liable to go everywhere?

Gardz isn't expensive when a 2.5 ltr tin can do a whole room. It's just as liable to "go everywhere" as the dust from sanding a room if the person using a sander doesn't have an effective dust extraction system, and they are far more expensive than Gardz, especially for a DIYer who is only decorating one or two rooms.

None of this is a criticism of other peoples methods, but more an attempt to sift through the vast (and it is vast these days) amount of different products that exist and encourage use of specifics for whatever job is being done.

What it is is you giving the impression that a product isn't suitable for a specific job when it is.

[dynamod]

....."and more"

That's your argument? That's pretty wooly I'd say.

I'm not saying it's not suitable. What I'm saying is there are other better ways to do it. I've never heard of anyone using Gardz in the way you describe. I'm not saying it won't work, but I've only ever heard one person recommending it for bridging silk emulsion.

DIY level people need encouraged to adopt correct preparation and methodology. Not whacking on products that aren't intended for that use. Can you imagine the mess a DIY'er will get into trying to roll Gardz? That doesn't even bear contemplating.

I have recommended Gardz for certain things. Sealing paste residue, plasterboard and occasionally sizing at silly dilutions. It depends on many factors ultimately.

I've been dustless for 10 years, and no DIY'er is likely to have access to that sort of equipment. That's not a justification to encourage products over preparation though. Besides,a quick once over doesn't create a lot of mess. Sanding filler does that, and is the principal reason for adopting dustless gear.

[Tom d'Angler]

That's your argument? That's pretty wooly I'd say.

That's Zinsser's own statement on their website. Hardly wooly.

but I've only ever heard one person recommending it for bridging silk emulsion.

Google is your friend.

I'm not saying it's not suitable.

That's because it is suitable [as a primer for matt over silk]...

DIY level people need encouraged to adopt correct preparation and methodology. Not whacking on products that aren't intended for that use.

If a product is suitable, why wouldn't you recommend it? As a primer for silk before covering it with matt it is tried and tested. Even Zinsser say it's great for that purpose. So, it's hardly "whacking on products that aren't intended for that use".

Can you imagine the mess a DIY'er will get into trying to roll Gardz? That doesn't even bear contemplating.

When I have recommended Gardz I have always said how runny it is and to go carefully. Provided everything that doesn't need Gardz is covered up, I don't see the issue.

I've been dustless for 10 years, and no DIY'er is likely to have access to that sort of equipment.

Yet, in a previous post on this thread you said "Why, when you can go round the average room in half an hour with an orbital sander would you do a third coat with a watery solution (which isn't cheap)that's liable to go everywhere?" Recommending use of an orbital sander while knowing the user probably doesn't have sufficient dust extraction isn't, in my opinion, the best advice, especially when there is a safer and suitable alternative.

DIY level people need encouraged to adopt correct preparation and methodology.

Surely, they need to be encouraged to use the safest possible methods after taking into account their circumstances, budget, and likely equipment?