OPINIONS AS TO VALUE OF WOOD TURPENTINE. 49 



. 



it is impossible for painters to use the wood turpentine on this class of work, as the odor 

 from same is very nauseating in a closed place where there is no circulation of air. 



Burckhardt Co., Cincinnati, Ohio: Our experience with wood turpentine has been 

 very unsatisfactory. We find it almost unsalable on account of the penetrating odor. 

 When a large surface is exposed freshly painted in a closed, space, for example, any 

 interior work, the fumes given off are exceedingly disagreeable, both as to odor and 

 effect on the eyes. The natural gum turpentine is free from such objection. 



A. B. Chase & Co., Norwalk, Ohio: Our experience with wood turpentine has been 

 very limited. The only thing we noticed is that it curdled or precipitated the varnish, 

 and that the odor was very offensive. We have decided that it is not to be used in 

 thinning varnishes for use on high-grade pianos. 



//. H. Franklin Manufacturing Co., Syracuse, N. Y.: We are of the opinion that 

 wood turpentine would be of no use to us on account of the odor. 



The Locomobile Co. of America, Bridgeport, Conn.: We have never been able to get 

 satisfactory results in the paint department when using wood turpentine. Our 

 painters state that it is very quick drying, has a tendency to thicken the paint after 

 standing a short time, and on evaporation leaves the paint lifeless. 



Brewster & Co., New York: We have only experimented with wood turpentine, but 

 so far as we have gone we find that its solvent power seems to be less than ordinary 

 turpentine, that it does not dry as well, and appears to leave a greasy residue on the 

 surface of the article painted instead of drying flat and clear, as in the case where pure 

 gum turpentine is used. It is also heavier to work. In covering power there is no 

 appreciable difference. We have not found it satisfactory to use in our business where 

 a very good finish is necessary. 



Grand Rapids Chair Co., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Its solvent power is the same. It 

 does not dry as well and makes a more inflexible varnish than ordinary turpentine. 

 It is more difficult to work and appears to separate from the varnish. It deteriorates 

 with age. 



Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co., Newport News, Va.: We beg to say 

 that we are still using wood turpentine, or Florida spirits, and the only objection we 

 find is that the odor is unpleasant, as before stated. If this bad odor could be elimi- 

 nated, we would use it much more extensively. 



Norfolk & Western Railway Co., Roanoke, Va.: We have found the wood turpentine 

 to have as good solvent value as spirit turpentine, of slightly slower drying qualities, 

 but would dry out in time giving good results. This time of drying has a practical 

 value in many of our shop operations, and is ofttimes the determining factor. We 

 would not consider it as good as spirit turpentine in varnish making, due to the presence 

 in small quantities of creosote. We did not find wood turpentine difficult to manipu- 

 late, nor did we find it to give detrimental results so far as the covering value of the 

 paint was concerned. 



The odor is rather objectionable to painters, which is probably the only point so far 

 determined on which we would not recommend ite use. 



Pullman Co., Pullman, III.: So far as we are able to see, the solvent power of wood 

 turpentine is about the same as that of the ordinary turpentine, with the exception 

 that it dries a little slower. The covering capacity is apparently the same as the 

 ordinary turpentine, and we are unable to note any difference in its manipulation or 

 working. No objection has been raised by any of our painters, and for all purposes it 

 seems to be a good substitute for the gum turpentine. 



Another prominent railroad company: During the past four or five months we have 

 used samples of these products and there is considerable objection to them, principally 

 on account of the odor, which is sickening. As to their solvent power we do not find 

 there is any difference, nor do we find a difference in drying qualities. There is no 

 difference in the work nor in manipulation. We notice in mixing these substitutes 

 that they turn whitish as a foam which disappears when they are left to settle. From 

 7085 Bull. 144 IX 4 



