jfalkens Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 CLICK---ebay auction for a casino Check out the 2nd, third, and fourth pictures. I heard that Poly is actually more expensive to put on that Nitro. Why does Epiphone not put Nitro on guitars (besides the Lennon, JL Hookers models)? One thing I didn't like about my Casino (besides not staying in tune) is that it looked like it was dunked in plastic/acrylic . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byrds1965 Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Nitro is more expensive and the process takes longer. Poly is cheap and unless I'm wrong only takes one application. With Nitro the wood can breathe, with poly it is sealed. I like nitro on acoustics but on electrics I'll take the poly as I don't like how nitro gets sticky. Some of the Epiphones look like they were plastic coated and some have a thinner poly just have to look and see it varies guitar from guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheX Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Official nitro head here, have it in cans in the workshop with bodies hanging getting their 30 day cure time. It's secksi and repairable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutoftheBlues Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Official nitro head here' date=' have it in cans in the workshop with bodies hanging getting their 30 day cure time. It's secksi and repairable.[/quote'] Yep, nitro can take up to a full year to cure and get hard, whereas urethane has a harding agent in it and gets rock hard in a day or so. When you are mass producing guitars, lacquer is not economical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Okay, first of all, let's not bandy about terms like 'poly' without realizing that there are two different 'poly' finishes in use by Epiphone. The first is polyester, which is that thick impervious stripper-proof stuff they use on the regular line guitars; the second is polyurethane which is used on the Elitists. Personally, while the polyester finishes are terrible I don't really see that much of a disadvantage in polyurethane versus nitro although perhaps twenty years down the line the difference will be more critical. Beyond the fact that a polyester finish is much easier to apply than a nitrocellulose finish, there may be regulations with regard to international shipping that make nitro-finished products a pain to get into North America, but I'm just speculating on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron G Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 The problem is that the Department of Homeland Security banned the import of nitrocellulose because it sounds like an explosive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lerxst1281733995 Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 Nitrocellulose lacquer is also very bad for the environment... I've heard that Gibson and other guitar companies have to pay hefty fees in advance each year for their use of it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Lister Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 ...polyester' date=' which is that thick impervious [u']stripper-proof[/u] stuff they use on the regular line guitars ...yeah, but that's why it's perfect for condoms! Lacquer is antiquated auto paint technology --- the reason why cars made before late '70s fade/rust badly. Polyurethane was designed for jet aircraft and applied to later-model autos..., and guitars. Guess which one is more durable? BTW -- they are all very environmentally unfriendly Hit every BLUE NOTE baaaby..., I'm going to play on:-" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.