Squadron Putty ?

[Ace-Garageguy]

As said, the Squadron putty is fine if used intelligently...

The boot on this '32 was completely molded in with Squadron green putty, better than 25 years ago. Back when I thought this was the only putty. I did heed advise to put it on lightly. I did a coat a day for more than a week to build it up and let it dry out daily.  And it hasn't deteriorated or sank at all.

Exactly, and the old model car mags advised exactly this process when doing heavy builds with the stuff...or any lacquer putty.

Of course, this takes time...a lot of time...and the 2-part putties allow you to do heavy fills (1/8" to 1/4") with one application. Try that with lacquer putty and it will shrink and crack for sure.

[Snake45]

Exactly, and the old model car mags advised exactly this process when doing heavy builds with the stuff...or any lacquer putty.

Of course, this takes time...a lot of time...and the 2-part putties allow you to do heavy fills (1/8" to 1/4") with one application. Try that with lacquer putty and it will shrink and crack for sure.

Another thing I've found useful is, about two hours after you lay on a coat, hit it a lick with ROUGH sandpaper--#280 or grittier. This will take off the hardened "skin" that is impeding the stuff underneath from drying. Then let dry 24 hours, then do your "good" sanding on it. Repeat as necessary. Remember, THIN coats are key.

[Bob Turner2]

I haven't used that Squadron garbage in at least twenty years. Best thing you can do is throw that junk out & get either the Tamiya one part putty, or a good quality catalyzed two part putty. The small tube of Bondo pictured that includes the tube of hardener with it is excellent for the price & won't go bad before you can use it all like the larger, (& more expensive), containers of two part putty tend to do. Nothing against those larger containers, like Icing & the rest, it's just a lot of putty sitting around that can go bad, unless you also use it on 1/1 vehicles.

You can also use superglue with an accelerator for filling. It works especially good on sink marks & ejector pin marks & sets up a lot faster than putty, so you can get to sanding faster.

On any one part putty, (which is what that Squadron junk is, & it is junk), other than Tamiya, besides the fact that it can & will shrink as the solvents evaporate over time, sometimes showing up years later, who in their right mind wants to spend a week or more building that junk up in layers, so the solvents do have time to evaporate so it, (hopefully), won't shrink!?! By the time you do all that work, I've got the Tamiya or the catalyzed putty on, set up, sanded & the part I used it on is in primer at least by then, & I won't have to worry about shrinkage. Ever.

It's 2017, not 1967, 1977, or 1987 anymore. Get into the 21st century & use something more advanced & better formulated! 

For those who might get offended by my calling Squadron putty the garbage & junk that it really is, get over it. You're not the only ones allowed to have a bias or express an opinion around here. BTW, other than the color difference, both the green & the white are the same, & both are indeed junk.

[Ace-Garageguy]

 

For those who might get offended by my calling Squadron putty the garbage & junk that it really is, get over it. You're not the only ones allowed to have a bias or express an opinion around here. BTW, other than the color difference, both the green & the white are the same, & both are indeed junk.

As I've said repeatedly, I use it for what it works well for, and I'll put my finish and paint up against ANYONE'S for proof.

Using a two-part putty for tiny minor flaws and pinholes is not particularly efficient, and the Squadron products work just fine for that.

To put a label of "garbage" or "junk" on a product that has a worthwhile place in the builder's arsenal just because YOU don't particularly like it really does the community no good whatsoever.

Edited March 6, 2017 by Ace-Garageguy

[Bob Turner2]

To put a label of "garbage" or "junk" on a product that has a worthwhile place in the builder's arsenal just because YOU don't particularly like it really does the community no good whatsoever.

Hmmmm, neither does a chorus of people telling him how "good" that junk is in the first place. That's why I mentioned the Tamiya one part putty as a viable option, as well as superglue with an accelerator, not to mention the absurdity of putting that Squadron on in layers over a time period of a week or so, when there are faster & more user friendly products out that that give a much better result.. You did take the time to read & digest my entire post, as well as fully comprehending it one hopes. Or did you merely focus on the one part to take umbrage at? Knee jerk reactions seldom make one look very good. I reiterate; with two part catalyzed putty, Tamiya putty, or superglue I don't have to worry about shrinkage. Ever. Hmmmm, perhaps George Costanza could have used one of those products in that episode of "Seinfeld",,,,,

The only way Squadron putty is "worthwhile" is if you tape a quarter to the tube you toss out, so you can say you threw away something of value.

 

 

Edited March 6, 2017 by Bob Turner2

[Dann Tier]

I myself like the Tamiya filler, but there is another one that I'm surprised no one has mentioned yet that I really like to use a lot, and that's Milliput Super fine white. that stuff is outstanding!!  -or maybe you guys stay away from it for some reason that I haven't found out yet?

[Dann Tier]

don't know what the heck happened with the double blank post thing.....

Edited March 6, 2017 by Dann Tier

[Bob Turner2]

I myself like the Tamiya filler, but there is another one that I'm surprised no one has mentioned yet that I really like to use a lot, and that's Milliput Super fine white. that stuff is outstanding!!  -or maybe you guys stay away from it for some reason that I haven't found out yet?

I've honestly never used Milliput's one part putty, so I can't say either way. I do like their epoxy putty, though in this case, I do prefer the one from Tamiya. Both are good however, in this case it actually is a matter of personal preference.

[Dann Tier]

I've honestly never used Milliput's one part putty, so I can't say either way. I do like their epoxy putty, though in this case, I do prefer the one from Tamiya. Both are good however, in this case it actually is a matter of personal preference.

I used the Milliput for the first time on my D-type Jaguar build, for the "bump" behind the drivers head. Its in the Under glass section -Jaguar XKSS if you want to see how it looks.....it was built 20-25 years ago, and no issues so far! -I also like to use it for making fender flares for my BMC Mini Coopers as well.

[Snake45]

Where's my popcorn?

[Ace-Garageguy]

Hmmmm, neither does a chorus of people telling him how "good" that junk is in the first place. That's why I mentioned the Tamiya one part putty as a viable option, as well as superglue with an accelerator, not to mention the absurdity of putting that Squadron on in layers over a time period of a week or so, when there are faster & more user friendly products out that that give a much better result.. You did take the time to read & digest my entire post, as well as fully comprehending it one hopes. Or did you merely focus on the one part to take umbrage at? Knee jerk reactions seldom make one look very good. I reiterate; with two part catalyzed putty, Tamiya putty, or superglue I don't have to worry about shrinkage. Ever. Hmmmm, perhaps George Costanza could have used one of those products in that episode of "Seinfeld",,,,,

The only way Squadron putty is "worthwhile" is if you tape a quarter to the tube you toss out, so you can say you threw away something of value.

And in turn I'd have to point out that apparently YOU haven't actually read...or comprehended...all of my thoughts on the subject, or know much about my work either.

I already pointed out the absurdity of using the stuff for heavy fills,

I said the product is good for tiny fills. It is. I posted a photo of an example of what it's good for as illustration.

I've also been a strong advocate of using 2-part products well before they were universally accepted in the modeling community and in my engineering capacity, probably know more about various epoxies and polyesters than anyone on the forum, and from my other professional work, know rather a lot about paint products and procedures as well...from over 40 years of first-hand experience.

Much of the model I showed using a tiny spot of green Squadron was scratch-built, and the surface formed of 2-part polyesters, reinforced with epoxy.

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/96942-dry-lakes-scratchbashed-29-fordardun-stupid-mistake/?page=1

But feel free to call Squadron "junk" and miss the point entirely.

 

Edited March 6, 2017 by Ace-Garageguy

[Mark]

Where's my popcorn?

You don't want popcorn...it's junk food.

[PeeBee]

I always thought that the Squadron green was courser and meant for broad coverage, while the white was finer and meant more for "finish" filling and sanding (could swear that I read this on Squadron's web site, though I could be wrong).  I used both for years and never had a problem with either, shrinking or otherwise.  When Tamiya introduced their product I switched over and found it more to my liking, just as I prefer their masking tape to other's.

I have tried CA as a filler and found that it dried much harder than the plastic, which, for me, caused problems when feathering, etc.

I only bother with 2-part when putting a finish on metal bodies, but I really don't do much heavy filling/sculpting.  When I do have large areas to close up or modify on styrene I prefer to "weld" in stretched sprue with Tenax 7R.

PB.

[Bob Turner2]

I always thought that the Squadron green was courser and meant for broad coverage, while the white was finer and meant more for "finish" filling and sanding (could swear that I read this on Squadron's web site, though I could be wrong).  I used both for years and never had a problem with either, shrinking or otherwise.  When Tamiya introduced their product I switched over and found it more to my liking, just as I prefer their masking tape to other's.

I have tried CA as a filler and found that it dried much harder than the plastic, which, for me, caused problems when feathering, etc.

I only bother with 2-part when putting a finish on metal bodies, but I really don't do much heavy filling/sculpting.  When I do have large areas to close up or modify on styrene I prefer to "weld" in stretched sprue with Tenax 7R.

PB.

I can understand the issue with sanding superglue, especially with the accelerator. I've learned the trick is to be ready to sand it within no more than 5-10 minutes after applying it. I literally swear by it for sink marks, (especially shallow ones & ejector pin marks, as I've literally filled & sanded 4-6 of them within 30-40 minutes & I mean finish sanding through every grit to where the part is ready for primer. No putty, be it one part or two part lets you do that type of work as fast. It did take me trying it more than once before i got the hang of it, but I am glad I tried it a second time.

Until I discovered Tamiya 1 part putty, (as well as getting good with the superglue/accelerator method), I had gotten used to using 2 part putty for everything, as I was so disgusted with the Squadron. That stuff is a huge waste of time & money for all but the most shallow sanding scratches, & even then I'll use Tamiya putty first.

[PeeBee]

Yeah, I've been advised that the CA works better if you sand it before it's had a chance to fully harden, but my life is chaotic and bench time is often abruptly interrupted...

PB.  

[Snake45]

I can understand the issue with sanding superglue, especially with the accelerator. I've learned the trick is to be ready to sand it within no more than 5-10 minutes after applying it. I literally swear by it for sink marks, (especially shallow ones & ejector pin marks, as I've literally filled & sanded 4-6 of them within 30-40 minutes & I mean finish sanding through every grit to where the part is ready for primer.

My experience is similar. I never use the accelerator anymore, but I've found if I sand superglue within a few hours of application, it's not much if any harder than styrene, but if I let it set a day or more, it is. Of course, if you use a sanding block, much of that whole question is moot anyway--it's gonna sand out and even feather smoothly and nicely.

[Bob Turner2]

And in turn I'd have to point out that apparently YOU haven't actually read...or comprehended...all of my thoughts on the subject, or know much about my work either.

I already pointed out the absurdity of using the stuff for heavy fills,

I said the product is good for tiny fills. It is. I posted a photo of an example of what it's good for for illustration.

I've also been a strong advocate of using 2-part products well before they were universally accepted in the modeling community and in my engineering capacity, probably know more about various epoxies and polyesters than anyone on the forum, and from my other professional work, probably know more about paint products and procedures as well.

Much of the model I showed using a tiny spot of green Squadron was scratch-built, and the surface formed of 2-part polyesters, reinforced with epoxy.

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/96942-dry-lakes-scratchbashed-29-fordardun-stupid-mistake/?page=1

But feel free to call Squadron "junk" and miss the point entirely.

 

Sigh, you do realize that my initial comment was in reference to all the praise this garbage was being given, not just your comments? I'm sorry, but perhaps you're not as important as you seem to presume you are, Since it was obvious I was addressing the overall topic in general, while citing specific examples. Therefore I was certainly aware of your comment that mine mirrored, just as I was aware of the inane comment made by another about layering that garbage.

Do pardon me for not being an engineer/whatever other professional work you're referencing. I'm merely a retired teacher who builds models & tinkers with my 1/1 cars, including doing bodywork & paint, having taken a course in it, (graduating as well), at my local community college many years ago. With that said, I'd warrant that most people praising Squadron in this thread seem to have less experience vis-à-vis the subject as it relates to 1/1 vehicles at hand than you or I do. I do remember one of the two body shop teachers I had telling us first thing that all one part automotive putties were a waste or time. That was almost forty years ago, & he had been in the business since the 1930's. The shop he started is still family owned & operated even today. I'd warrant that his knowledge, background & & experience trumped both yours & mine combined.

[Ace-Garageguy]

...I'd warrant that his knowledge, background & & experience trumped... yours...

Somehow, I kinda doubt it.  

[Badluck 13]

Dave ....... Dave ...... Dave ...... Ya jusssssssssss had ta ask didn't ya ........ Glad ya did't ask about the un-used citrus smelling K-mart tube glue............

[Bob Turner2]

Somehow, I kinda doubt it.  

That's painfully obvious from your many egocentric posts, & not just in this thread. It seems that nobody can be as or more knowledgeable than you about any subject.

Do tell, what are your thoughts on brain surgery, should someone develop a tumor & need advice? 

Edited March 6, 2017 by Bob Turner2

[Allen Wrench]

The only good thing I can say about Squadron putties is that they are better than Testors Contour Putty,  and that is damning them with the faintest praise I can muster because that Testors junk is the absolute worst.

I personally place Squadron putties in the same category as I do Testors tube glue ...

"I'll take 'Model products that are no longer found on my work bench because I've found alternatives that work much better' for $1,000, Alex."

I see nothing inefficient about mixing up small amounts of catalyzed putty for small jobs; I do it all the time. Very easy to do with the Bondo two-part putty that comes in a tube.

 

Edited March 6, 2017 by Allen Wrench

[Bob Turner2]

My experience is similar. I never use the accelerator anymore, but I've found if I sand superglue within a few hours of application, it's not much if any harder than styrene, but if I let it set a day or more, it is. Of course, if you use a sanding block, much of that whole question is moot anyway--it's gonna sand out and even feather smoothly and nicely.

I've never had as good results for this without the accelerator as I do with it. It might be simply because I know I have a limited time window to sand it once I apply the accelerator, so I don't let the part sit around too long.

I've also had good results using superglue, baby powder & accelerator to fill larger voids in poorly cast resin parts. On one I used a dental pick to open it up more, backed the hole with masking tape, & applied an almost paste like mix of superglue, baby powder & accelerator to the void, let it set & then sanded it. Worked like a charm.

[Xingu]

Bob,

I have no idea why you jumped in and turned this into personal attacks because someone disagrees with your point of view on this. That is totally uncalled for.

None of us need to call a product junk or garbage. If you have a different product that you like just say what it is and explain why you feel it is better.

The OP asked for opinions on this and he got some well thought out responses with examples. As with any product we use, there will be those that love it, those that hate and those that don't care. The general consensus is that it is OK for small repairs because it will shrink.

 

 

Edited March 6, 2017 by Xingu
Spelling

[Allen Wrench]

Why would you get upset over someone referring to a product as "junk" or "garbage" unless you were the manufacturer of said product or had some other type of vested interest in it? That simply makes no sense to me. It's an opinion, nothing more, and Mr. Turner is certainly entitled to express it. 

 

[Xingu]

Why would you get upset over someone referring to a product as "junk" or "garbage" unless you were the manufacturer of said product or had some other type of vested interest in it? That simply makes no sense to me. It's an opinion, nothing more, and Mr. Turner is certainly entitled to express it. 

 

On this board, it leads to an argument. In most cases it comes across as antagonistic, whether intended or not. Doesn't matter what we are talking about. Why not just say you do not like it and explain why or provide an alternative choice and explain how it is better.

In this case, if you go back and read from the beginning, the thread started downhill as soon as the putty was called junk. Up to that point it was pretty much unanimous that this stuff is good for small fills and to be avoided for larger work. There was no absolute praise for the product, just a use with caution attitude.