Author Topic: Who's selling Brodak dope? (Read 7093 times)

wwwarbird · « **on:** October 24, 2010, 01:51:05 PM »

Other than directly from Brodak, who sells and ships Brodak clear dope and thinner in quarts? Whoever this would be, I would also assume be offering the colors in pints as well?

Paul Smith · « **Reply #1 on:** October 24, 2010, 01:58:51 PM »

http://www.randolphaircraft.com/

Here's the ulimate source of Brodak dope. Available in quarts & gallons, for just a little more than tiny tins.

Leester · « **Reply #2 on:** October 24, 2010, 06:09:43 PM »

Wayne, Try Northcoast Hobby in the Vendors Corner.

larry borden · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2010, 10:39:28 AM »

I have started using Randolph exclusively, even colors. A quart of colored dope is the same as a pint from the local hobby shop. I get mine here in Fort Worth from Tex-Air supply. Look on the Randolph web site for dealers near you.

wwwarbird · « **Reply #4 on:** October 25, 2010, 11:13:28 AM »

So regular Randolph right from the can and thinned as necessary is fuel proof and all for our models? I've always known that Randolph makes Brodak, but haven't ever known if it's the same recipe.

larry borden · « **Reply #5 on:** October 25, 2010, 11:48:17 AM »

Only the butyrate dope is fuel proof. I use nitrate to seal wood and silk and the put a couple of coats of clear butyrate on before primer and colors.

billbyles · « **Reply #6 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:44:02 PM »

Quote from: wwwarbird on October 25, 2010, 11:13:28 AM

So regular Randolph right from the can and thinned as necessary is fuel proof and all for our models? I've always known that Randolph makes Brodak, but haven't ever known if it's the same recipe.

Hi Wayne,

No butyrate dope is "fuel-proof"; some of them are more "fuel-resistant" than others. My experience is that Sig is the most "fuel-resistant" of the butyrate dopes available, Randolph is slightly less "fuel-resistant", and the rest follow. My practice is to use Randolph for the base clear build-up and also use Randolph (they make a huge variety of colors) and use Sig Light Coat clear for the final topcoats of clear. I am careful when fueling my airplanes and have had very few problems over the years with the Randolph/Sig butyrates.

Bill

Allan Perret · « **Reply #7 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:55:52 PM »

Seems to be common knowledge that Brokak dopes come from Randolph.
So what is the source of SIG dope ?
The only other manufacturer I know of is Certified, are there any others ??

larry borden · « **Reply #8 on:** October 25, 2010, 02:30:34 PM »

I use Randolph for everything. For the final clear coat over the colors, I use Brodak crystal clear.

wwwarbird · « **Reply #9 on:** November 06, 2010, 09:32:34 PM »

What's the difference between the Brodak Crystal Clear and their regular clear? I've been using the regular clear and have no real complaints.

Leester · « **Reply #10 on:** November 07, 2010, 05:25:55 AM »

It's a more clear looking dope as compared to a yellowish. Put some of each in a glass jar and you'll see what I'm saying.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #11 on:** November 07, 2010, 07:48:18 AM »

How long a can of dope sit on the shelf before turning an amber color? I opened a can of dope the had never been opened, Still had the little metal clips on the can. It was a dark amber color. Used it anyway on a plane that was painted yellow and for base coats with talcum powder for filler.

wwwarbird · « **Reply #12 on:** November 07, 2010, 07:39:19 PM »

Quote from: Leester on November 07, 2010, 05:25:55 AM

It's a more clear looking dope as compared to a yellowish. Put some of each in a glass jar and you'll see what I'm saying.

So it's clearer than clear then.

Leester · « **Reply #13 on:** November 08, 2010, 04:05:37 AM »

YEP

Paul Smith · « **Reply #14 on:** November 08, 2010, 06:54:34 AM »

Randolph puts in a little bit of tint so you can tell taugthning from non-taughtning.

You can see it in the jar, but not so easy in the finished product.

I imagine "crystal clear" involves Brodak buying enough to get Randolph to delete the tint.

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #15 on:** November 08, 2010, 08:01:36 AM »

Randolph makes 2 different clear, non-tautening versions of butyrate dope. W-8350 is tinted transparent tan to help see coverage on application. A-1690 is untinted and should be used for clearcoating on white or light colored models. I agree with Bill Byles in his belief that SIG Litecoat clear offers the best fuelproofing of the commonly used butyrate clears. Ideally do not spill raw fuel on any butyrate finish. Both versions of Randolph clear sell for around $43 per gallon from Aircraft Spruce.

afml · « **Reply #16 on:** November 08, 2010, 08:21:31 AM »

If you like Sig Lite Coat or ANY Sig dope, hope you have it stockpiled....
The Lady on on the phone last Thursday said "That's all Folks!"
Well.....SHE didn't say THAT

But she DID SAY "Sig dope is no longer available."

"Tight Lines!"

Wes

wwwarbird · « **Reply #17 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:45:00 PM »

I checked out the Randolph and Wicks sites. I am assuming that the Randolph clear butyrate taughtening dope is what the Brodak clear actually is. Can anyone confirm this, or am I wrong with that assumption? I would really appreciate it if anyone knows this answer for sure.

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #18 on:** November 11, 2010, 07:33:57 AM »

Brodak clear is a non-tautening version. Do not get tautening as it will likely turn your wing into a twisted mess. I use tautening dope for only one coat and that is usually only the first coat of dope on open bays after applying silkspan. Depending on what covering I use, I may never use any clear except non-tautening.

wwwarbird · « **Reply #19 on:** November 11, 2010, 09:40:05 AM »

So the Brodak clear butyrate is actually Randolph clear butyrate non-tautening then? What I'm trying to get to here is are they both the same product???

Leester · « **Reply #20 on:** November 11, 2010, 05:53:16 PM »

Someone needs to ask John B if the Brodak clear is or is not tauntening. I find it hard to believe that it is not, as the planes I've used it on have tight silk span from clear dope only.

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #21 on:** November 12, 2010, 07:56:46 AM »

Guys,
All Butyrate dope shrinks. Non tautening just shrinks less. Can't remember what the % is but if Bill Byles comes on he can probably give the numbers. Sig has or had two kinds of clear dope in their line. Supercoat and Litecoat. Supercoat was a tautening dope and Litecoat was a non tautening. All colors of Sig dope were made using a non tautening formulae. Brodak makes both clears and colors with a non tautening formulae. Brodak dope has more pigment in the colors so you get better coverage than with Sig dope. When using Sig dope I used to add raw pigment to improve coverage especially of white and yellow. I believe that Brodak adds additional plasticiser to their dope to make it more flexable. Randolph dope is high on pigment content also and coverage is very good. The only problem with Randolph is that quarts are the smallest quantity you can buy. Some modellers can't see spending say $25 for dope when they only need 4 oz for some trim on their next world beater.
Alan Resinger

wwwarbird · « **Reply #22 on:** November 12, 2010, 06:29:26 PM »

Thank you very much for clearing some of this up Alan and Ty. I didn't realize that all of it shrinks. I took non-taughtening to mean no shrink.

I'm going to ask here one more time then, (hopefully the last). Would it be safe to say that the Brodak clear is actually Randolph's non-taughtening? All I'm trying to find out is what the Brodak actually IS.

Thanks guys!

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #23 on:** November 12, 2010, 10:37:12 PM »

My understanding is that Randolph supplies the ingrediants for Brodak to mix and package their line of butyrate. That said I remember Windy U. telling me that when these products were being developed that there some difference in the final formulation as the end product was for model use as to full scale aircraft use. So I won't say that Randolph non tautening clear and Brodak are the same but they may be. You'd have to ask John Brodak if he wants to share his formulation with the general public.
Alan Resinger

wwwarbird · « **Reply #24 on:** November 12, 2010, 11:54:15 PM »

Thanks Alan.

Leester · « **Reply #25 on:** November 13, 2010, 09:53:29 AM »

I just received a reply from Windy U. and he states that Brodak clear is a COMBINATION of taughtening and non taughtening Butyrate. So Brodak clear IS different than Randolph clear.

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #26 on:** November 13, 2010, 01:52:53 PM »

If I may, Another good word for John Brodak. While speaking with my Randolph supplier, I mentioned Brodak dope and prices for some of the various items. I was told that the price seemed quite high. We continued talking, but when I finished saying that Brodak was available in pints and four ounce jars my source told me that if he did all that also, the prices were actually very good. Having to buy all the pint cans and 4 ounce jars, mixing the colors (not to mention inventing some that Randolph doesn't sell) and pay the labor to break it all down would at least double the price accross the board, all things being equal.

Another thought. Is it worth paying one third the cost of a quart of dope for four ounces you are only going to use once? Personally I have quarts of Randolph, along with gallons but also have probably, 12 pints of various colors, some of which are not available at Randolph. Also small amounts of Brodak this and Brodak that. So think about it. In almost, if not everything as the quantity gets smaller the price per ___ (insert your own unit of measure here)goes up, sometimes expotentally.

wwwarbird · « **Reply #27 on:** November 13, 2010, 04:44:08 PM »

Good points Robert, and I more or less agree. I'm only talking about clear in this case though.

While my intentions are likely obvious, I should also make it clear that I'm not trying to totally sidestep going through Brodak for this stuff. I want to support anyone who supports our hobby if I can. I am using their dope exclusively at this point, and I plan to continue. My main issue is that I can't get it through my normal supplier anymore, so I'm going to have to find another avenue for all of it. But, as far as just the clear goes, I'll admit that I would like to get it directly from Randolph if it will save me some $$$. This is because I use a lot of it, and I do need to save a little in this area if I can.

Bill Little · « **Reply #28 on:** November 14, 2010, 12:44:30 AM »

HI Wayne,

I order Randolph dope from Aircraft Spruce in GA. In quart sizes, the Haz Mat shipping charge is nothing like it is for a gallon. I haven't done a model with only Brodak's as the only dope, but I would venture a guess that Randolph and Brodak would be compatible.

Now, with retirement and an even stiffer budget, I use more and more Randolph due to the price.

Bill

Leester · « **Reply #29 on:** November 14, 2010, 09:58:29 AM »

A pint or a quart ?? holy dope batman you need to take out a loan for that much. I think the 4oz jar I bought was almost 15.00

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #30 on:** November 14, 2010, 12:03:17 PM »

Back again...
Let me take these posts in order. I am in total agreement with you. I buy my clear by the gallon and my thinner by the case. I tend to thin it about 3/1 thinner. It seems to flow out better than 1/1. I also have colors that need to be thinned. And I get Randolph. Also Randolph colors.

My source for Randolph is Aircraft Technical Support in Orient, Ohio. Their phone number is 1-877-877-3334. Web site, which may be generic is www.poly-fiber.com. They are also listed on the Randolph web site as a distributor. I've been advised that they have no haz-mat charge for shipping. That may have changed since my last shipment was 2 years ago. I picked up my current supply while in Columbus this spring. You can speak with either of them. They are extremely nice people and knowledgable to the point that they travel the country putting on seminars on aircraft refinishing. They were able to give me an answer for any question I could think of, even the wierd ones. I can't say about shipping costs because I don't know where you live (not that I have a clue as to the hows or whys of shipping charges. I only drove a big truck for 15 years and was never able to understand it. I'm now retired and hate to pay them). So, wwwwarbird I hope this helps you to find some cheap dope.

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #31 on:** November 14, 2010, 12:14:37 PM »

Wayne,

You might want to try my source listed above also. I don't know where you live either but the good folks at ATS will do their best for you. Brodak gets their supplies from Randolph. John's a distributor too.

Ty,

I do have a pint of B-25 silver. I hadn't planned on selling it because I have a couple of planes I was going to paint silver, one of which is a very old, but still classic B-25 with 15s for engines. I was not aware Brodak quit making it which is a shame because it is more silver than plain silver dope. Randolph sells aluminum powder and you may be able to mix it??? Or if you have a higher need than I, you might be able to talk me out of it.

Leester, I don't remember what I paid for mine.

Leester · « **Reply #32 on:** November 14, 2010, 01:10:17 PM »

Hey Ty, Brodaks web site says the B-25 silver is in stock

?

wwwarbird · « **Reply #33 on:** November 14, 2010, 09:20:55 PM »

Robert, thanks for the info. What B-25 are you going to build?

Bill Little · « **Reply #34 on:** November 16, 2010, 09:12:15 PM »

Hi Ty,

I am considering getting the aluminum powder from Randolph (as Robert mentioned) and making my own silver. I have one plane (A P-51D) planned to build that I need a bright silver for.

I have never seen reference to Brodak colors ever being sold in quarts. Biggest I could find on the web site was pints.

Bill

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #35 on:** November 17, 2010, 07:42:10 AM »

If you're looking for Brodak B-25 Silver you can check out Great Hobbies up here in Canada. Last time I looked they showed having pints in stock.
Alan Resinger

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #36 on:** November 19, 2010, 06:54:55 PM »

WWWarbird,

The plans say Timely plans, Number 195. There is FM semi scale stunt written on them. Looks like it will take anywhere from .15 to .25. I can tell you nothing further for sure. I think it is from an old Flying Models.

Bob

wwwarbird · « **Reply #37 on:** November 19, 2010, 08:01:44 PM »

Robert,

I've got those exact plans and copy of the magazine article and it is the best published C/L B-25 design I've found yet, about the only one for stunt. It's a Paul Delgatto design. One good thing about it is that it's got a great airfoil considering the era that it's from. It's also got a pretty good scale outline overall, but it doesn't have the gull wing as designed. It's right in the ballpark for the size that I want to build too, something for two .25's.

I've been gathering various C/L B-25 plans for this future project off and on for about five years. With my searching I've got a fair amount of other B-25 stuff now too, almost all scale though.

I've wanted to build a nice, scale looking, full-fuse C/L B-25 since I was a kid. That thought is one of the many reasons I got back into C/L about ten years ago now. I'd like to build one in the next year or so, but it looks like I'll just design it myself combining a lot of the info I've gathered. It will definitely have the gull wing too, ain't right without it.

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #38 on:** November 20, 2010, 09:38:56 AM »

Wayne,

Thanks a lot. Now I know much more about the design. When I recieved the plans I kept looking at them and the more I looked, the more I liked both the design and the thought of building it until I decided that I HAD to build it.

However, I'm still trying to finish two Twisters I got at Perry last year and have made an attempted (firm?) decision to finish all the planes I have started and all the planes I've bought that were not finished or need to be repaired and all the planes I've crashed that are somewhat repairable or at least worthy of rebuilding before I start on another new airplane.

Any chance I could get a copy of that article from you? I'd love to at least see how it went together and know if there is something special I need to do while building it.

Granted, there is no gull wing on it but I do like the plane as it sits, so I don't think I'll modify it to have a gull wing. I have plans for the Jack Sheeks Stuka and Corsair with reverse gull wings which I'll build that way, if I live long enough. Good luck with your design.

Bob

Bill Little · « **Reply #39 on:** November 20, 2010, 09:48:36 AM »

Hi Bob, and Wayne!

I have recently cut all the parts out for a Del Gatto B-25. I got the plans and article from friends here on the forum. The construction is fairly typical of 1950's style. I understand that Leroy Black flew one at VSC in the past. The original used 2 K&B 19 (according to pics in the article), which I have, but I decided to not use those, but OS 15FPs instead. Mufflers are required at many sites.

The B-25 has been a favorite of mine since childhood, and a twin engine stunter has always been a "dream" of mine, so.......

The construction is dependent on building the wing first then building the fuselage around it. The fuselage is planked, but you could mold some balsa I guess. I'll just plank it.

Never have figured out the weighted aileron on the outboard tip! LOL!!

Big Bear

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #40 on:** November 20, 2010, 11:49:06 AM »

Bill,

Thanks for the info. I don't have any .15s (I think) but I do have at least one FP .25. Wait a minute, I do have a Fox .15. But.. a friend of mine was talking about a pair of Fox .25s, but also that they may be too much. Any ideas?

I've been intrigued with B-25s also since I was a little kid building plastic models. I never could get the vertical stabilizers to stay on that model! That also made me a bit afraid of them for some number of years.

Bob

wwwarbird · « **Reply #41 on:** November 20, 2010, 09:58:33 PM »

Quote from: Robert Schroeder on November 20, 2010, 09:38:56 AM

Wayne,

Thanks a lot. Now I know much more about the design. When I recieved the plans I kept looking at them and the more I looked, the more I liked both the design and the thought of building it until I decided that I HAD to build it.

However, I'm still trying to finish two Twisters I got at Perry last year and have made an attempted (firm?) decision to finish all the planes I have started and all the planes I've bought that were not finished or need to be repaired and all the planes I've crashed that are somewhat repairable or at least worthy of rebuilding before I start on another new airplane.

Any chance I could get a copy of that article from you? I'd love to at least see how it went together and know if there is something special I need to do while building it.

Granted, there is no gull wing on it but I do like the plane as it sits, so I don't think I'll modify it to have a gull wing. I have plans for the Jack Sheeks Stuka and Corsair with reverse gull wings which I'll build that way, if I live long enough. Good luck with your design.

Bob

Bob,

The article only has a few pics of the finished model, no construction photos. If you decide to build one I would run at least .20's on it. I think FP.25's would be ideal and I've got two N.I.B. ready and waiting for whatever I end up doing. Give me your address and I'll mail out copies of what I have.

Bill,

Hand or laser cut on your stuff? I've also checked around a little to see if anyone could or would laser cut this design. Even a short kit would be great and save a lot of time. A full kit would make me instantly clear and prepare my workbench. If anyone would decide to do either, I'd be first in line.

Bill Little · « **Reply #42 on:** November 21, 2010, 01:36:11 AM »

Hi Wayne,

I hand cut it while watching TV with the Missus.

Made copies of the plan, cut them up and went to it. I have a cutting mat I use on a 17" clip board.

I am planning on using FP .15s. If this one works out like I hope it does, I will be using it in Classic/Nos. 30. It will be unique, and I can't win that event so I might as well be unique! LOL!!

I had first thought of using 1957 Fox .25s, but I would have to make two custom tanks of some kind to get enough fuel in it for the pattern. FP .20s would make for a wild machine! The whole model comes out to be pretty near the size of a "Classic era" Fox .35 size stunter, and two FP .15s are stronger than a Fox .35.

Bill

wwwarbird · « **Reply #43 on:** November 21, 2010, 09:54:07 AM »

My philosophy is that too much power is usually just about right.

Size is comparable, although on the larger side, to the models you're comparing it to but you're going to have more weight and drag. Just keep in mind that you can always prop or needle it down, but if you don't have enough "juice" to begin with...?

Make sure and keep us posted on this one Bill.

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #44 on:** November 21, 2010, 11:17:46 AM »

Wayne,

Thanks for the offer of the article. I'll take you up on it. However, I'm going to have to wait until I know when we're leaving for Florida. The date has changed twice so far and I and my mother-in-law have to see the doctor before we go. I don't know what the mailbox looks like in Florida and I know that if I send you this address the article will get here the day after we leave (Murphy controls our lives). Never mind, I'll send you a PM.

Bill,

I've never seen quarts from Brodak's either, not even in his hobby shop. At least it didn't register if I did as I was looking for a specific item and...my wife calls me a tunnel (totally concentrating on one thing to the exclusion of anything else, as compared to a random who is into 10 things at once and doesn't finish most of them).

Bob

wwwarbird · « **Reply #45 on:** November 21, 2010, 06:56:27 PM »

Just let me know Robert, I'll send it whenever you're ready.

Bill Little · « **Reply #46 on:** November 21, 2010, 08:16:01 PM »

Quote from: wwwarbird on November 21, 2010, 09:54:07 AM

My philosophy is that too much power is usually just about right. Size is comparable, although on the larger side, to the models you're comparing it to but you're going to have more weight and drag. Just keep in mind that you can always prop or needle it down, but if you don't have enough "juice" to begin with...?

Make sure and keep us posted on this one Bill.

Hi Wayne,

I agree on the power aspect. The model is 54" WS, and the fuselage isn't all that big, so I figure (2) OS .15 FP will do it. Paul had four on his B-17 and no problems, and this ain't gonna be near that one. The ".25" referred to in the article were probably the old (really old, '54-'57) Fox .25 which were made in the .19 cases. The .15FP is every bit as much as the K&B .19s Del Gatto used, in fact more usable power. I feel the .20FPs would become a problem..... the main reason for not using the Fox .25s (1957) I have is that I cannot get a 3 1/2 oz. tank in the provided space. But I will be rechecking long before I hit the nacelles, so who knows? I have a few .20FP set up and I have a few 1954-57 Fox .25s , which run just like a Fox .35 stunt and with about as much power. The model I am guessing will be in the mid 40 oz range. Should definitely be under 50 oz.

I have three planes to get off the bench before the wing gets started, so it will be a while.

Bill

wwwarbird · « **Reply #47 on:** November 22, 2010, 11:20:41 AM »

Cool, can't wait to see it Bill. Good luck, but I'll bet'cha five bucks on the 50oz target though!

Bill Little · « **Reply #48 on:** November 22, 2010, 11:35:41 PM »

It's going to be interesting!

Big Bear

Robert Schroeder · « **Reply #49 on:** November 24, 2010, 08:47:35 AM »

Yes, quite interesting. What got to me yesterday was that I was looking at plans for an Albatros when wife came home. The first words out of her mouth were, "You're not starting another plane, are you?"

I said, "No, just looking."

Author Topic: Who's selling Brodak dope? (Read 7093 times)

larry borden

larry borden

larry borden