For years we have used a conversion varnish (2 part/ catalyzed mixture) as our standard for commercial work- restaurants / hotels. Recently we have had a small number of finish failures- moisture rings or cloudy areas after being exposed to moisture (serving dishes). So, we ran some comparative tests between a couple different conversion varnishes and our supposedly less robust pre-cat lacquer. The test results revealed that the pre-cat lacquer showed zero water rings after 18hrs of exposure to a wet glass placed on the table top. Both conversion varnish samples showed bad, permanent ringing after the 18hours.. Based on this I see no reason to go to the trouble and expense of using a conversion varnish but maybe there are other considerations. For what it is worth, we had the conversion varnish suppliers assist in applying their material to assure that we did it "correctly". Tests were performed after 10days of cure. Let me know what you guys think but I'm ready to abandon the CV...

View higher quality, full size image (567 X 496)

Well that is quite surprising, exactly not what i would have expected.

What brand are you testing? What is you procedure for adding the catalyst, wondering about your accuracy. I can show you failures of precat if you are interested. Around the kitchen sink, dishwasher, and stove hood. That one job I did that cost me money, my own kitchen. Never had a single call back on conversion varnish.

We have tested both CCI Finishworks Premium CV and Chemcraft Chemlife 24 CV. We had the suppliers confirm the catalyst was added and mixed appropriately. I believe they are both done at 10%. The schedule is as follows on ambrosia maple: Spray stain, self seal with CV, Glaze, CV, CV. with scuff sands at each application of CV.

Educated guess is the glaze between the initial seal coat and the second seal coat....Before you abandon the CV, at least make up a few more samples "without" / )Not applying), any glaze coat and run the test again....please get back with results, such as no improvements, better, or problem solved..!!
If the same results are still like your pics, then I would highly recommend 2K Urethane and instead of "glaze" color toning your woods.!

Solvent or water based glaze?

Does anyone use water base glaze in between or over coats of CV..?? Just wondering.??

The damage to the conversion varnish is not surprising to me. If you follow the directions the film thickness is very thin. It's not some magical finish. Like the others I'm surprised that the picture is not the precat. It should be trashed as well.

If you want a bombproof finish go with a solvent stain like MLC Woodsong and a 2K urethane. You could probably get your 5 coat process down to a 3 coats with a much more durable final product.

As Chemmy noted do some test samples over bare wood with both precat & CV.

How are you having them add the catalyst for you and getting back in time to spray . Most CV has a 24 hour pot life max and a lot of 2k has just a few hours .

Updates/ Answers to previous questions and thank you for your thougths on this, by the way.
We are using a solvent based stain / glaze.
The finish supplier came to our shop to assist with the catalyzation as well as application. They too are surprised with the results, especially that the precat performed better. That said, they basically are suggesting a urethane as well but not yet able to explain the failure of the CV. I'd chock this up to just a bad choice of brand/ supplier but it happened with two totally different brands of CV. We are testing some additional schedules to isolate the stain glaze as this problem does not appear to occur if the CV is used alone (no stain, no glaze). To be continued...

Hey AJB, what one must know about coatings is that companies that manufacture the initial coatings and offer them to the chemist that then further refine them..(if necessary)., are what we call starter formulations.
When the end user of the finalized product's try them out, they gain feedback as to what the client likes or does not like about there performance.! From that point additives are added or deleted or percentages changed, until they meet the performance properties the end user needs or demands. Almost all testing of coating follows well established guidelines as to how the test are run or performed, many of those test have little or nothing to do with wood applications per se'' unless they are asked to do so on the clients substrates being used.! Though I no longer keep up with any advances in coatings, this is how they were handled by those coating companies I worked for in the seventies and eighties especially.
The polymer chemist give out info and contents on a new resin/ polymer/ and a the base formula in using them, and leave it up to the coatings chemist employed at the various coatings companies, across the nation to add, subtract, anything that is necessary for a final product introduction to the end seller, be it Mohawk, Cci, Chemcraft, etc., They also, unless asked, don't test an entire system or all the steps being used by the companies spraying there coatings products, or at least that was the case decades ago.! Now it seems to be the case that the more successful coatings companies, realize that having just coatings instead of a full blown finishing system is a must, much like the best older companies such as H Behlen Brothers had and later Sherwin Williams, and others do or did.! All things in the finishing system must be without question, totally compatible, mixing one manufacturer's products with someone else's products can lead to many problems, that can be avoided, such as yours.! JSYK...
Glad to see progress in this situation, and I ask if the stain/ glaze your using is from the companies supplying you with the CV's.??
Just curious.??