Previous comment is correct.....most manufacturers will not give out the entire formula of a product. Us included. However, happy to post the msds and the product itself contains no harmful ingredients, no chemicals, no solvents and does, in fact, use real Mink Oil - we source it from farms in Finland.
FDS-1124-RENOVATEUR HUILE DE VISON MEDAILLE D'OR-GR-V01-20050603.pdf 39k .pdf file
In our warehouse here, we distribute 7 different 'balms' (for those that don't know, in addition to all of our shoe and boot work, we are the agents and stock house for Tarrago, Saphir, MDO and La Cordonnerie Anglaise for the US....all the sellers come thru us) and the MDO Renovateur is regarded as the highest quality # we have, although it should be pointed out that is also the most greasy. Many repair shops actually consider (and buy....both for the backroom and the shelf) the regular Saphir Crème Universelle the commercially viable product mainly due to the fact that you don't have to be as concerned about applying too much (can become gummy on the upper if not used sparingly) and it dries much more quickly. This product is basically the same formula, but without mink oil and includes Jajoba Oil. That being said, the MDO Renovateur is the same product that some French museums use to condition antique leather items, bookbindings, etc......I'm pretty sure there is no connection between Renovateur and 'leather cracking' on shoes.
Regarding the everyday use of cleaner/conditioners, you can go back to my post way back in 2005 where I recommend this usage, and nothing since then has changed my opinion - and we've seen an awful lot of shoes and clients come thru my 20+ years doing this. The first person that shows me that a non-toxic, natural, gentle balm caused a finish to crack...will actually be the first person to show me this.
Finally, it should be noted that I went out of my way to suggest Lexol, as well as Renovateur, back then. Not a thing wrong with Lexol. The only thing I would point out is that, I assume since it is a synthetic, it has a tendency to not penetrate well on some finishes. Lexol is a wonderful product for both the equestrian and car interior industries - which is why they concentrate their efforts there.....working with leathers that have very light top coats/finishes. As a matter of fact, I don't even bring in the equestrian products under the Avel name here for this reason - I don't see a whole in the market to compete.NOTE: a point that seems to constantly be missed on what I've read of this thread, is that most here think they are treating the LEATHER with products.....this is not correct - you are treating the FINISH on the leather with products in most cases.
in that one week he has posted tauting Saphir products all over SF no less than 15 times.
either he works for them, for hangar project, or is in fact simply trolling.
I'm glad he seems to be an enthusiastic customer, but nobody works for Saphir here in the US except for my wife and I - and we don't have any need to ask people to float around message boards talking about our products. Our retailers....I would have no idea.
Of course renomat contains voc it is intended as a wax stripper. To fault it for that is like saying you should not use wine to get intoxicated because it contains alcohol . I am not sure how Patrick Booths issues with Renovateur evolved into this Renomat witch hunt
Something tells me someone has been pushing RenoMat a little hard - it is a stripper! Like, a use sparingly, only when needed, stripper.
Now, as strippers go it's hardly the strongest out there (no repair shop would use it - it's too lightweight.....they use much more caustic stuff then RenoMat) but it is ideal for the DIY consumer market. Still, it should be used only as needed, and correctly. If you have a shoe with a spray booth finish (the vast majority are finished this way - even those who promote with clips and images of people working away earnestly with brushes and rags in their promo shoots) and you are hitting it for the first time, RenoMat will probably take that spray finish right off.
Originally Posted by VegTan Here (Consulter la fiche de sécurité)
is a MSDS of Renomat, which contains 10–25% isohexane, 25–50% chlorobenzene, 2.5–10% butyl acetate, and 2.5–10% surfactant.
I don't know whether VOC decreases a water(moisture) content of leather, even if VOC decreases, the decrease would be only a temporary phenomenon and be spontaneously restored from surrounding air, because a water content of leather is determined by relative humidity. Weinheimer leder
proposes a relative humidity of 60–70% for storage, but it is so high that used leathers will mold. I feel leathers need a relative humidity of 50–60%.FIG.8 from here.
By the way, if you need to moisturize, here
is a new product, Mizuno Pro Leather Care Slime, which contains hyaluronan, non-ionic surfactant, and copolymer. While Lexol cleaner contains glycerin as a moisturizing agent, I feel hyaluronan is expensive and excessive.
Hi VegTan - are you in the business? Do we know eachother? Anyway, that's not how you read a GHS MSDS, but the point is well taken. This is not stuff to mess around with haphazardly. The chart you show concerns soling bends, and is available to factories so they can determine how to store it long term. The Leather Slime we hear is very good (the seller you got the info from is our seller in Japan)....for baseball gloves, to which it is marketed. We also heard they had trouble with the FDA here so it's not available from Mizuno USA, but I know nothing for sure...only small talk. It's a useful point to make in regards to using the right products for the right purpose though.
I am sure this anti - Saphir agenda is confusing at best and patently false at worst. Imo It defeats the purpose of this thread that is the passing of helpful info from one to another I think we would all benefit by ceasing to confuse our opinions with facts and accept them for what they are, just opinions
I actually don't read it as an anti-Saphir commentary.....I think PB has a legitimate concern and identified what he thinks is the culprit. Seems reasonable to me, even if I have a feeling the cause was something else.
Some people like a mirror shine on their shoes. Apparently maintaining this involves applying many layers of wax. Keeping the shine apparently requires frequent repetition.
Actually, it's not so much many layers of wax as much as it is a combination of wax/water/heat. And it does require far more maintenance. For all the years I did refinishing work, I stayed away from the glow in the dark finishing requests - just aren't good for the long term. I usually suggested they contact someone else. Just an opinion.
Somewhere in this thread are some comments concerning the use of Dubbin on uppers....can't find it right now. However, I am not sure where this comes from - never heard of anyone using Dubbin on a dress calfskin upper. Not sure if it would do any harm, but also not sure what good it would do. Dubbin is for waxy calf, hot stuffed leathers, pull-ups, chromexcels, etc. Not finished calf, IMO. I have had people ask me about using it on soles, and I would be scared to death to suggest that, honestly. I know there are shops that do, but I always picture someone using too much of it and sliding down the subway steps and breaking their ass in NYC on a wet day.
That sounds fine. For calf leathers such as G&G RTW, EG, etc, they are dyed and antiqued with weak finish so doesn't make much sense to use renovator in the beginning to change the factory finish unless its the intent.
I would rather trust bespoke shoemakers instead of saphir distributors...
sidenote - it's always been interesting to me to hear how little bespoke makers actually value the finishing aspect of their work. They concentrate far more on the actual pattern work and construction work/effort to define their results (does DWIII still rail against pvc holdfasts on here
) while factories, who use more or less the same machines and processes, value the finishing room as the most expensive aspect of the production. As a stereotype.
Originally Posted by nutcracker
They know you should only use their overpriced, rebadged Saphir polishes!!
We actually no longer make their branded products.
Originally Posted by chogall
Certain individual has been trolling in some venders favor. Nothing against HP, but they are never the shoe experts. Saphir was popular on this forum way longer than HP has been around.
And yes, HP's shoe care regiment is bad for most customers. Renomat is as bad as acetone or dye removers to all shoes. And renovator is a good product but its like those 2-in-1 shampoo + conditioners; a lazy man's solution. Caveat emptor.
Ehhh....don't be so hard on Kirby.....he is doing a good job taking care of customers, trying to give the best advise he can, offering different solutions. He has asked numerous times to come to my warehouse to learn more by working with his hands, and to this point I haven't found the time to host him, so I am more at fault than he is. He is working hard to build a nice site, and I think he is doing a good job. Besides, I know plenty of other people in the business who pretend to know twice as much as they actually do - and half again what they should - but are not so reserved with their comments and misguided opinions and advise to consumers.