Aluminum Chloride verse ALUM tans.

Submitted by John C on 11/9/04 at 11:53 PM. ( an old cape for demo. )

I have never taken care of this cape, finally after many many years the nose fell off.

The cape was spoiled when I started, I even sanded the flesh side.

It has been in a metal Q hut for the last 5 summers, before that it spent three years in a metal garden shed in KS. Before that is layed in water in my X brother in laws basement.

Before that I kicked it around the shop, took it to shows to demo my tanning.

Remember when Lutan was discovered?
WW-II by the NAZI's, since they had been cut off from supplies.
It is a by-product.

Now look at your under arm deoderant, it contains LUTAN-F.
Aluminum Chloride, if its so great why has iit not killed the skin under your arms?

So the difference is sulphate and cloride. both Aluminum based.

So its a fair bet the aluminum is doing the work.

THe difference is the MINIR Acidic level of the sulfated hide.

So we know LUTAN-F, FN attaches at a pH on 5.0 to 5.5.

This still leaves the skin in an acidic state for acid rot.

I am betting with today advanced hide adhesives that an Aluminum Sulphated hide will last as long at any other tan.

Maybe the only difference in the mounts at the Museum is the HIDE ADHESIVE.

So if something is working, is affordable and is readily available, easy to use.


Return to Tanning Category Menu

I Agree but,

This response submitted by oldshaver on 11/10/04 at 8:04 PM. ( )

I think that a Taxidermist with any volume at all is wasteing their time tanning their own skins. I know, I am wearing this point out, but I just dont think its good business sense. What does the hair on that redfox look like when you tan it yourself, in comparison to a reputable fur dresser tanning it. Dont even try and tell me that it looks as good, I wont believe you. Have a good one

Just your opinion

This response submitted by David Patton on 11/10/04 at 8:22 PM. ( )

Good business sense? How about the taxidermists that run a tannery out of the back of their taxidermy? Take Jim Williams for instance. He owns East Carolina Taxidermy and he has a tannery in the back room that is run by one guy. He does a good volume of business and never misses a lick! He saves himself many thousands of dollars in tanning alone every year by doing it himself. Not good sense? When was the last time you had a couple extra grand in your hand just because you took on a project on your own?

It is good business sense when you have the right people doing the work and Jim does.

Now have a good one.

Two businesses

This response submitted by oldshaver( Aubrey Young) on 11/10/04 at 9:18 PM. ( )

He has got two businesses going. There is a big difference between that, and a man devoting all his time to Taxidermy. He or She might not want to take on the time or the problems of doing other peoples work. There is the matter of liability here.

We do most of our own tanning

This response submitted by KB on 11/10/04 at 9:19 PM. ( )

because it's so expensive. My husband is the taxidermist, and I do the tanning. Last year we were too busy with sick relatives (who have since died), and we sent our tanning out. It cost us over $15,000. This year I am happy to be doing my own again, knowing how much it's saving us.

The debate is over Taxidermists doing their own tanning

This response submitted by DP on 11/10/04 at 10:49 PM. ( )

He does devote his time to taxidermy. If you notice, the taxidermist mentioned has a business called East Carolina Taxidermy, not East Carolina Taxidermy and Furdressing. Jim may do some "tanning only" for his customers but that is strictly as a taxidermist. If he is tanning for other taxidermists, he is keeping quiet about it.

My point is that he tans his own work and does not send it out to a commercial tannery. The bulk of his tanning is for his mounts to avoid the high priced tanneries in the region. And that is not a slam against you and yours.

As KB mentioned, some taxidermists have it set up to tan in house and that is great if they can pull it off and save money. $15,000 is a lot KB!

Running two businesses would be extra work anyway when all a taxidermist would be trying to do is save money by using alternative means like John C started out talking about.

I thought-

This response submitted by oldshaver on 11/11/04 at 6:14 PM. ( )

DP, I thought you were doing some fur dressing yourself, for Taxidermists. What would be your purpose in argueing this point?

Here is my purpose in this debate

This response submitted by David Patton on 11/12/04 at 10:37 AM. ( )

I am responding to the fact that you have came into the tanning forum on and tried to tell these guys and gals that doing their own tanning does not make good business sense. This forum is mainly comprised of taxidermists who want to tan for themselves. Sometimes someone will show up here asking for a commercial furdresser, but their posts are largely not even responded to anymore due to the archive search button.

I would think that telling these taxidermists that it is not "good business" to tan in-house would be the wrong thing to say in this context. Have you ever seen any of my posts on this site saying: "Hey, send me your hides to tan for a price because it will save you time and money?" No you haven't. And you never will.

This is not the place to try for advertising. This is the place to help out the guy or gal who wants to "DIY". That is why I was LMAO when I saw you had posted:

"I think that a Taxidermist with any volume at all is wasteing their time tanning their own skins. I know, I am wearing this point out, but I just dont think its good business sense. What does the hair on that redfox look like when you tan it yourself, in comparison to a reputable fur dresser tanning it. Dont even try and tell me that it looks as good, I wont believe you. Have a good one"

Trying to convince taxidermists to use commercial furdressing is pointless here. Most people have already made up their minds if they are going to do that or not before they ever get to this site.


I see you left the red fox thing alone

This response submitted by oldshaver on 11/13/04 at 10:02 AM. ( )

MY whole point was that a Taxidermist would get back a skin that was easier to mount, AND LOOKS A WHOLE LOT BETTER ON THAT FORM. Hence more repeat business due to a better looking mount. Do you even read these forums and the questions that people ask? Some of the new Taxidermists on here have been made to believe that tanning there own skins is a neccessary part of being a Taxidermist. Its not, and never will be. We both know that MOST of the most successful Taxidermist in the nation send their stuf out. They hire additional taxidermists, not build a tannery in their shop! As for advertising, this whole forum is one big advertisment for some type of home tanning product or another. If I can get one person to send their skins out(anywhere besides in house) I have accomplished my goal. Your purpose in this debate is the same one it always is. Lurking around, waiting for me to post, so you can come back with your usual superior intelect attitude. I guess the Capeche is more bait huh. Its spelled with an I not an E. No I am not LMAO-I guess that comes with that superior intelect attitude.

Way off base now

This response submitted by David Patton on 11/15/04 at 1:50 PM. ( )

You brought up the red fox. John never said anything about a fox, he was talking about a cape, no species mentioned. Do you even read what people post? Why bother trying to keep this going? You just saw something posted about an alum tan and you had to pop back in and take the conversation away into another direction. That is fine, but my point still stands. The biggest majority of people in this forum would like to try tanning on their own and try and save some money.

Now, what exactly would you like to talk about next? Your insecurity complex about our intellects? Mine vs. yours. How would you like to measure the thing? Book sense, common sense? How about leaving the "I'm smarter thing" at the door. There are plenty of high and mighty types in this forum without you and I trying to jump on the wagon.

Get over it man. I don't have anything against you. If I was "lurking" around here, I guess I would use an anonymous name like many others do. I always give my name as David Patton, or DP for short. I have done so every since Geaorge or Bill pointed out what a silly thing it is to use a made up name instead of your given name.

And I retired my spellchecker a long time ago. I could care less if you have a spelling problem. I have no problem reading your posts, even with all the character flaws.


A Real example of Flaunting Superior Intellect

This response submitted by David Patton on 11/15/04 at 5:39 PM. ( )

Your comment had no basis. Here is a good example of my point about high and mighty types:

"Yep it's old but some haven't heard it
This response submitted by Cecil on 11/15/04 at 10:54 AM. ( )
Bill feels inferior to me because of my high I.Q. and is just waiting to pounce on me if he thinks I've made a mistake! LOL

Bill it's a moot point! Did I get it right this time?"

Now oldshaver, is this where you want to be in this debate? How about just leaving the debate within the context of the debate. The personal comments can be left to others.

And if you want to see things getting Ugly

This response submitted by DP on 11/16/04 at 1:03 PM. ( )

Then check out the "Am I wrong?" post on the Taxidermy Industry button. As long as I have been posting here, and that is since around 98-99, I don't think our conversations have ever really gotten bad like that.

Peace Bro

Return to Tanning Category Menu