It sucks, even worse than the original, if possible.

"better to leave the walls bare than put Behr on the walls"

I have never used the Behr paint and primer in one. I usually use Behr flat enamel on my walls. It seems fine to me. I use it for walls because it isn't too expensive. I think it is much more important to use better paint for cabinets and trim. Am I wrong? Would my walls look better if I used a higher quality paint than Behr? If so, which paint do you like for walls, Christopern? Does it look noticeably different than Behr paint?

I have never used the Behr paint and primer in one. I usually use Behr flat enamel on my walls. It seems fine to me. I use it for walls because it isn't too expensive. I think it is much more important to use better paint for cabinets and trim. Am I wrong? Would my walls look better if I used a higher quality paint than Behr? If so, which paint do you like for walls, Christopern? Does it look noticeably different than Behr paint?

I do not understand your reasoning about better paint for cabinets than walls. It is your home, are not the wall important also, you see more of them than anything.Your Behr paint is cheaper for a good reason,it is cheap.Your walls and everything else would certainly look better with a high quality paint.Any QUALITY paint from a paint store would be better than Behr, they all carry different levels.Is it noticeable? Maybe not but does it clean and last and is it easier to apply,absolutely

You are better off using the same money you would pay for a higher quality Behr Paint towards a Primer + a more reputable brand of paint.

I have heard this paint is uneven and painters have to cover it with a primer and repaint. FYI

I'm not sure why this thread has come to the surface again, but since it has . . .

I've used Behr Premium Plus Ultra in a couple closets of my house and the exterior version to paint a fence. It goes on fine, covers great, and seems to be holding up well. (I'm a DIYer, not a pro painter.)

Summary of interior and exterior with different gloss levels, in the most recent tests of a leading, independent consumer products testing organization, Behr was reported to be excellent paint at an average price.

A leading, independent consumer products testing organization?

What is that?

It's probably the same thing as saying '9 out of 10 dentists recommend....'

Marketing hogwash.

Stefano said, "I have heard this paint is uneven and painters have to cover it with a primer and repaint."

I have actually USED it, and had no problems.

I'm not sure why the paint has such a bad rep, although mindlessly repeating what you have heard despite never having tried the paint may have something to do with it.

The "flat enamel" variety is "stickier" than some brands, which may annoy people who are in the habit of rolling it too thin and then re-working semi-dried areas. You can't do that with the Behr.

If you roll on nice thick coats (appx 3 sq feet/rollerful of paint) it's marvelous stuff.

Not hogwash. In general, Consumer Reports designs good tests for products though sometimes they bite off more than they can chew, in my opinion. They take no advertising money. They are not perfect, but they don't sell or market anything except information so why would they distort their results?

In the case of paint, they apply them, side-by side, and do accelerated and real-life aging tests. They made other measures of characteristics that are important to paint performance. IIRC, they looked at buffing, stain resistance, adhesion to itself after drying (like between doors and frames) and maybe more. Designing a set of objective tests for paint is not rocket science compared to some other products.

Sorry, but I have to accept their conclusions, often based on quantitative data, over a couple of SOTP opinions from people that try a couple of brands of paint a few years apart.

Many of the opinions expressed on this forum are not from people that try a couple of brands of paint a few years apart.

However, that might be a fabulous description for the Consumer Reports model because they don't actually *use* the products in the field. The purpose of their testing any product is ultimately to create content for their subscription based business.

I assign far more value to the opinions from paint and color professionals who work day in and day out in the real worlds of paint and color than purportedly quantitative data gleaned from "designed" tests. Testing that is arguably designed more for the purpose of generating content for a magazine than actually proving-out the quality and value of a product.

Consumer Reports is a subscription based magazine. Currently $26 for 13 issues. (That's a savings of 60% off the newsstand price.) By recommending - year over year - the economy lines of paint, maybe the sheeple consumers will be sure to have enough leftover to buy a subscription.

There's absolutely nothing in it for the folks on this forum to gain or lose by commenting on their experiences with different brands and products.

I assign far more value to the opinions from paint and color professionals who work day in and day out in the real worlds of paint and color

. . . assuming that said professionals have used the product they are commenting on, which we know is not the case here.

I would agree that is an assumption.

I have personally given Behr several chances - painted with it as well as had my DIY clients choose to use it. The old premium and the new 'paint and primer'. Those are my only two options with Behr - to either use it myself or feedback from my DIY clients. Because none of the pro painters I have ever worked with would consider Behr as an option.

funcolors, painting professionals may be good judges of if a paint that they have in hand covers well and looks good immediately after painting, but they won�t know what looks good after 10 years because they rarely go back to look. I doubt that most paint pros that do only typical residential work could even comment even on short-term durability. Painters in institutional settings have an advantage. IIRC, CR used to test paint in the field by painting stuff and putting it out in a field.

Unfortunately that kind of paint testing is probably not that useful anymore. The current marketplace that requires new and improved products all the time so by the time real-life testing is complete, the paint would no longer be available. Stuff gets reformulated constantly. That is why accelerated testing is more useful. Note that most of these are directed to interior paints. Fading resistance can be determined by exposure to UV light. (Painting a sunny room with plain windows?) Mildew resistance can be tested by putting painted surfaces in a humid chamber with some spores. (Painting a bathroom?) Abrasion resistance can be reproducibly tested with a machine. (How about a kids� room here?) How well paints clean off can be assessed by applying standardized versions of common household soil materials and cleaning with another test machine. (Maybe a kitchen?) How well does it cover? (How many professional painters paint over a standard test pattern with 30 different paints?) You should nudge yourself out of your parochial world once in a while and consider what other kinds of information are available.

Consider how my general MO that would be tailored to paint choice. I consult CR and evaluate their test procedure. I see 6 flat exterior paints. Appearance after 3, 6 and 9 years are equal. One is not very mildew resistant and I have a mildew problem so I am down to 5. One has been reformulated since the test so it will be buying a pig in a poke. That leaves 4. Another costs $20, but the nearest store is 15 miles away. A couple cost $23 and $25 at nearby stores. One I can walk to. The last is priced at $40 and it is at the top of the ratings. It is low VOC, but I don�t care because it is outside and well-ventilated by definition. That is kind of pricy to me and not worth the insignificant increased performance. Oh, which to buy? I guess I will go for the one preferred by a painting professional, who has used one or two brands of paint over the last 10 years.

My parochial world? Fortunate you were able to put your Consumer Reports magazine down long enough to type a response.

You clearly know more about the professional worlds of paint and color than me and there's really nothing else to say.

Residential painters are actually the perfect judge of brands. As you said, formulas are changing all the time and this forces us to switch around a lot. Also, my business is totally like a cycle. I paint the house when it is new, then repaint it when the people are ready for custom colors then repaint it again when they change their decorating tastes or begin to have children then repaint again when the children have trashed the place. The idea behind using a good product on the front end is so that the customers don't complain....if you use something marketed as washable, but is not, you hear about it. Plus, we ask for feedback.

As for CR, I don't have faith in their rankings for anything. Call me a skeptic.

funcolors, there is always more to say. That is why fora like this keep going.

My perception is that a painter typically goes to the same store to buy all of their paint because of convenience, and because they get a discount. With those constraints, how could they possibly know what paints work best?

Another thought, outside of institutional settings I have rarely seen good painting done by so-called professionals. In fact, I don�t think I have seen any good work done on residential buildings for at least 30 years. I frequently hear complaints about painters� lousy work that is buttressed by my own observations. Slapdash, hasty work is the rule. I know that might be hurtful for painters that take pride in their work to read. Please don�t be angry, my comments are not aimed at you. I am sure that there are some good ones doing residential work, but I think you are rare. The guys that I see on payrolls of large institutions, working on the same buildings all the time, do some nice work.

What is a "color professional" anyway? I am curious. If I had not seen the term in a paint forum, my first thought would be that they are experts advising women about makeup choices.

A large number of people seem to hold grudges against CR because they appear to have slighted a product that the grudge-holder liked. CR did not rate Plymouth Horizons/Dodge Omnis well. A guy I know had one and thought it was a great car. He lost faith because he felt that they did not deliver in one case. Am more forgiving. CR is not perfect. I write to them sometimes to tell them they got it wrong. Maybe the Horizon/Omni was a great car

I used Behr Premium Plus Ultra paint today on my exterior trim and wasn't impressed. It seemed to be a bit more runny than I'm used too and didn't cover as well. I don't think I'll be buying it again.

ion says"My perception is that a painter typically goes to the same store to buy all of their paint because of convenience, and because they get a discount."

Well, your PERCEPTION is just plain wrong.....

Get over it.

funcolors says

" By recommending - year over year - the economy lines of paint, maybe the sheeple consumers will be sure to have enough leftover to buy a subscription."

My parochial world? Fortunate you were able to put your Consumer Reports magazine down long enough to type a response.
You clearly know more about the professional worlds of paint and color than me and there's really nothing else to say."

Well said!

What is not true, painters don"t get discounts at paint stores or they don't go to a restricted number of stores?

"Sheeple" consumers are the ones that just look at paid advertisements, articles in magazines that take paid advertisements (Popular Mechanics and Car and Driver would be good, real-world examples, but there is a huge list.), and infomercials and swallow what they say in an uncritical manner. Non sheeple consumers do real research from unbiased sources or maybe less biased sources, compare the information and use their reasoning to come up with a conclusion to get the most for their money.

Do I know a lot about paint and color? That is relative. Paint is complicated and got complicated relatively fast. 50 years ago, there were not many choices. Now there are. Fortunately, all but the worst work better than what was available then. Kudos to the chemists! Unfortunately, it makes choosing the BEST paint difficult. As with many things in the modern world, there are just too many decisions to make.

What is complicated, on the other hand, about color? Human color vision is trichromatic. That is why it is useful to speak of three primary colors even though the choice of specific ones is arbitrary. Add to that the essential concepts that adding all visible wavelengths of light together yields something that we like to call white and taking them all away yields something we call black and you pretty much have it down.

Of course color can be summarized in a very different way. Eight is not enough. Twelve or 16 are way better. Twenty-four is plenty. Sixty-four are more then you will ever need. On the other hand when you start breaking some, use them up, or our so-called friends steal them, you will wish you had 128 because some look enough alike that you can substitute and it really does not make a significant difference.

Fortunately, all but the worst work better than what was available then

I am not sure about that!. I still come across ( in very old homes) old oil based( lead) paint that has been on for 50 years or more and STILL looks good. I do not think any modern paint will make it past 15 years at most.

ionized, I was pretty much on your side on this conversation, except for the insult to funcolors. Then you wrote this: What is complicated, on the other hand, about color?

What's complicated? OMG. If you had read any of the several treatises that funcolors has written and posted on line, you would understand. To put it simply, ionized, you don't know what you don't know about color.