On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:33:01 GMT, Ronald Raygun
wrote:

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

"Armond Perretta" wrote in message
...
Armond Perretta wrote (on 25 April 2009):
I have been using Pettit Trinidad on my 28 foot sloop for many years
(1981 boat purchased new). When we haul, the boat is
pressure-washed, and then in the Spring the loose stuff is scraped
off and the entire bottom wet-sanded with 80 wet-dry. I use a foam
roller and about 3 quarts per coat on this full keel boat with a 22
foot waterline. At this rate every 3 years I've had enough paint on
hand to avoid buying a new gallon.
...
This year I have decided to honor the titans of Wall Street and what
remains of the financial system by "going cheap." I took a new
gallon of Trinidad, split it in half into a new empty gallon can,
added what appeared to be about one half quart of last year's paint,
and then thinned each can to bring the volume to about three quarts
in each one gallon can. This means the paint was thinned about 25 to
27 percent, which is well in excess of the manufacturer
recommendations. In fact just about any source I can find would
disagree with my approach and advise that I will end up with less
than adequate protection. The only advantage to me is, of course,
cutting my paint cost by half.
I suppose I will find out in the Fall if this plan is practical, but I
thought I'd throw it out there to see if anyone else does it this way
or has similar experience.

Last April I posted the above looking for comments and similar
experiences.
We hauled the boat yesterday and were able to determine how the highly
thinned bottom paint performed. The short answer is: "Very well."

I would have to say that this thinning method works for me, as I am now
going to get 2 paint jobs from one gallon on this 28 foot full keel
sailboat.

Stupid, stupid, stupid!

A bit harsh, though I must say his numbers don't quite seem to add up
or, as you would say on your side of the Pond, his "math" is suspect.

He needs 3 quarts per coat, and his old system therefore used 12 quarts
(3 gallons) of full strength goop every 4 years. His new system still
involves using 3 quarts per coat, but of goop thinned to 75% strength.
In other words he will now need 2.25 quarts of full strength goop per
coat, which isn't quite down to the 2 coats per gallon (which would be
2.00 quarts per coat) he claims, unless he's going to dilute it down to
67% strength (which he may well get away with, but I guess that's next
year's experiment).

3 gallons used to give him 4 years, and if he dilutes to 67%, then 2
gallons will give him 4 years. That's not "Half Price", it's 1/3 off.
And then only if the thinner costs nothing.

What you are doing is spending more on haul outs
than you save on paint. Your system requires an annual haul out and we all
know those aren't cheap. They call this being penny wise and pound foolish
across the other side of the Pond.

But he may well be hauling out annually anyway, for other reasons, even
in those years when no painting would be needed.


I think that youse guys are confusing quantities of liquid with what
actually provides the anti fouling function - the solids.

What is happening is that the O.P. is applying a thinner then previous
layer of solids to the hull. This layer is providing the required anti
fouling function for the period between haul outs.

Since all anti fouling either ablate or expend their anti fouling
chemicals over time logically one applies just enough of the expensive
stuff to last - depending on your use of the vessel. An ablative paint
for example, seems to work best if you go sailing regularly.

In essence probably most people apply more anti fouling then they
require and then complement themselves when they haul annually and
find no growth :-)

By the way, Practical Boatowner, a British magazine, conducted a
rather extensive test of anti fouling paints a few years ago (Post
TBT) and found that a paint that worked perfectly in one local didn't
do worth a damn in another so the fact that a bloke gets startling
results with XYZ paint in one section of the country doesn't
necessarily mean that it is the best paint for another.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Bruce In Bangkok wrote:

What is happening is that the O.P. is applying a thinner then previous
layer of solids to the hull. This layer is providing the required anti
fouling function for the period between haul outs.
...
In essence probably most people apply more anti fouling then they
require and then complement themselves when they haul annually and
find no growth ...

As the "OP" I believe I am qualified to state that Bruce has summarized the
situation accurately. In case the point was not adequately explained (or
more likely not adequately understood by some) in earlier posts, let me
restate the point he the idea is to save money. Could that point have
possibly been overlooked?

BTW it is a sad comment on the state of Usenet (and this group in
particular) that an effort to provide helpful information results in some
(but not all) of the responses to this thread. I am not one to give up on
this group, but is this really the best we can do?

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare

Armond Perretta wrote:
Last April I posted ... looking for comments [on _really_ thinning bottom
paint] ... When we pulled the boat we had ... slime but not much and
certainly not more than on previous occasions using the same paint
straight from the can. We had no barnacles on the paint, but they are out
there as I had a few on the prop ... I would have to say that this
thinning method works for me, as I am now going to get 2 full paint jobs
from one gallon on this 28 foot full keel sailboat.

We are in season two of this mini-experiment. Just for the record, our
paint costs are way down and this trend looks like it will continue. Who in
the world wants to pay 200 to 300 dollars US for a gallon of solvent with a
few copper compounds? Also for the record, we are aware that the
arithmetic implied by "half price" is a bit oversimplified.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare

On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 04:30:34 -0400, "Armond Perretta"
wrote:

Armond Perretta wrote:
Last April I posted ... looking for comments [on _really_ thinning bottom
paint] ... When we pulled the boat we had ... slime but not much and
certainly not more than on previous occasions using the same paint
straight from the can. We had no barnacles on the paint, but they are out
there as I had a few on the prop ... I would have to say that this
thinning method works for me, as I am now going to get 2 full paint jobs
from one gallon on this 28 foot full keel sailboat.

We are in season two of this mini-experiment. Just for the record, our
paint costs are way down and this trend looks like it will continue. Who in
the world wants to pay 200 to 300 dollars US for a gallon of solvent with a
few copper compounds? Also for the record, we are aware that the
arithmetic implied by "half price" is a bit oversimplified.


I suppose that the proof of the pudding is how many days/months/years
are you getting per paint job? How much you sail and how much you lay
at anchor.

As most bottom paints are ablative, at least to some extent, so the
use the boat is put to has a big effect on bottom paint. Sail 12 hours
a day and you find nearly any bottom paint keeps the baddies off.
Haul every year and again is a different story then those who haul
every two, or three.

But the Important thing is if it satisfies you, you got a good deal.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Apr 9, 8:08*am, Gogarty wrote:
We have found West Marine's El Cheapo ablative to be quite good for our
useage. Haul every two years and find no hard growth on the paint.

I have always used the hard epoxy type paint with the most copper
possible because I keep my boat in Florida in severe fouling
conditions. Normally, I go 3 years between haulouts but I scrub the
waterline a couple times a year. Haulouts are difficult around here
because facilities are very few in the Florida Big Bend and if you
figure they will charge you $1000 for hauling and painting, you might
as well use the best paint. I just had my boat done and I had to sail
200 miles to get it done so I had them use Trinidad at $280/gallon.
If I was able to do it myself every other year, I'd use the cheap West
MArine stuff.

On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:25:09 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Apr 9, 8:08*am, Gogarty wrote:
We have found West Marine's El Cheapo ablative to be quite good for our
useage. Haul every two years and find no hard growth on the paint.

I have always used the hard epoxy type paint with the most copper
possible because I keep my boat in Florida in severe fouling
conditions. Normally, I go 3 years between haulouts but I scrub the
waterline a couple times a year. Haulouts are difficult around here
because facilities are very few in the Florida Big Bend and if you
figure they will charge you $1000 for hauling and painting, you might
as well use the best paint. I just had my boat done and I had to sail
200 miles to get it done so I had them use Trinidad at $280/gallon.
If I was able to do it myself every other year, I'd use the cheap West
MArine stuff.

Out of curiosity how big is your boat? I was in Perth, W.A. a while
back and several people had dollies to haul their boat with. These
were pretty substantial rigs. One guy hauled his 28 ft. steel hull
motor sailor out with one. The seemed to have long tongues and they
backed them in at low tide then floated the boat over them at high
water and hauled them out with a tractor. The beach was mainly hard
gravel from the look of it.

It might be possible to build a rig like that and ignore the yards for
ever more.

The Aussy that posts from W.A. must know about these as when I saw
them I was the only one surprised. I'll try to get the name of the
place where I saw them. Can't remember the place but the dollies were
called "Jinkers".


Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

"Gogarty" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
I have been using Pettit Trinidad on my 28 foot sloop for many years (1981
boat purchased new). When we haul, the boat is pressure-washed, and then
in
the Spring the loose stuff is scraped off and the entire bottom wet-sanded
with 80 wet-dry. I use a foam roller and about 3 quarts per coat on this
full keel boat with a 22 foot waterline. At this rate every 3 years I've
had enough paint on hand to avoid buying a new gallon. This routine has
worked for many years, and even though the boat has never been taken down
to
bare glass, the buildup is not an apparent problem. In recent years the
boat has been kept on the Jersey Shore in brackish water.

This year I have decided to honor the titans of Wall Street and what
remains
of the financial system by "going cheap." I took a new gallon of
Trinidad,
split it in half into a new empty gallon can, added what appeared to be
about one half quart of last year's paint, and then thinned each can to
bring the volume to about three quarts in each one gallon can. This means
the paint was thinned about 25 to 27 percent, which is well in excess of
the
manufacturer recommendations. In fact just about any source I can find
would disagree with my approach and advise that I will end up with less
than
adequate protection. The only advantage to me is, of course, cutting my
paint cost by half.

I suppose I will find out in the Fall if this plan is practical, but I
thought I'd throw it out there to see if anyone else does it this way or
has
similar experience.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare


Is that an ablative paint?

Last year we had a short haul to repaint after two years in the water. The
old paint was in remarkably good shape, just a little flaking where the
very
bottom coat had let go. We had several partial cans of paint lying
about --
different brands but essentially the same stuff. We mixed it all together
and
thinned it and painted it on. I thnk we got one full coat out of it. Did I
mention that money is very, very tight these days? Seems to be holding up
well.

We have always used ablative -- boat came with it -- and have seen no need
for extensive surface preparation beyond pressure washing (which takes a
fair
amount of paint with it).



My recollection is that it isn't an ablative, although there's perhaps a
version that is. I used the Micron (ablative) on the last haulout. My
experience with it was that it lasted nicely for just about 3 years.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com