Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 63
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

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



  #2   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
MMC MMC is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 541
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)


"Armond Perretta" wrote in message
...
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


Local marinas used to thin the heck out of it and offered a $160 bottom
paint job (about 15 yrs ago). It was good for a year.


  #3   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,869
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

"Armond Perretta" wrote in message
...
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





Trinidad is excellent paint. But what you did is an illusion. You added
volume by adding thinner. This will not harm the paint but it will reduce
the thickness of each coat as the excess thinner will evaporated of
sublimate resulting in a thinner coating than if the paint had not been
thinned. What it amounts to is you fooled yourself into thinking you had
more paint while all you really accomplished is making extra work for
yourself in that you have to add at least one more coat to acquire the
thickness you would have had with fewer coats using paint that was not
thinned.

It's like trying to make a bed sheet longer by cutting a foot off the bottom
and sewing it on the top.

Wilbur Hubbard


  #4   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 63
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

mmc wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote...

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 ...


Local marinas used to thin the heck out of it and offered a $160
bottom paint job (about 15 yrs ago). It was good for a year.


The old man who owned our yard did this exact same thing for many years and
had few complaints. However he's been dead about 13 years now, and I never
did know exactly how much he thinned the paint. I suspect I'm cutting it
very close to the practical limit, but I have no way to predict the outcome.

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



  #5   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 63
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message

... I took a new gallon of Trinidad, split it in half, ... added ...
about one half quart of last year's paint, and then [brought]
the volume to about three quarts in each ... can. This means
the paint was thinned about 25 to 27 percent ...


.... But what you did is an illusion. You
added volume by adding thinner. This will not harm the paint but it
will reduce the thickness of each coat as the excess thinner will
evaporated of sublimate resulting in a thinner coating than if the
paint had not been thinned. What it amounts to is you fooled yourself
into thinking you had more paint while all you really accomplished is
making extra work for yourself in that you have to add at least one
more coat to acquire the thickness you would have had with fewer
coats using paint that was not thinned ...


I'm not sure "illusion" is a good description of my thinking. I am aware
that I am covering the same surface area with less active material (in this
case somewhere between 72 and 75% of the cuprous oxide active ingredient I
have applied in the past). The question is: "Will this attempt to cut
expenses result in satisfactory single season performance for my particular
application, when compared with standard application methods?"

Can you comment based on your own experience?

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










  #6   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,757
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

"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



  #7   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,869
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

"Armond Perretta" wrote in message
...
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message

... I took a new gallon of Trinidad, split it in half, ... added ...
about one half quart of last year's paint, and then [brought]
the volume to about three quarts in each ... can. This means
the paint was thinned about 25 to 27 percent ...


.... But what you did is an illusion. You
added volume by adding thinner. This will not harm the paint but it
will reduce the thickness of each coat as the excess thinner will
evaporated of sublimate resulting in a thinner coating than if the
paint had not been thinned. What it amounts to is you fooled yourself
into thinking you had more paint while all you really accomplished is
making extra work for yourself in that you have to add at least one
more coat to acquire the thickness you would have had with fewer
coats using paint that was not thinned ...


I'm not sure "illusion" is a good description of my thinking. I am aware
that I am covering the same surface area with less active material (in
this
case somewhere between 72 and 75% of the cuprous oxide active ingredient I
have applied in the past). The question is: "Will this attempt to cut
expenses result in satisfactory single season performance for my
particular
application, when compared with standard application methods?"

Can you comment based on your own experience?


Like I said, it's not the thickness of a particular coat but the overall
thickness of the combined coats that counts. When the extra solvent
evaporates the thickness of each coat will be less but the concentrate of
the biocide will not change. The total thickness will end up the same as if
you'd not added the extra thinner.

I used two gallons of Trinidad about five years ago when I last painted my
22-ft LWL vessel which has remained in the water since. I did not thin it
but rolled on the first coats with a short nap roller. I brushed on the last
two coats with a fore and aft stroke for a smoother surface. The two gallons
resulted in eight coats from the boot stripe around the turn of the bilge
and four coats everywhere else except on the rudder and leading edge of the
bows which got about 10 coats each. I also added four small bottles of
tributyl tin biocide to the paint - two to a gallon. Each small bottle is
2.5 ounces. Five years later the paint is still there except for a couple of
small areas where it is wearing thin from scrubbing. But no corals and few
barnacles are adhering to date - just a lot of slime and other plant
material but it scrubs off easily enough and takes a month or two to grow
back.

Wilbur Hubbard


  #8   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,966
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 13:12:28 -0400, "Armond Perretta"
wrote:

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message

... I took a new gallon of Trinidad, split it in half, ... added ...
about one half quart of last year's paint, and then [brought]
the volume to about three quarts in each ... can. This means
the paint was thinned about 25 to 27 percent ...


.... But what you did is an illusion. You
added volume by adding thinner. This will not harm the paint but it
will reduce the thickness of each coat as the excess thinner will
evaporated of sublimate resulting in a thinner coating than if the
paint had not been thinned. What it amounts to is you fooled yourself
into thinking you had more paint while all you really accomplished is
making extra work for yourself in that you have to add at least one
more coat to acquire the thickness you would have had with fewer
coats using paint that was not thinned ...


I'm not sure "illusion" is a good description of my thinking. I am aware
that I am covering the same surface area with less active material (in this
case somewhere between 72 and 75% of the cuprous oxide active ingredient I
have applied in the past). The question is: "Will this attempt to cut
expenses result in satisfactory single season performance for my particular
application, when compared with standard application methods?"

Can you comment based on your own experience?


I would not expect it to perform as well. Ablative paints depend on
adhesion to the hull, AND adhesion to itself. Without that much
thinner, the paint is not going to be as strong. My guess is that it
is not only a thinner layer, but it will ablate much faster.

What did you save with this foolishness? $25?

Bottom paint is not there for looks. Maybe you could save money by
straining your old oil through a tee shirt and putting it back in the
engine.


  #9   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,869
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 13:12:28 -0400, "Armond Perretta"
wrote:

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message

... I took a new gallon of Trinidad, split it in half, ... added ...
about one half quart of last year's paint, and then [brought]
the volume to about three quarts in each ... can. This means
the paint was thinned about 25 to 27 percent ...

.... But what you did is an illusion. You
added volume by adding thinner. This will not harm the paint but it
will reduce the thickness of each coat as the excess thinner will
evaporated of sublimate resulting in a thinner coating than if the
paint had not been thinned. What it amounts to is you fooled yourself
into thinking you had more paint while all you really accomplished is
making extra work for yourself in that you have to add at least one
more coat to acquire the thickness you would have had with fewer
coats using paint that was not thinned ...


I'm not sure "illusion" is a good description of my thinking. I am aware
that I am covering the same surface area with less active material (in
this
case somewhere between 72 and 75% of the cuprous oxide active ingredient I
have applied in the past). The question is: "Will this attempt to cut
expenses result in satisfactory single season performance for my
particular
application, when compared with standard application methods?"

Can you comment based on your own experience?


I would not expect it to perform as well. Ablative paints depend on
adhesion to the hull, AND adhesion to itself. Without that much
thinner, the paint is not going to be as strong. My guess is that it
is not only a thinner layer, but it will ablate much faster.


Duh. Trinidad is not ablative paint! Trinidad is a hard, scrubbable epoxy
based paint.


Wilbur Hubbard


  #10   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,966
Default Bottom Paint Half Price (Serious Question)

On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:33:16 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 13:12:28 -0400, "Armond Perretta"
wrote:

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message

... I took a new gallon of Trinidad, split it in half, ... added ...
about one half quart of last year's paint, and then [brought]
the volume to about three quarts in each ... can. This means
the paint was thinned about 25 to 27 percent ...

.... But what you did is an illusion. You
added volume by adding thinner. This will not harm the paint but it
will reduce the thickness of each coat as the excess thinner will
evaporated of sublimate resulting in a thinner coating than if the
paint had not been thinned. What it amounts to is you fooled yourself
into thinking you had more paint while all you really accomplished is
making extra work for yourself in that you have to add at least one
more coat to acquire the thickness you would have had with fewer
coats using paint that was not thinned ...

I'm not sure "illusion" is a good description of my thinking. I am aware
that I am covering the same surface area with less active material (in
this
case somewhere between 72 and 75% of the cuprous oxide active ingredient I
have applied in the past). The question is: "Will this attempt to cut
expenses result in satisfactory single season performance for my
particular
application, when compared with standard application methods?"

Can you comment based on your own experience?


I would not expect it to perform as well. Ablative paints depend on
adhesion to the hull, AND adhesion to itself. Without that much
thinner, the paint is not going to be as strong. My guess is that it
is not only a thinner layer, but it will ablate much faster.


Duh. Trinidad is not ablative paint! Trinidad is a hard, scrubbable epoxy
based paint.


Wilbur Hubbard


In that case, he really screwed up, as the structure of the cured
paint will be wrong and the copper will be unable to leach out
properly. He may as well forget bottom paint and just dive on the boat
weekly. That will really save some money, and give him some excercise.

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bottom Paint question NE Sailboat Cruising 33 March 27th 07 04:08 PM
Bottom Paint Question ,, on prep, type, application NE Sailboat Cruising 1 March 12th 07 05:06 PM
Bottom Paint ,,, 20 layers of Bottom Paint ,,, how to remove it. Thomas Wentworth Cruising 33 April 12th 06 12:31 AM
Bottom Paint Question Jim, General 5 December 29th 05 12:01 AM
Interlux Bottom Paint Question Mike Cruising 6 June 17th 04 12:24 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017