Interesting. If your Hughes has a fairly modern underbody it should
be about the same wetted area as my E32. That makes it sound like the
yard did get it all done with two cans (one coat). There was just
about a quarter can left over for the pad areas.

I must have been putting it on thicker but it's hard to see how. The
temperature was at the lower end of the recommended range, I used the
shortest nap roller I could get, and the roller was just barely wet
out each time. It doesn't look thick and there are even some spots I
want to hit when we lift her out of the blocks.

It may be a matter of paying close attention to the overlap. Thinking
back, I may have been using the same technique I've used for walls.
If I overlapped strokes by 25%, that could account for the difference
in coverage. Maybe the yard thinned a little as well. No one in town
had the thinner for this paint.

It's a question of some interest as I used a hundred bucks more paint
than the yard did last year.

There's also the question of why Interlux tells you to buy six cans of
paint for a boat this size. The answer to that's pretty easy. Same
reason the dog food companies tell you to feed your dog twice as much
as the vets says is healthy

With two coats on the critical areas, I hope I get less fouling this
year.

--

Roger Long



"Ryk" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 May 2006 02:38:35 GMT, in message

"Roger Long" wrote:

If the yard last year put on just one coat, it is possible that they
could have done it with two cans if thinning could stretch it from
75%
to full coverage. Is that possible or did they just forget to
charge
me for a can?

I'm in fresh water, so one coat is enough. I got a full coat of
VC17M
on the bottom of my Hughes 35 with 2 cans and no thinner. Admittedly
it was cold weather, but without special anti-evaporation tricks I
still had about 1/4 can remaining for under the pads and passing on
to
the next boats in the launch parade. (Our club charges by crane
time,
so our launch proceeds rather quickly...)

I think it may depend on the substrate. I used a lot more when I was
painting directly onto fresh InterProtect rather than last year's
VC17. Or maybe the weather was warmer.....

Ryk

On Thu, 25 May 2006 00:41:52 GMT, in message

"Roger Long" wrote:

Interesting. If your Hughes has a fairly modern underbody it should
be about the same wetted area as my E32. That makes it sound like the
yard did get it all done with two cans (one coat). There was just
about a quarter can left over for the pad areas.

I must have been putting it on thicker but it's hard to see how. The
temperature was at the lower end of the recommended range, I used the
shortest nap roller I could get, and the roller was just barely wet
out each time. It doesn't look thick and there are even some spots I
want to hit when we lift her out of the blocks.

I use a very thin foam roller, and I hurry enough that passers by
think I'm being rude. That, and your point about overcoating -- you
can put on a whole lot more paint if you aren't aggressive about
spreading it out. With the new formulation it doesn't really dry in
the tray, but it dries on the hull in a real hurry.

Modern is relative ;-) The Hughes shows a distinct IOR era influence
with skinny ends and substantial overhangs, full skeg rudder and a
more or less square, swept back fin keel. I'd guess at about the same
area.

Ryk

"Ryk" wrote

That, and your point about overcoating -- you
can put on a whole lot more paint if you aren't aggressive about
spreading it out.

That's probably where the thinning comes in. It was drying so fast on
the hull (good drying day even though cool) that I couldn't move it
around much after it was rolled on.

It doesn't look very thick but, if it was only 25% thicker than the
yard put on, it would account for the coverage difference. In other
words, you don't have to add 25% thinner to increase coverage by that
amount with a fast drying paint like this which is what I was thinking
when I first posted.

I'll try foam rollers next year as well.

--

Roger Long