Bottom Paint For Caribbean

[svlamorocha]

You say that you have never said anything remotely like "there is no proof of environmental damage from copper antifouling".

I was referring to your point of a while ago that "The point is, there are no studies linking it (copper in antifouling) to environmental damage "

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...e-51069-4.html

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by svlamorocha

This concern is common but I have seen a study that show that the copper released in a "professional" bottom clean using "good practices" is equivalent to only a few days of "passive" release. Of course, there are those who will incur a member´s wrath by suggesting that those studies are skewed to favor the people who stand to profit from frequent repainting and frequent in-water cleaning. I acknowledge that it would be easy to skew those studies, just by making sure the scrub is more gentle than what a diver would do in reality.

Again, you have misinterpreted what is really going on. The study you are referring to (I assume) is the recent SPARWAR study done in San Diego on behalf of the paint manufacturer's lobbyist, Amec (a study that nobody from the hull cleaning indusrty was allowed to witness or participate in, BTW.) The results showed (not surpsingly) that in-water hull cleaning activities contributed about ten times more copper to the water column than any of the multiple studies conducted previously, showed. Why? In my opinion, part of the reason was the mechanical scrubbing device they created to approximate what a human diver would do while cleaning a boat bottom. The anti fouling paint manufacturers have long maintained that their products are not responsible for the copper loading in our coastal waterways, but rather it is the hull cleaners who are responsible. This study allowed them to submit "proof" that is the case.

That said, there is no one group "who stand to profit from (both) frequent repainting and frequent in-water cleaning." In-water hull cleaning, performed using industry-tested Best Management Practices will actually reduce the need for new anti fouling paint. This is something both the paint companies and the boatyards understand and actively fight.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by svlamorocha

You say that you have never said anything remotely like "there is no proof of environmental damage from copper antifouling".

I was referring to your point of a while ago that "The point is, there are no studies linking it (copper in antifouling) to environmental damage "

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...e-51069-4.html

Yes, five years ago I didn't have personal knowledge of any such studies. But as I mentioned above, a quick Google search now reveals plenty of them.

[svlamorocha]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

How little you understand the issue. The paint manufacturers have a vested interest in keeping copper in anti fouling paints, not only because they want to be able to continue to market an effective product to boaters but because they have contracted to purchase copper from its producers for many years to come. They and their lobbyist, Amec, were instumental in not only amending copper banning legislation in California so that copper would still be allowed in reduced amounts, but in ultimately getting the legislation tabled indefinitely. Nobody wants copper to remain legal for use in anti fouling paints more than the paint manufacturers.

I will leave you confuse copper producers with paint manufacturers and what happens now with what will happen when they come up with a proprietary foul release solution that works. Once you have seen form the inside how the lobbying sausage machine works once you are suspicious forever.

I am done with the thread; I will not help you get it closed. Have a good weekend.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by svlamorocha

Once you have seen form the inside how the lobbying sausage machine works once you are suspicious forever.

I have sat at the table with a California state senator's staff, paint manufacturer's employees and Amec lobbyists. At first, I thought that they all were senate staffers, that's how closely they worked together and knew each other. Believe me, I understand how the lobbying machine works.

Why you think I have confused paint manufacturers and copper producers is beyond me however. They both are interested in selling as much copper as possible. And if you think the paint manufacturers are going to come up with some anti fouling magic bullet, whether it be a foul release coating or something else, I submit to you that if that were likely to happen, it would have by now. In any event, they have been pretty successful in keeping heavy metals in their products in this country, Washington notwithstanding.

[douglong]

I wasn't being flip(pant). My experience with Super Ship bottom paint indicates to me that it lasts longer in tropical and temperate waters than any others. Take my opinion for what it cost you.

[model 10]

Originally Posted by douglong

I wasn't being flip(pant). My experience with Super Ship bottom paint indicates to me that it lasts longer in tropical and temperate waters than any others. Take my opinion for what it cost you.

It's a funny name for a paint. Is it hard or soft, what's in it and where do you get it?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Guy

It's a funny name for a paint. Is it hard or soft, what's in it and where do you get it?

Super ShipbottomÂ* Hard Ablative Antifouling Paint

Don't believe everything you read on the web site though

[colemj]

We used SuperShip Bottom several years ago. It was an OK to good paint - not as good as Micron 66 (but also without Micron 66's negatives), and better than most other paints.

We had it on the bottom for 2 years as we went down the US East Coast to the Bahamas twice - so pretty much in warm water.

It was by far the stinkiest paint I have ever used, but also the most pleasant paint to apply - assuming you haven't passed out from the smell. The coverage was exactly what they advertise - where I find others do not cover as well as they say and more paint is necessary. It rolled on smooth and didn't flash quickly, and remained thin in the pan. By far the best application experience I have had with a bottom paint (except for the noxious smell, of course).

It is a hard ablative - it can take much more scrubbing than Micron 66, but you can't go to town on it. The first year we had nothing but thin mild soft growth that easily came off under a hard sail or gentle wiping with a cloth.

In the second year, we started to get some type of circular red soft growth that would start out as a small circle and quickly get larger and larger. This growth seemed to drill deeply into the paint and was very difficult to remove. Even when seemingly totally removed, it came right back in the same areas.

By the end of the second year, it was becoming difficult to keep up with this specific red soft growth organism, and I was scrubbing much of the paint off trying to get rid of it.

We never had any hard growth outside of a few occasional and random small barnacles.

If we leave out "The Paint That Shall Not Be Named", I think your only options for the Caribbean is Micron 66/77/99 (the latter two are available in the Caribe, but not in the US), or possibly SuperShipBottom.

Micron 66 can never see fresh water, and can be deactivated with longish periods in brackish water. Micron 77/99 is supposed to fix that issue. If you think you will be spending time in fresh to brackish water (ie, Chesapeake, or exploring rivers in South/Central America), then don't use Micron 66.

Also, Micron 66/77/99 is an EXTREMELY soft paint. I mean, you just look at it all squinty-eyed and clouds of it release into the water. You will almost immediately lose it all off your leading edges bow, keel, rudder - so just plan to scrape those by hand. Not too onerous. When it becomes time to maintain it by softly wiping it, you will cry as all that money goes out into the water. You will also need to wipe a section, wait for the vast clouds of paint to clear, and wipe another section, etc.

Other than that, it is the only paint, that is not SSB or "TPTSNBN", we have found to work in the Caribe. Others will go on about many other paints, but talking to many, many people, the only consistent responses of good experiences is with Micron 66 and TPTSNBN (SSB is just too rare). Fstbttm will never admit it, and he has no experience to back up his endorsement there, but Trinidad SR is a terrible paint for much of the Caribe. So many put that on, and so many have growth issues with it.

So, try SSB if you want to take a chance - we found it pretty good. If you pass on that, then Micron 66/77/99 is the second best paint after TPTSNBN. Try to get the 77 or 99 version. They advertise it as "professional-only", but I can't see why - they both allow roller application.

Oh, BTW, they used to have a commercial very much worth watching. I must have viewed that 100 times until I learned how to apply it…

Mark

[bob_77903]

Another vote for Super Ship Bottom. Smelled like any other bottom paint to me...dunno

[colemj]

It is important to realize that putting any emphasis on what others say is a good paint is only fruitful if those people are using that paint in your exact area in a close time period, and have had it in use for more than a year.

Getting recommendations for paints that work well outside your area, or was used non-contemporaneously, or has only been on someone's bottom for a short time, is useless.

Even if the above criteria is met, I have met too many people who have a seemingly religious devotion to a type of paint and extol its virtues between constant scraping...

Mark

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by colemj

Micron 66... is an EXTREMELY soft paint. I mean, you just look at it all squinty-eyed and clouds of it release into the water. You will almost immediately lose it all off your leading edges bow, keel, rudder...

That is soooo not true. At least not of Micron 66 (I have no experience with the other two products.) While Micron 66 is not the most durable of anti fouling paints, it certainly doesn't "plume" when cleaned like Vivid or Trilux 33 or even almost any standard ablative you can name (including other products in the Micron line.) This is why Micron 66 is called a hybrid ablative- because it shares some properties of hard paints. And one of these properties is that it is relatively hard. If you are seeing copious amounts of paint coming off when you clean it, you are being much too aggressive with it.

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Sea Hawk produces a tributyl tin-based anti fouling paint. Tributyl tin has been banned for use in anti fouling paints worldwide because it is one of the most damaging poisons ever intentionally introduced into the marine environment. That said, there are still a very few nations (mostly in the Carribbean) that allow its use. And, as you can see from this thread, there are still sailors who put their personal convenience over any other consideration.

Last year, the top Sea Hawk executives were convicted of felonies involving illegally selling their tin-based paint in this country and misleading their customers and the USEPA about this. The executives went to prison and the company paid a large fine.

In addition, recently there have been numerous complaints about Sea Hawk products performing poorly, paint adhesion problems etc. There has been speculation that these quality issues are related to the recent legal problems the company has suffered.

Aside from all that, as a marine service provider with extensive experience with anti fouling paints in California, I have never found any Sea Hawk paint to be worthy of recommending to a client. Poor quality? I don't know that I can say that. Unable to match the competition? Most definitely.

Used Sea Hawk once- most fell off in 2 months

[colemj]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

That is soooo not true. At least not of Micron 66 (I have no experience with the other two products.) While Micron 66 is not the most durable of anti fouling paints, it certainly doesn't "plume" when cleaned like Vivid or Trilux 33 or even almost any standard ablative you can name (including other products in the Micron line.) This is why Micron 66 is called a hybrid ablative- because it shares some properties of hard paints. And one of these properties is that it is relatively hard. If you are seeing copious amounts of paint coming off when you clean it, you are being much too aggressive with it.

We have had 4 years of M66 experience, and what I wrote is what we experienced in the tropics with it. In fact, I have never talked to anyone who has used it who did not say it was a fragilely soft paint. I understand how to be gentle when cleaning, but this still results in lots of lost paint.

I would be interested in other people's experience here with Micron 66 in regards to how soft they thought it was.

Interlux advertises the paint as a chemically ablative paint - which means that the paint wears away chemically rather than physically. This was a unique formulation, but it has been copied by a few others. They do not tout it as sharing some properties of hard paints. That is a misunderstanding.

Mark

[fstbttms]

Nonetheless, as ablatives go, Micron 66 is as hard as they come. I clean this product every day. Yes, you will see some color when it is wiped. But it is very little when compared to virtually any other ablative paint.