Hard or Soft - Paint

[hellosailor]

Ben-
"Do you have any instances of people's bottom paint being scrutinized by the authorities?"
Perhaps you remember, maybe five years ago, when the IRS pressured some deals with various countries including the Swiss and a number of Carib nations, to have them send copies of account records for US citizens that had offshore accounts? And all of a sudden, the world changed for many people.
Prior to that ruling a lot of folks had been quite successful at the "guaranteed safe" way of hiding their undeclared income, by depositing it offshore and spending it via offshore-issued credit cards. No paper trail, no way to find it in the US.
Until the feds decided the problem was big enough to do something about that.

The problem with putting TBT on your hull, is that the hard evidence is there on your hull. And a casual inspection of the hull, or a fast rub-test of the paint, could turn up proof of it. At that point it becomes a matter of "Place your hands behind your back, you're under arrest."

So no, AFAIK there's no current program to examine hulls and one hopes any boater smart enough to keep TBT aboard their boat has poured it over into unmarked containers. Using it "should" be perfectly safe, just like using offshore accounts to hide taxable income was.

I think the OP's original question had the unspoken condition on that that he was looking for LEGAL options that would outperform what he had.

[kenbo]

Not all ablative paint only slough off during movement. Micron 66 and Blue Water Commercial Marine SPC 99 both hydrolyze the outer layer even when anchored. The SPC 99 is an excellent overall bottom paint but the time of effectiveness for SPC 99 and all other ablative bottom paints is dictated by the total thickness of the coating.

I stopped buying pleasure boat bottom paint years ago. I now buy commercial paint and have cut my bottom paint costs in half. Blue Water Marine will ship any order over $200 for free!

Ken

[hellosailor]

kenbo-
Bluewatermarine paints makes a big point on their home page about how they totally blew away the competition in Power Boating magazine's paint tests, and how readers should check that out under their FAQ menu.
Except, there's no FAQ menu on that page, it is a submenu that you can drill around to find. And on the FAQ page, there's no reference to those paint tests.
And if you search the web, you'll find other vendors mentioned as coming out number one, and (wait for it) that publication was SHUT DOWN in 2007, a full decade ago, by the same publisher who still puts out Practical Sailor.

When a vendor boats about claims that were obsoleted over a decade ago, do you ever wonder if maybe their product is bunk also? Everything allegedly works for someone. But really, boasting about being chosen as the best, by a publication that hasn't been around for a decade?

[Benz]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Ben-
"Do you have any instances of people's bottom paint being scrutinized by the authorities?"
Perhaps you remember, maybe five years ago, when the IRS pressured some deals with various countries including the Swiss and a number of Carib nations, to have them send copies of account records for US citizens that had offshore accounts? And all of a sudden, the world changed for many people.
Prior to that ruling a lot of folks had been quite successful at the "guaranteed safe" way of hiding their undeclared income, by depositing it offshore and spending it via offshore-issued credit cards. No paper trail, no way to find it in the US.
Until the feds decided the problem was big enough to do something about that.

The problem with putting TBT on your hull, is that the hard evidence is there on your hull. And a casual inspection of the hull, or a fast rub-test of the paint, could turn up proof of it. At that point it becomes a matter of "Place your hands behind your back, you're under arrest."

So no, AFAIK there's no current program to examine hulls and one hopes any boater smart enough to keep TBT aboard their boat has poured it over into unmarked containers. Using it "should" be perfectly safe, just like using offshore accounts to hide taxable income was.

I think the OP's original question had the unspoken condition on that that he was looking for LEGAL options that would outperform what he had.

I wasn't advocating for illegal paint--I just wondered if the Nanny State had begun doing paint checks somewhere. It kind of wouldn't surprise me, if they were looking for a reason to be unpleasant...

[kenbo]

Hellosailor,

I can't and won't vouch for their website claims. And I really don't have much faith in bottom paint tests as a practical matter. But when I noticed that most of the commercial fisherman in my area were using Blue Water Marine paint a few years back I asked them about it. Their response was mostly - clean, smooth bottom and "a gallon in the tank is money in the bank". I've been using SPC 99 ever since. Never any hard growth and minimal slime at the water line that comes off very easily with a soft cloth.

Ken

[hellosailor]

Ben-
It would be simple enough for any tax department to email Trinidad C&I and say "We'd like to buy a printout of all visiting US yachts in the last five years". Then sort the data by location and time, and check versus locally registered vessels and pop down to check them. But the overwhelming odds (unless I'm missing something) are that there's no money to be made by doing that. Very few owners who would be risking the issue, and those might well be out cruising long term anyway. So...No, Nanny prefers more profitable endeavors.(G)

[sailorboy1]

Guess my question is dead

[Djarraluda]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

AFAIK ablative bottom paint never gets "hard" as such. It gets hard and chalky, sure, but like chalk, it then can just be rubbed off. It isn't "hard" like Baltoplate or any of the other hard bottom paints is.

Maybe the ablative paint was actually gone, completely, and the cleaner was actually looking at the barrier coat or another coat that had been under the latest ablative?

The only agreement that I've heard (other than banned tin-based paints being great at their job) is that every bottom paint performs well in a very limited niche environment. You'd have to ask Micron (etc.) for their recommendation for very specific salinity and hours in motion to get a really informed guess at what might work best.

I've seen a paint work great one year, and in the following year in slightly different waters, not work at all. Niches.

PBO (UK magazine) has done a test of anti fouls on sample boards around the UK. It really does demonstrate the regional differences.
Here in Sydney, Micron is a waste of money but Altex is great in Pittwater, not so great further south though and so forth.
I have read that true ablative properties require 6kn. Not really certain of the veracity of this statement, it could be spread by a hard paint supplier to suggest all small sailing craft should use their paint instead.
Roger

[Benz]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Ben-
It would be simple enough for any tax department to email Trinidad C&I and say "We'd like to buy a printout of all visiting US yachts in the last five years". Then sort the data by location and time, and check versus locally registered vessels and pop down to check them. But the overwhelming odds (unless I'm missing something) are that there's no money to be made by doing that. Very few owners who would be risking the issue, and those might well be out cruising long term anyway. So...No, Nanny prefers more profitable endeavors.(G)

So, did you just talk yourself in a circle? Is it safe to enter Nanny waters with TBT on your bottom or not?
To the OP: for what it's worth, I'm a fan of Pettit's Trinidad, though now I hang out in cooler New England waters.

[hellosailor]

Benz-
There's no circle there. Odds of being caught? Next to none. Costs of being caught? Very steep.
The DOJ's Uniform Crime Reports used to point out that 95% of all large robberies (at that time, over $1 miliion) got away unsolved. The guys who rob the 7-11, usually get busted. That doesn't mean they recommended committing a big robbery.
Same way, a similarly large percent of new businesses fail with in five years. That doesn't mean some don't succeed.
A few too may drinks one night, a casual word to a friendly guest, someone drops a dime...And a nice man could show up to arrest both boat and owner. But hey, serial murders usually get away with it, and the FBI suspects that's part of why 1/4 million people are reported as "missing persons" in the US every year.
Circular logic? No, if you want to play the odds, that's just gambling.

[sailorboy1]

Whacked

[SVTatia]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Guess my question is dead

Well, not really…
The question “What are other cruisers doing?" has been answered in more ways than one
I even learned a thing or two, and will try SPC 99 - thanks for sharing that Kenbo

[TomLewis]

Great feature, the search function. I was able to find this relatively new post as my boat again is on the hard for other issues, but it was discovered the bottom paint fell off. Just had it done 5 months ago. This seems like a pre paint treatment issue to me, but not a paint expert.

[Zai]

Ablative paint was a failed attempt at trying to eliminate the periodic hull cleaning.

It failed imo I have had good results with hard paint and now I am trying out copper coat on my sailboat.

Will write more about the copper coat in general and about the use in proximity to a sail drive as the season progresses.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Zai

Ablative paint was a failed attempt at trying to eliminate the periodic hull cleaning.