Is Coppercoat anti foul worth it?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Ewan Clark

So if the boats in SF Bay are cleaned 6 to 15 times a year when using normal anti-foul, it would be reasonable to expect the cleaning program to be similar for Coppercoat.

Just to be clear (because I'm sure someone will pick up this ball and run with it), I never said 15 cleanings a year is the norm here in the Bay Area.

Originally Posted by Ewan Clark

...we've all seen people on this forum and others comment on their treatments working perfectly well in SF, requiring no more cleaning than would be deemed normal.

To the contrary, the anecdotes I've read on this forum about local experiences with Coppercoat generally indicate less than normal cleaning frequencies, which makes me further doubt the veracity of their claims.

In any event, expect plenty more feedback from me- good, bad or otherwise.

[Ewan Clark]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

here in California, when using a properly applied and maintained, high quality copper-based anti fouling paint, we get 3-4 years out between haulouts. Why would anybody (not forced to do so by severe winter weather) haul and repaint repaint more frequently than that?

Unfortunately for boat owners in most other parts of the World, they are not so lucky. In Europe, most boats are lifted and repainted every year, with some managing two years. The same holds true for Australasia. But for places such as Middle East you are doing well to last 6 months without needing new paint! I suppose it makes the rest of us realise just how lucky the sailing population of California are.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Ewan Clark

Unfortunately for boat owners in most other parts of the World, they are not so lucky. In Europe, most boats are lifted and repainted every year, with some managing two years. The same holds true for Australasia. But for places such as Middle East you are doing well to last 6 months without needing new paint! I suppose it makes the rest of us realise just how lucky the sailing population of California are.

You didn't answer my question. Why does a boat with a particular product in Austrailia have to be repainted yearly but a boat with the identical product in California only need repainting every 3 years? Luck certainly has nothing to do with it and to infer as much is fairly ridiculous.

[Ewan Clark]

I apologise for my slight misquote Fstbttms - I've now edited my earlier post to say California as opposed to SF Bay. Didn't mean to mislead anyone, so hopefully no harm done, but all corrected now anyway.


As for why boaters in the majority of the World have to repaint every year or two, as opposed to only every 3 or 4 years as may be the case in California, I suppose the answer is because they feel the need to. There's probably a host of different underlying reasons as to why that is though.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

To the contrary, the anecdotes I've read on this forum about local experiences with Coppercoat generally indicate less than normal cleaning frequencies, which makes me further doubt the veracity of their claims.

I've read all the Copper Coat threads over the last 9 years. I feel the only one to say a Copper Coat painted boat needs less cleaning is YOU. What people have said is that they have CC and don't do any, or low amounts, in water cleanings. That's not the same as saying it needs less cleaning as standard AF in the same location.

You respond to every anti-fouling or bottom paint thread the same, which is to assume the World is the same as your location.

I also get the feeling that your planned control test you plan to clean the panel with regular AF regularly, but not the CC painted panel. Which of course is a unless comparison.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I've read all the Copper Coat threads over the last 9 years. I feel the only one to say a Copper Coat painted boat needs less cleaning is YOU. What people have said is that they have CC and don't do any, or low amounts, in water cleanings. That's not the same as saying it needs less cleaning as standard AF in the same location.

I have never stated that Coppercoat needs less cleaning than traditional anti fouling paints. Quite the opposite in fact.

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

You respond to every anti-fouling or bottom paint thread the same, which is to assume the World is the same as your location.

Not so. I have always taken pains to indicate that my experience with Coppercoat is in California only. I have never made claims about its performance elsewhere.

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I also get the feeling that your planned control test you plan to clean the panel with regular AF regularly, but not the CC painted panel. Which of course is a unless comparison.

What gives you that idea? I never said that nor did I infer that. I plan to clean half of both panels with the same frequency, leaving the other half uncleaned as a control.

Either you have a raging hard-on for me or your reading comprehension skills are poor. Either way, every statement you just made about me is patently untrue.

[sailorboy1]

yeah, tell yourself all that

[fstbttms]

Coppercoat panels received (thanks Jim), quart of Trinidad red purchased. I will cut some panels from an old Sunfish for the Trinidad and get them painted ASAP. I intend to rig a PVC frame that will suspend all four panels in a line and hang them near the surface from a dock nearest the middle of the Estuary at the Alameda Marina. One panel each will be cleaned regularly to simulate typical boat maintenance and one panel each will be left to foul as a control. Pix to follow as construction progresses.

[reed1v]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

yeah, tell yourself all that

Roger that. Wierd since Practical Sailor has done all these tests and reported them over and over again. Why duplicate what is already available, and under controlled conditions? Suspicious to say the most.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by reed1v

Roger that. Wierd since Practical Sailor has done all these tests and reported them over and over again. Why duplicate what is already available, and under controlled conditions? Suspicious to say the most.

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Coppercoat panels received (thanks Jim), quart of Trinidad red purchased. I will cut some panels from an old Sunfish for the Trinidad and get them painted ASAP. I intend to rig a PVC frame that will suspend all four panels in a line and hang them near the surface from a dock nearest the middle of the Estuary at the Alameda Marina. One panel each will be cleaned regularly to simulate typical boat maintenance and one panel each will be left to foul as a control. Pix to follow as construction progresses.

fb...thanx for the efford. I will be very interested in the results

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by reed1v

Roger that. Wierd since Practical Sailor has done all these tests and reported them over and over again. Why duplicate what is already available, and under controlled conditions? Suspicious to say the most.

Because each area has different fouling characteristics. I for one would like to see the same test repeated in Trinidad, where propellers get so fouled they can't move the boat in less than 6 weeks.

From Practical Sailor "Coppercoat earned a Poor performance rating at the 12-month mark (PS, October 2010) and a Poor at the 18-month test checkup (PS, March 2011). It didn’t make the cut after 24 months, so it was not included in the two-year test results table in the October issue.

[lateral]

Originally Posted by reed1v

Roger that. Wierd since Practical Sailor has done all these tests and reported them over and over again. Why duplicate what is already available, and under controlled conditions? Suspicious to say the most.

Suspicious? Yeah,right, by someone that has no affiliation with any of them in his line of work. Perfect nonsense.
I suspect, coppercoat needs regular light cleaning AND less frequent burnishing as well, but less frequent painting. Choose your poison.

Ditto on CS's sentiments FB.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by reed1v

Roger that. Wierd since Practical Sailor has done all these tests and reported them over and over again. Why duplicate what is already available, and under controlled conditions? Suspicious to say the most.

Given the tests from Practical Sailor are not public unless you have a subscription, can you post their results here?

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Given the tests from Practical Sailor are not public unless you have a subscription, can you post their results here?

Probably not, Practical Sailor will want to protect their content.

Peter