Coppercoat bottom paint

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

I ain't here to win no popularity contests.

Good thing because you are like a broken record on every bottom paint thread and always know the condition of people's bottoms that are on the other side of the country (you know outside the world of SF Bay).

You make some good points. But they get lost in the same old arguments about issues that just cloud the story. I don't really even need to read them anymore because I know where they lead.

This thread was about Copper Coat. All your posts that didn't say what your experience with that in the SF bay were worth worth just what?

Just admit it, there will never be an effective bottom paint as far as you are concerned. After all when would that leave you?

We all know things are different for the Country of California! I know as I grew up there!

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

Just admit it, there will never be an effective bottom paint as far as you are concerned.

You really haven't read my posts, have you?

Here's the thing- Most of these threads (this one included) are started by people looking for something that works better than the tried and true examples of copper-based anti fouling paints that we all know and love. In my time, I have come across virtually all of them and so far, there just ain't nothing better than the tried and true examples of copper-based anti fouling paints that we all know and love. But also notice I didn't come into this thread stating that Coppercoat didn't work well in Salem MA/Merrimack NH . I only related my experience with it in the Bay Area.

Yes, I realize that I tend to come on strong when I read something ignorant on the subjects of anti fouling paint and water quality (still amazed by the number of sailors on this forum who apparently couldn't give two sh*ts about that one.) And yes, I realize that my tone turns some people here off.

[Ironhorse74]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

And yes, I realize that my tone turns some people here off.

Who ever said we could not agree on anything? Although I would modify that to most.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse74

Although I would modify that to most.

That's your opinion. And it's worth exactly what the reader paid for it.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

You really haven't read my posts, have you?

Yes I have and all those that have been before and they all go the same way! Have YOU read them?

Here's the thing- Most of these threads (this one included) are started by people looking for something that works better than the tried and true examples of copper-based anti fouling paints that we all know and love. In my time, I have come across virtually all of them and so far, there just ain't nothing better than the tried and true examples of copper-based anti fouling paints that we all know and love. But also notice I didn't come into this thread stating that Coppercoat didn't work well in Salem MA/Merrimack NH . I only related my experience with it in the Bay Area.

And there it is! All you know is that in YOUR experience it doesn't work in the Bay Area! And how many posts on this thread do you have that are about something else?

So why do you always turn a bottom paint thread into your mission to go on a rant beyond your experience of a paint used in the Bay area?

I started reading this thread to learn more about other people's experience with the Copper Coat. Not about past bottom paints, how boaters don't care, what the Bay is like, what California thinks/does, nuclear bombs and the military, municipal sewer run offs.

So still don't know much more about Coppercoat that I didn't know from reading past threads about it beacuase it has all been lost in the noise.

[fstbttms]

I didn't drag this thread off-topic. Merely added my $.02 when others did. And if you feel the real world experience I have to share on the topic of anti fouling coatings isn't worthwhile, by all means please feel free not to use it. You won't hurt my feelings a bit.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Ewan Clark

In response to Skipmac - there have been copper/epoxy products that needed aggressive sanding from time to time to expose fresh copper, and it is fair to say that this did remove some of perceived advantages of them. Copperclad by Scott Bader resins in particular comes to mind.

But our Coppercoat is different - the epoxy base is "weaker", for want of a better word. It slowly dissolves away, at a rate of about 5 microns per year, and constantly exposes fresh copper.

Some boats do benefit from an initial burnish (to expose the copper mixed with the resin), but after this they are left alone. Certainly burnishing every 3 or so years is not what we would recommend or expect, and most of our clients tell us they never burnish it.

Those that lift each year as a matter of course simply pressure wash off any growth. Those that stay in usually dive (or pay a pro diver) to scrub the hull annually.

If Coppercoat did need abrading every year there is no way we'd sell what we do, and the yards and boat building companies we supply wouldn't be using or recommending it.

I hope this helps to explain one of the key differences between Coppercoat and the various other superficially similar sounding systems.

How does the paint compare to hard/soft paints if the boat is stationary are anchorge a long time?

Does a yearly pressure wash reduce the life ofthe paint?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

How does the paint compare to hard/soft paints if the boat is stationary are anchorge a long time?

Does a yearly pressure wash reduce the life ofthe paint?

Even I am getting pretty tired of seeing my name in this thread, but in the interest of accuracy I will add this: Coppercoat is not a "paint" and shouldn't be considered one. It is a copper-loaded epoxy and works differently from both traditional hard and ablative anti fouling paints. Know also that it cannot be applied over existing anti fouling paint. FYI.

[wingNwing]

Guy in our marina in Chesapeake Bay has had Coppercoat now going on year 9. He maintains the boats for a charter fleet, and has Coppercoat on 4 of his boats. He has now contracted to put it on more boats. His priority is to save maintenance $$, remember his job title, not to keep the local divers employed.

It was enough to convince us that we'd made the right decision to put it on our boat.

As we understand from the Coppercoat rep, if the boat is stationary for a long time, it will build up slime just as it would on any other paint, but on the copper it is easy to remove. There are no issues of the paint failing if you haul for the winter, unlike some conventional antifouling that need to reapplied if they dry out.

BTW, If the same forum member gets into multiple pissing matches with multiple people in multiple threads, ... well, then I guess I tend to discount that person's posts. Just sayin'

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Even I am getting pretty tired of seeing my name in this thread, but in the interest of accuracy I will add this: Coppercoat is not a "paint" and shouldn't be considered one. It is a copper-loaded epoxy and works differently from both traditional hard and ablative anti fouling paints. Know also that it cannot be applied over existing anti fouling paint. FYI.

Thanks for the info, but didn't answer the question I asked and had your name nowhere on it!


Was asking the "paint" vendor. Far as I'm concerned if it comes on with a sprayer, brush or roller....it's paint!

[lateral]

Quote:I hope this helps to explain one of the key differences between Coppercoat and the various other superficially similar sounding systems.

Whilst we are on the angst wagon, Cu powder, water based epoxy* & maybe a little biocide/ solvent or other doesn't constitute a break through in AF science.
Just an expensive variation on the theme & destructive of the environment we love. At $100 a litre, I guess the suppliers can get excited about it.Lets face it, the average punter just wants to minimise his/hers personal effort to keep their bottom clean & enviromental concerns are secondary.
Homo sapien superior

* (= very slightly ablative)

[bobconnie]

Yes one must be VERY careful to not try to joke about anti- fouling paints on this forum!! some folks get all bent out of shape about things like that !!LOL Ya even have to be careful to not remember anything from 30 yrs ago or more ! cus ya get all kind of flack for something like that !! It's good that I for one have a thick skin, and do admit to living in the past as much as I live in the Now!! This copper coat sounds like it may well have some good things about it !! just my 2 cents

[TeddyDiver]

Next question... Can Coppecoat be painted over? Kind of using it as base AF and put something else on top if mooring a winter or two in somewhere where it might not be sufficient alone.

[Ewan Clark]

Several points to respond to here:

To Don Lucas - if a boat is left stationary for an extended period the chances are that some slime (and possibly then other growth such as barnacles) will attach to the Coppercoat - but no more so than would be the case with a conventional copper based anti-foul paint. In this situation the hull would need a clean off to return the boat to best performance. Therefore boats that are used regulzrly stay cleaner, and require less maintenance, than boats that are static.

An annual pressure wash will not shorten the life of the coating. Coppercoat is tough stuff (far stronger than a conventional anti-foul paint), so regular cleaning is not a problem.

For example, we have clients that live in Europe that keep their boats in the Caribbean and only get to visit and use them maybe two or three times a year. These customers tend to scrub the hull when they arrive each time (or have it scrubbed for their arrival) to ensure it is clean and ready for use. This is far less expensive than lifting and re-painting the boat each year. Obviously in lower fouling locations less frequent cleaning is required.

To Teddy - you can indeed apply a conventional anti-foul paint directly over Coppercoat. You simply need to give the Coppercoat a light abrade to give a key for the paint to bond to. There's no need for a primer or tie-coat, so don't waste money on such. But generally it is cheaper still to pay for an extra in-water scrub than it is to lift out and apply a regular paint for temporary protection.

To Lateral - all pesticide based anti-foul coatings can be deemed detrimental to the environment - that much is true. But an epoxy based system such as Coppercoat has a far lower leach rate than most conventional ablative paints, and is far less damaging. In fact last year we won the award for "Most Eco-Friendly Marine Business" at the China International Boat Show in Shanghai - not bad for an anti-foul manufacturer! It was in recognition for the fact that even though anti-fouls are "bad", at least we are trying to be less "bad".

I joined this forum to be able to give factually accurate answers to questions regarding Coppercoat so I hope my posts are found useful and on-topic.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Ewan Clark

I joined this forum to be able to give factually accurate answers to questions regarding Coppercoat so I hope my posts are found useful and on-topic.

Yes, and you seemingly answered everybody's questions except mine. Since I could be considered a detractor, perhaps that's understandable. But let me try again:

Originally Posted by Ewan Clark

...an epoxy based system such as Coppercoat has a far lower leach rate than most conventional ablative paints...

Lower leach rates typically mean lower anti fouling performance. Can you address Coppercoat's performance in moderate-to-high fouling waters like California and how does your product perform in such waters when compared to a high-copper, high leach rate paints like Pettit Trinidad Or Interlux Micron 66?