Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2 part Exp. vs. Enamel

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2 part Exp. vs. Enamel

    I know there are a lot of questions that fly around about paint preferences, but an interesting discussion came up this weekend about 2 part epoxy vs. brightside enamel.

    My father in-law is overhauling his dinghy([:u]), which he seems to do every 3 years([:u]). Anyway, as part of the overhaul he is repainting inside and out, all fiberglass, the bottom with typical bottom paint. We had a discussion about the above paints, he went with the enamel after speaking with the owner of a local boatyard. He was told 2 part epoxy would be a waste of money and no good for a variety of reasons, most importantly because of the flex of the hull would be too much for the expoxy.

    I just thought I would throw this one out there because I initially suggested looking into other options because he has used the single enamels in the past and they are not very durable and look beatup after two years.

    Just wondering ...

  • #2
    I have to agree on the single part epoxy comment. I used the EasyPoxy from Pettit and I'm not very happy with it. It will be removed and sprayed with a two part this winter. Interesting about the flex issue though. I've heard a comment or two about that, but concerning car paints mainly. Flex never really came up with the Mako hulls that I know of. Will be interesting to see what the gurus have to say.[]
    Artie Sutherland[br]Rude Attitude -\'76 Mako 25 CC. - SOLD[br]1976 Mako 21[br]2002 Yellowfin 31 - 300 hp Suzukis[br]Gulf Coast, Mississippi[br]

    Comment


    • #3
      actually, brightside is a one part polyurethane. and it is mostly a topside paint. i use this on the 'inside' of things that won't be seen very much. while it is fairly durable, the paint goes on very thin when sprayed which makes it a poor choice for high wear or exposed areas. (i'm using this as an example because you mentioned it in your post.) but it is fairly typical of a one part paint.

      the durability of the 2 part polys and epoxies is enhanced by the fact that they 'do' flex without crazing or cracking. polyurethanes and epoxies are basically 'plastics' for lack of a better term. you're able to get a better build up with 2 part paints as well as better adhesion. add in the fact that most of these finishes are tough as nails you would be better off spending the few extra $$$$ for a two parter as you'll save in the long run by not having to repaint every two or three years.
      Grant[br]87 21b 97 Suzuki DT200[br]http://www.classicmako.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=23633[br]New Orleans, LA[br][email protected]

      Comment


      • #4
        grantn-

        Your approach is what I was arguing. The interior of the dinghy takes a beating with the sand etc. ground into the floor. The outside hull also takes a beating at the dinghy dock contstantly hit by other boats/oars etc. I just naturally took the approach that the 2 part was much more appropriate for such a high wear application. The actual cost difference was not huge for a smaller application, generally about 1/4 more.

        I was curious to see what the audience felt...

        Comment

        Working...
        X