Cetol or Varnish?......

todd gustafson · Post by **todd gustafson** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 11:17 am

I am in the midst of a topside make-over on "Rosie" a Tartan 27.....and all hardware and teak/mahogany has been removed.....
.....Between sanding, filling, sweating and cursing i plan to do much of the brightwork off the boat at home........I have worked with most varnish companies including Interlux (clear) Perfection, with marginal success.....all but Cetol. I have never used it and was wanting to share any testimonials before starting......i love varnishes but like the breathability/flexability of Cetol.

So get out to the polls and vote........no "hanging chads" allowed.
Todd

Case · Post by **Case** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 11:43 am

I love varnish. But for things like toerails, they just don't last in my case. I have had it with endlessly fixing the toerails only to have it peel in less than a year. Other varnished bits are still good after 6 years so I will keep using varnish for these parts but not for the toerails. The colors might not quite match but wood itself often is a bit mismatched so I don't care...

I am going for Cetol on the toerails this spring. I have tried Cetol Teak and to be honest, it doesn't look too bad. I don't like the regular Cetol which is way too orange. The newer Cetol blends are nice. Add Cetol Teak or Cetol Light then add Cetol Clear Gloss atop the first 2 or 3 coats for more gloss. If you like satin finishes (not glossy) then don't add Cetol Clear Gloss.

Part of myself are "ugh, I am going over to the dark side" but after repeated efforts on the toerails, I just don't care at this point!

- Case

Post by **Tim** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 11:53 am

Cetol or varnish? That's not even a choice. ;<)

I'm a hardcore varnish traditionalist. I have used Petit/Z-Spar captain's varnish--as traditional an amber spar varnish as there is--for many years now. I love it--it's easy to apply and holds up well. Here in the 4-month-season northeast US, two maintenance coats each spring do very nicely and last till the next spring. Obviously, areas with higher UV levels will require more maintenance on any finish.

I used to use Epifanes, but became disillusioned some years ago by the continual and irritating crazing I'd experience on many surfaces during the season. I don't miss this product one bit. (I do still like and use their rubbed-effect satin varnish on interiors, however.)

I'd never choose anything but a traditional spar varnish. It looks the best by far, and lasts for many years with proper maintenance. And it smells good when you apply it, too.

Hirilondë · Post by **Hirilondë** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 12:01 pm

What Tim said.

You can not petrify wood and have it look good. Someday they may invent a synthetic that looks good and last a really long time. Someday they (the proverbial they) may do a lot of things. For now good old varnish is still the best result for the effort IMO.

jlroberts280 · Post by **jlroberts280** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 12:02 pm

I dont care for the original Cetol but I like the Natural Teak. I think it is easy to apply (I have had good luck without sanding between coats) and while it stays fairly soft, it is very easy to spot repair. I know it doesnt look as traditional as the deep (10 plus coats) varnish but I think it has a nice warm look to it with it's satin finish. To me the trade off is worth it. I also think it might depend on the boat and how you plan to use it.

todd gustafson · Post by **todd gustafson** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 1:07 pm

Well, as i had said, i have used them all......i prefer the traditional varnishes and like the process, almost militant upkeep every spring.....it's not that bad if you do it every year.....Like going to the dentist for a cleaning...do i have to go?....but in the end your glad you did it, good for another 6 months to a year.

I am putting new toerail on "Rosie" and knowing it is going to get banged up the most.....letting water in to create chips/flaking....the jury is still out on weather to oil or varnish......?

todd gustafson · Post by **todd gustafson** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 1:16 pm

Tim, I read in one post that you take off your coamings each year for maintenance, or did i miss read the thread?No bungs i presume? Do you varnish all the entire surfaces? How does the flexing or camber effect the finish?

Post by **Tim** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 1:41 pm

Yes, my coamings are installed with external screws/finish washers so I can easily remove them. No problems with the curves or flexing (actually the coamings retain most of their curve when removed anyway).

Paulus · Post by **Paulus** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:01 pm

Guillemot's spars are varnished with Epifanes and they are in magnificent shape. The Teak is not holding up as well - especially the strips on the hatches and cockpit seats, but I believe that's mostly from the failing glazing between strips. The PO says he only used Epifanes, so I assume it is that what is now in ned of complete removal and replacement. Non-strip teak, however, like the rudder worm gear enclosure, but also the toe rails, are holding up remarkably well...

I will be interested to follow this thread, as I too will need to decide what to do with the failing finish on the cockpit seats and two hatches. I am leaning towards leaving them "natural" and wash/scrub them down on a monthly basis with mild soap.

The teak on our Club Launches is treated that way and shows a refreshing pink/blond, though over time, it seems the lignin between the wood/cellulose fibers is getting rubbed away and the surface is no longer smooth.

Anyone have any opinion on this/

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:58 pm

Another potential avenue to explore is (automotive-type) clear coat. I have never used it myself, and it is sprayed not brushed on. I'm not sure what the choices are for the initial finish.

I don't know if Charlie J will see this, but I was just chatting with him the other night and asked about his mast, which is clear-coated (his partner Laura sprayed it), and he said it still looks good. This is after about three years in south Texas, Florida, and The Bahamas. They had previously used the Flagship varnish as their mainstay (when they lived in Texas), and I think they tried Bristol Finish, too. I don't think they had nearly the longevity they have had with the automotive type clear coat.

Now I'm asking myself if the three year figure can possibly be correct but I am almost positive that's what he said. The mast is box-sectioned spruce.

Rachel

Skipper599 · Post by **Skipper599** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:18 pm

Last fall, I applied 5 coats of Cetol Marine Natural Teak to the cap rails, the inner and outer periphery boards on my teak deck, as well as the stand-off 'bolsters' for my chain plates. I had intended 7 coats, but the temperatue dropped and has yet to return to working comfort.

Looking at my efforts today, I would say they look pretty good, but I'll probably give them another two coats later in the spring ..... or, I might try something else. . . . eg: Bristol Finish.

I have created a lovely boom gallows using a nice piece of african mahogany. I had intended to apply the same Cetol finish until I happened to see an ad on Craigslist for a quart kit of Bristol Finish. - - - I scooped it moments after it was first advertised at reasonable price.

As many of you probably know, it's a 2-part acrylic urethane giving a high gloss finish. Furthermore, it states right on the product, it can be used over base coats of Cetol. The Cetol being a satin finish as applied, I thought this new boom gallows deserved a somewhat more jazzy finish to show off the beautiful natural grain.

If I like the application, I just may apply a top coat or two over the Cetol finish previously applied to the cap-rails and coaming caps.finish.

Skipper599 · Post by **Skipper599** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:26 pm

Rachel wrote:Another potential avenue to explore is (automotive-type) clear coat. I have never used it myself, and it is sprayed not brushed on. I'm not sure what the choices are for the initial finish.

I don't know if Charlie J will see this, but I was just chatting with him the other night and asked about his mast, which is clear-coated (his partner Laura sprayed it), and he said it still looks good. This is after about three years in south Texas, Florida, and The Bahamas. They had previously used the Flagship varnish as their mainstay (when they lived in Texas), and I think they tried Bristol Finish, too. I don't think they had nearly the longevity they have had with the automotive type clear coat.

Now I'm asking myself if the three year figure can possibly be correct but I am almost positive that's what he said. The mast is box-sectioned spruce.

Rachel

Interesting comment Rachel. I'm surprised an automotive finish would perform well on a wood spar. I'm not at all surprised it performs well in the natural elements after all, car finishes have to survive some of the worst weather. I'm just surprised it can be applied to wood.

Post by **Tim** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:36 pm

Remember also that masts are about the easiest bright-finished structures to maintain. Most finishes last a long time on the vertical spar, which doesn't receive the harsh direct rays of sunlight the way many deck structures do. One cannot discount this fact when discussing longevity of finishes.

Clear coat, in any event, would lack the color of traditional varnishes. Part of the beauty of varnish on most boatbuilding woods is its rich color, which I think I'd miss. Your desires may vary.

Quetzalsailor · Post by **Quetzalsailor** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 6:18 pm

I'm a grump about the Epiphanes and probably soon to be a grump about Cetol Teak.

I'm using traditional varnish over epoxy on the Flying Dutchman, but it will live under cover for most of its hours.

Shoalcove · Post by **Shoalcove** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:09 pm

I use Epiphanes ( either the regular or wood finish gloss) on hatches and coamings and it looks great. It also has held up very well over the last 6 or 7 years with a top coat or two in the fall and spring. Any varnished bits can be removed if a strip down and redo are required. My toerails and the cabin eyebrows are done with Cetol Light. I find it looks pretty good although not as nice as the varnish but has the strong advantage of only needing 2 coats. This was a big issue for me since the varnish always lifted on the toerails and I was living 3.5 hours from the boat. Nova Scotian springs do not respect the temperature and humidity requirements of mere varnish manufacturers...

todd gustafson · Post by **todd gustafson** » Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:50 pm

The last time we refinished our wood on Rosie was a few years ago and tried Interlux 2 part clear perfection...... it brushes on very thin and being a 2 part there is a short pot life before it sets up...you really have to work fast to get all wood covered, and it being a very thin coat, any foreign matter like bug-bristle-smudge, etc. will show and is hard to sand out..... All and all i liked traditional varnish better.....more forgiving.

Todd

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:22 am

Tim is right that you can't really compare a vertical spar to something like a toerail for longevity of any one finish. It's so much easier to keep something vertical in good shape, brightwork-wise.

On the automotive clear: I believe that Charlie J and Laura started by coating their mast with epoxy, and then put the clear over it. The wood has a very nice tone, so although the clear is not amber, it still looks very nice because.... 50-year-old clear spruce just looks good :) What I don't know is if you can use the clear over other "primer" coats, as I have not looked into it.

I know they first used Z-Spar Flagship traditional varnish (I think also over the base epoxy but I am not positive on that), and then they tried Bristol Finish. With the amazing amount of sun/UV in south Texas, they were having a hard time keeping up with it - and they pay a lot of attention to their boat. They've had more longevity with the epoxy/clear (three years and counting I think). They've also painted over some of their varnished brightwork (on deck; the paint can be removed as there is bright finish underneath).

I don't really like to coat with epoxy because I live in fear of it failing and having to deal with that. So I stick with good old varnish. I just mentioned the clear as a possible alternative for some people/situations, since more options were being discussed.

Rachel

Duncan · Post by **Duncan** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:28 am

Case wrote:I love varnish. But for things like toerails, they just don't last in my case. I have had it with endlessly fixing the toerails only to have it peel in less than a year. Other varnished bits are still good after 6 years so I will keep using varnish for these parts but not for the toerails. The colors might not quite match but wood itself often is a bit mismatched so I don't care...

I am going for Cetol on the toerails this spring. I have tried Cetol Teak and to be honest, it doesn't look too bad. I don't like the regular Cetol which is way too orange. The newer Cetol blends are nice. Add Cetol Teak or Cetol Light then add Cetol Clear Gloss atop the first 2 or 3 coats for more gloss. If you like satin finishes (not glossy) then don't add Cetol Clear Gloss.

Part of myself are "ugh, I am going over to the dark side" but after repeated efforts on the toerails, I just don't care at this point!

- Case

My thoughts exactly. You and a couple of other people noted the toerail issue, which I've also had.

I think that water gets in from underneath, or via missing or cracked bungs. I think that for a proper toerail job, the wood has to come off and be varnished underneath. If you do this, the bungs all have to be redone, too, which I think is another good thing for sealing it all up.

Anyway, I'd prefer properly varnished toerails, but I don't want to dedicate a week or two this spring, so I am thinking of slipping over to the dark side, too.

miltonb · Post by **miltonb** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:40 am

Hello,
I've got a 1960 Triton with a fair amount of wood. I gave Bristol finish a try 3 years ago. The areas I used it on (handrails, tiller, cockpit locker covers, batter boards) have been untouched in that time and still look great. I found it a little weird to apply until I thinned it about 10% with MEK. Flows well, levels well and looks like traditional varnish. With Epiphanes, I've got to recoat about every 3 or 4 months. Florida is hard on finishes!

Regards,
Milt
S/V Natana

Hirilondë · Post by **Hirilondë** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:55 am

miltonb wrote: I found it a little weird to apply until I thinned it about 10% with MEK.

What a deadly combination of materials. I finish that contains isocyanates thinned with MEK. Don't do it any where near me please.

Skipper599 · Post by **Skipper599** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:32 pm

Why use MEK? The kit comes complete with a container of reducer, to be used to slow the drying process. It is to be added according to working conditions. eg: Temperature. It also has a 'thinning' quality.

One thing I've learned over many years is, DO NOT modify a manufacturer's instructions for any reason. Basically, because they will not stand behind a modified finish or product and neither should they be expected to.

miltonb · Post by **miltonb** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:12 am

Why use MEK? Because it's listed by the manufacturer as a thinner, as is acetone. Take a look at their website for verification. You guys must think I wrote MEK Peroxcide; I did not. I chose MEK THINNER instead of Acetone because it evaporates slower.

Regards,
Milt

Skipper599 · Post by **Skipper599** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 2:10 pm

miltonb wrote:Why use MEK? Because it's listed by the manufacturer as a thinner, as is acetone. Take a look at their website for verification. You guys must think I wrote MEK Peroxcide; I did not. I chose MEK THINNER instead of Acetone because it evaporates slower.
Regards, Milt

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My apologise Milt, yes, I did "jump to conclusions" ... never a good thing to do! But whenever someone refers to MEK, it usually is the Peroxide version we tend to think of.

Anyway, glad you cleared that up for us, because I'm about to try Bristol Finish for the first time so it's good to hear what others have done with an application. I've just opened the box and I see a mass of instructions included which I will spend some time reading before I go to work with it. .

Hirilondë · Post by **Hirilondë** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:56 pm

miltonb wrote:Why use MEK? Because it's listed by the manufacturer as a thinner, as is acetone.

The manufacturer does very little to warn you about the dangers of the isocyanates, it doesn't surprise me it recommends MEK as a thinner. I think Acetone is much safer. MEK is a mutagen and Acetone is almost drinkable. OK, I exaggerate, but it is quite safe, even used in medical applications and widely used in cosmetics. Even in the MSDS for these materials (Bristol Finish, MEK) all you will find is relative amounts creating relative risks over relative time spans. I just don't trust our government to protect people over special interests. I just see no point in taking the risks. I will stick with varnish and turps.

Tim Mertinooke · Post by **Tim Mertinooke** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:49 pm

I had huge success refinishing my wheel last year with Epifanes Woodfinish Gloss and plan on using it for the rest of my boat this year. I can appreciate a good varnish job, but time and weather are my enemies so I'm drawn to a no-sand product like this one. The ease of use and aesthetics really impressed me.

Idon84 · Post by **Idon84** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:38 pm

I use Epifanes, and like it a lot. I don't have much experience in the way of use of other Varnishes. Cetol lost my vote a long time ago because of the yellow/orange color which I hear has changed a lot since then.

I will say I used 2 part Perfection Varnish on my Thistle when I rebuilt it about 6 years ago. The stuff pealed and flaked all over the place even after all of the prep I did. Maybe I did something wrong but in the end I learned a valuable lesson on 2 part varnishes. Removal of 2 part varnishes seems to be WAY MORE difficult than single part varnishes. Of course that's just my opinion. I've thought that maybe the boat being very flexible is what ruined this job but who knows.

I now keep some 80 grip paper in the Thistle and use it to go over what is left of the Perfection over time. It should all be off in the next couple of years or so.

The pictures below were taken about 5 months apart.

todd gustafson · Post by **todd gustafson** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:23 am

The same happened with me when i used the 2 part.....with up to 6 coats it was not enough the first season to protect from chips/cracks/....

Post by **Tim** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 7:28 am

One reason varnish works is that it's a softer, flexible coating--based on natural resins--that moves with the wood.

Two-part finishes are urethane-based, are harder, and tend to be less forgiving to the natural movement of wood.

boatsnh · Post by **boatsnh** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:12 pm

A timely thread as snow falls all over NH this week.....I'm looking at refinishing the rails on my Dickerson for this spring....Might take a look at the newer less orange cetol..Seems that cetol sticks with a grip that's hard to beat on teak. But, that said, most everything else is varnish. I Love the look of varnish & find that there are worse projects on a boat than varnish work. I do protect the 4 teak hatches, teak steering wheel & pedestal, ect with canvas covers my wife sewed up - makes a huge difference in longevity - my wheel is 5 years on the same varnish.

All the Dickerson trim is teak -it looked like old, grey, weathered shingles when we got the boat a few years back - now most of it looks decent as I have sanded (and in some areas actually used a small hand plane) everything smooth - teak is amazing how it will come back from the dead.

I tried Bristol finish - maybe it was just me but I had poor luck with it - cracked and peeled a bit after 1 season (6 coats). Probably will not use it again & its a horror to get off..... I have used Epiphanes wood finish gloss & like that - nice full coat & pretty easy to apply. I also bought, and applied, a couple quarts of the HMG varnish (Coma Bernice) that has worked well on my hatches & wood sampson posts (three of them). I do hit the sampson posts each year with 2 coats - quick & dirty, 'cause they get lines wrapped on them and lines are hell on varnish.

I find most quality varnishes will work pretty well here in New England if re-coated before it really needs it...every year on "wear" areas & every couple years on less exposed areas. I'll most likely buy the Epiphanes on Sale at Hamilton Marine Main Boatbuilder show and use that as my daily varnish ...a little bonus for heading to Portland in March.

FWIW, I did switch from my nice badger brushes a few years ago to foam brushes - toss them in the trash when done & easy to use...Hard to get around at first, but find much easier overall. Also I find I'm more likely to "break out the brush" and hit a small area if a lot of time is not spent chasing down thinner & cleaning a brush afterwards.
Mike

todd gustafson · Post by **todd gustafson** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 8:49 pm

Some of the posts have mentioned applying epoxy before varnish. I assume that's supposed to water proof the wood. Is that really needed? I would think several coats of varnish would do the job unless the wood is under water continuously.

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 9:36 pm

todd gustafson wrote:Some of the posts have mentioned applying epoxy before varnish. I assume that's supposed to water proof the wood. Is that really needed? I would think several coats of varnish would do the job unless the wood is under water continuously.

In my opinion it's not needed on any type of wood that you would normally have on the outside of a boat. But then I admittedly don't go for the "epoxy base coat" as a matter of course (which is not to say I don't epoxy things, but not as a varnish "primer"). I have had to remove epoxy that has failed and that puts me off it for this use. Plus... not needed and I find varnishing more pleasant.

I think one reason people use it under varnish is that it builds/fills quickly. The reason people who use it varnish over it is because it does not stand up to UV rays.

Post by **Tim** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:11 am

todd gustafson wrote:Some of the posts have mentioned applying epoxy before varnish. I assume that's supposed to water proof the wood. Is that really needed? I would think several coats of varnish would do the job unless the wood is under water continuously.

Not only is it not needed, but in my opinion it's a potentially bad idea.

Let wood be wood!

Hirilondë · Post by **Hirilondë** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:47 am

The only time I use epoxy as waterproofing is for plywood. The best example is when I build a plywood boat like my dinghy. I see nothing to gain in using epoxy as a "primer" for varnish. And like several have said, it creates more work when it does fail.

boatsnh · Post by **boatsnh** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:04 am

epoxy under varnish can make for a "mottled" color - some areas darker/lighter than others.

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 11:56 am

Perhaps this was mentioned in an earlier post, but I didn't see it: Where are you?
In brightwork, like so many things, location location location matters. Lattitude, really, but also rainy vs. dry seasons.

With all respect and love to my friends at higher lattitudes, shortened seasons and shortened days mean that their brightwork sees half as much UV as mine, which sees an even lesser fraction of that on a florida boat. Direct comparisons of the longevity and application of various finishes cannot be made in earnest.

Though I personally loathe cetol, I acknowledge that keeping both a boat and a full-time job in some locations will prohibit the use of traditional varnish.

With respect to epoxy under varnish: Yes a full-strength coat of epoxy can cause problems with traditional varnish. Yes this can be avoided if you give the epoxy lots of extra cure time, and take care to thoroughly remove any blush before applying varnish, but still it's a gamble. With an epoxy undercoat you're better off with a pseudo-varnish (I've had good success with system three's product) which is intended for such application.
In my observation, if you're dealing with a piece of trim which cannot be removed/rebedded with any kind of regularity, and that piece seems to pop its finish halfway through the season every year, sealing with a penetrating epoxy works.

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:24 pm

Figment wrote:Perhaps this was mentioned in an earlier post, but I didn't see it: Where are you?
In brightwork, like so many things, location location location matters.

I completely agree with you, Figment, location makes a huge difference in how "easy" it is to keep up your brightwork. However with respect to the original poster and where he is, well, he set the thread up as a poll asking what we like, so that makes it a little bit more awkward to find out where he is and answer for him, if you know what I mean.

Heck, in the tropics you can barely keep up with your stainless steel, much less your brightwork ;) That's one reason I mentioned that, for me, if I were planning to spend extended time there, I would varnish to a nice gloss (traditional varnish for me), lightly sand, and paint over it (tidy and nice-like) until such time as I was in gentler climes.

I remember reading one of the Pardeys' books early on, in which they discussed how - when they built their second boat - they paid a lot of attention to designing things such that they could keep their varnish to vertical surfaces as much as possible. I know Tim mentioned this earlier in the thread too, and it does help to build your own boat, so that you can choose appropriate woods, but perhaps the idea might apply to some already-living boats as well.

Quetzalsailor · Post by **Quetzalsailor** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:10 am

Lots of folks complain about toe rails and early finish failure. I'm one. Nothing's more painful and harder to do, looks so good when fresh, and goes bad so quickly! I've tried Epiphanes and Cetol Teak and both have failed quickly. The failure typically starts at edges, where the wood meets something else, or at corners. The Cetol lifts off in sheets. The Epiphanes seems to dissolve in air, and failure initiates, additionally, at pinholes. With multiple coats, there just should not be pinholes anymore!

I've pretty much concluded that the toe rail problems are caused by failed bedding; water gets into the join and under the finish. Of course, every drop of water on deck travels along the join until it finds a drain. Similarly, finishes fail at the surface nearest Quetzal's coamings' drifts. Water gets into the bungs or up from the open bottom of the drift's hole and lifts the varnish even though the drift is at least 1/4" away from the surface of the wood.

I've done epoxy coatings under varnish finishes on small objects, like tillers, with some success. Inevitable repair is more difficult. Stripper canoe builders do it. Gougeon Brothers (West System) used to brag about their 'Golden Daisy', an epoxy laminated and coated cold moulded racing boat. I've done it on a floor and several countertops. I'm doing it on my Flying Dutchman rebuild.

That said, I don't recommend epoxy coatings unless the piece is totally and reliably 'encapsulated' because the wood will change shape with moisture and crack the epoxy. Improvement can be had by wrapping the piece in glass, like a stripper canoe. But even so...the repair effort will be much more difficult. I consider my floor and countertops a success. I hope the FD will be a success. The reason I did it is that so much of the hull is glued with urea resin which is very weak; by keeping the wood dry, I hope to preserve the bonds.

I don't use urethane finishes where failure can be expected. They're too hard to remove or repair. Fine for interior floors or table tops.

I've become addicted to using a small scraper and heat gun for removing finishes. Though incidental damage is a concern, adjacent 'glass, etc. I wonder about damaging inner glue lines in laminated work, too. How about veneered furniture, where you can bet that the veneer was done with hide glue?

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:00 pm

Doug that toerail is precisely the application I'm talking about with respect to the epoxy helping the finish to hold. Take the finish down to wood, apply CPES and let it cure for AT LEAST a good warm week before moving on to a non-traditional varnish.

The wood will still move, of course, but the epoxy will prevent the moisture from wicking through and popping the finish off the surface.
That's the madness behind my method, anyway.

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:21 pm

Quetzalsailor wrote:Similarly, finishes fail at the surface nearest Quetzal's coamings' drifts. Water gets into the bungs or up from the open bottom of the drift's hole and lifts the varnish even though the drift is at least 1/4" away from the surface of the wood.

Hi Quetzal,
I'm always interested in learning new things: What are drifts?

Hirilondë · Post by **Hirilondë** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:53 pm

2 techniques that help considerably for toe rails are as follows:

1. Prevarnish the bottom and sides of the toe rail before installation. Do at least 2 coats. You can do the top as well, but not critical to do so. This gets rid of the mechanical seam where varnish meets bedding that moisture gets through at the deck.

2. Significantly round the 2 top corners of the toe rail. I say significantly, but this means round, it does not mean a large radius. 1/4" or even a bit less is sufficient. This way the varnish goes around a smooth curve instead of the top meeting the sides at a sharp corner. It is this corner that is often the beginning of failure.

CPES is a diluted epoxy. Epoxy does not like to be diluted. So what you have is poor epoxy. I have no use for the product at all. If I am going to use epoxy as a waterproofing coating I will use a brand name at full strength, use 3 coats, and try to do them as hot coats to achieve a chemical bond between them. LIke I said before, I only do this for plywood.

Quetzalsailor · Post by **Quetzalsailor** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:59 pm

Rachel, drifts are pins, like bolts without heads or nuts, or nails without heads. You'll see 'em pictured in wooden boat's deadwood or across wood boats' centerboards or rudders. Think of 'em as transverse fiber. For another example, in the good old days of Chesapeake Bay Log Canoes, they were iron so a little corrosion was all it took to get them to marry immovably with the logs. In Quetzal's coamings, the drifts are about 3/8" dia, probably (but who knows) bronze, in a coaming whose original thickness was a little over 1 1/8". They keep the Teak from splitting. I presume that they were installed after the Teak was steam bent; at 1/3 the thickness that would have been a significant stress concentration during bending!

Hirilonde, I think you are quite right about thinned epoxy, but not from experience. It's what Gougeon said about thinning their product. They recommended heat to thin their goo, but that requires experience and judgment to ensure the stuff did not go off in process. I think you must be right about priming the faying surface of objects to be sealed though I do not recall reading it anywhere. Surely the first wooding of the exposed surfaces means that the seal between a concealed, and primed surface ends up with an unsealed corner which can only get worse over time. Quetzal, at 41 years, has had plenty of time!

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:17 am

Ah, okay, those drifts. Those I know. For some reason I was picturing some part of a cockpit coaming -- like a wooden part -- and wasn't thinking about drift pins. Don't ask me why.

Skipper599 · Post by **Skipper599** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 2:23 pm

From an earlier post: - "I have created a lovely boom gallows using a nice piece of african mahogany. I had intended to apply the same Cetol finish until I happened to see an ad on Craigslist for a quart kit of Bristol Finish. - - - I scooped it moments after it was first advertised at reasonable price."

Lesson learned (again). There's no such thing as a bargain! - on opening the product, I found the seller had been into it previously. Not only was it not a full container, but the product had hardened and useless. So much for a "Scoop" and trusting of vendor's on Craig's List.

Oh well, must needs find something else. I'm tempted to use the same Cetol Clear Marine that I used on all the teak trim and yet somehow, African Mahogany kind of 'screams' for a good Spar Varnish.

I've checked my paint cabinet and found many part-used containers but, being a few years old, I think I'll send them all off to the recycler's and start afresh. So to the marine store I shall go to see what they have on hand. I'll post a pic of the finished item later.

BTW ... don't like to rub it in but, the temp here in the PNW just east of Vancouver BC was a balmy 57degrees yesterday. Not quite as warm today, but still reasonably mild.

Tim Mertinooke · Post by **Tim Mertinooke** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 3:42 pm

Quetzalsailor wrote:I've become addicted to using a small scraper and heat gun for removing finishes. Though incidental damage is a concern, adjacent 'glass, etc. I wonder about damaging inner glue lines in laminated work, too.

I second the use of a heat gun, scraper, and good technique. And I second your concerns on veneers. The previous owner of my boat painted all of the teak-veneered bulkheads and it's beginning to peel in some spots revealing a beautiful surface. I envisioned using a stripper to get all of the paint off, but I wonder if anyone has used a heat gun to remove a finish from a veneered surface. I worry that the glue that was used will get soft with the heat. Has anyone done this?

Hirilondë · Post by **Hirilondë** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 3:53 pm

Tim Mertinooke wrote: The previous owner of my boat painted all of the teak-veneered bulkheads and it's beginning to peel in some spots revealing a beautiful surface.

I will bet that if you do succeed in removing the paint you will find the not so beautiful surface areas that prompted him/her to paint them. But if you want to explore this further I suggest heat stripping near the sole, near chain plates and other such vulnerable spots first to find out if the paint job was a lazy response to needing varnish or a means of covering up stains and such. If you are careful, and use just enough heat you may well succeed, assuming that the ply and veneer is in good shape to begin with.

On a related note: I have added a "base board" to a boat that had staining and minor damage to veneer at the sole as a means of covering it up. It was far less work than repairs and new veneer, and looked quite good in the end.

Tim Mertinooke · Post by **Tim Mertinooke** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 4:00 pm

Great idea for the baseboard, I may go that route myself. Of the paint that has peeled so far, it has taken the original varnish off with it exposing nice veneer. I remember the previous owner telling me that he wanted to "brighten it up down below"...Ouch... I will have my fingers crossed while stripping the paint/varnish. To loop this back to varnish, I purchased a quart of Epifanes Rubbed Effect and some thinner recently which I hope to use on said teak-veneered bulkheads should they be worthy of such a magnificent product.

Skipper599 · Post by **Skipper599** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:33 pm

Ok, I paid a visit to the only marine store in my area and settled on ... ta da ... Epifanes ... the reason for doing so was because it was the only varnish product they had in a smaller amount eg: 500ml (1ltr. being the next available size).

I intend to follow the manufacturer's instructions to the letter in order to obtain a superior finish.
Having read all the information on the label, I see it claims 500ml will cover up to 150 sq ft Now, my gallows sports only about 5 sq ft max. area to cover. ... therefore, I figure I can apply about 300 coats before the can runs dry. ... Holy cow, I wonder what 300 coats would look like???

Tim Mertinooke · Post by **Tim Mertinooke** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:37 pm

Every time that I have used Epifanes, I have also followed their instructions to the letter with good results. I used their thinner too which went a remarkably long way, so for me it was worth the price.

todd gustafson · Post by **todd gustafson** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:52 pm

Bob
Hey, I think the coverage is 30 coats rather than 300...:)

Skipper599 · Post by **Skipper599** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 8:24 pm

todd gustafson wrote:Bob
Hey, I think the coverage is 30 coats rather than 300...:)

Ooops! a minor mathematical diference ... it really does matter where you place the decimal ... even so, 30 coats shud look good too don'tcha think?

What products do you like best?