East Coast antifoul (again)

beancounter

beancounter

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 Feb 2003
Messages
1,334
Location
Cambridge
Visit site
Following on from some discussion on here a while ago, herewith some pictures of Stargazer on lift-out a few weeks ago. We used Cruiser Uno - the guys in the yard (Ipswich Haven) commented that they thought the growth was a bit worse than other antifouls.

P1010031-1.jpg


P1010033.jpg
 
[ QUOTE ]
you seem to have a large section of the east coast around your P bracket and shaft.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, quite a little ecosystem, isn't it...
 
You should have seen "Huzzah" - your problems are as nothing etc.... Used Shogun - very disappointed.

Interestingly, it was much worse on starboard side, which tends to be a bit more in the sun due to wind and tide etc. Is yours 'even' on both sides?
 
Yes, pretty even all over.

The previous owner (down on the Blackwater) had used Blake's Tiger. I may well try that this year (altho' SWMBO will grumble about putting two coats on instead of the Uno... /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif)
 
I bought my Moody 31 in Plymouth and sailed it back to Bradwell. It had obviously only had one coat of cheapie and came out very weedy and any remaining antifould washed off with the pressure hose. My friend's M31 came out so clean it could go back in next year untouched. He used Blakes Tiger.
 
I use Marclear & am also was in Bradwell for the summer, worked well all apart from about three weeks in June/July when the long stringy green stuff started growing, but it went & was OK otherwise.

IanC
 
There really isn\'t much difference...

There really isn't much difference between most popular antifoulings. The coloured versions (ie not white) of Cruiser Uno, Marclear and Blakes Tiger all basically just contain cuprous oxide, although some have a bit more of it than others (the heavier the can, the more copper content). Successful performance owes much more to application - especially film thickness - than to the brand name.
 
Re: There really isn\'t much difference...

My friends also used Uno and were dissapointed when taken out, the yard said it was one of the worst they had seen this year. I used Jotun Sea Guardian - boat had only a few barnacles on the shaft & prop and am pleased. Reasonably priced at just under £60 for 5litres.
 
Re: There really isn\'t much difference...

Sea Guardian, like Cruiser Uno, Marclear and Blakes Tiger, is a simple cuprous oxide antifouling.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Your P bracket has been beefed up at some point. Mine is just a single arm as are others I have seen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, the original owner was a thorough type. A number of the other boat fittings reflect this too.
 
Maybe in the leaching / erosion rate?

I was told by a Blakes chap at the Boat Show that red a/f contains more cuprous oxide and less colourant than the others. He said that white is the worst, being mainly titanium dioxide. I have been using Ocean Performer but even that is failing to erode sufficiently fast to stay clean - slime forms first, and then everything hangs onto that. This is on a swinging mooring in a "healthy" estuary - boats in marinas foul much less.
 
White antifouling...

Yes, white (and some grey) antifouling usually contains cuprous thiocyanate rather than cuprous oxide. It's probably true that red is the most effective of the various colours, as it's likely to need less pigment added.

Ocean Performer should be better than the average, as it contains zinc pyrithione as well as cuprous oxide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top