preventative epoxy treatment - good or bad?

[rex_seadog]

Am (once again) considering changing the boat and in browsing through the second hand boat specs I often come across "preventative epoxy treatment carried out". However, I have seen articles in PBO suggesting that unless the hull is thoroughly dried out it can actually make things worse. Therefore, should I consider a preventative epoxy treatment as a plus or minus point in considering the merits of a particular boat? Could it even have been done to cover up a potentially more serious problem?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[boatmike]

Ask when the boat was first launched and when epoxy applied. If from new excellent. Otherwise probe more deeply.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Talbot]

Another important question is how long ago was the treatment.

recent - suspect that may be covering something

5 or more years - any problems ought to have shown up by now!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[cliff]

Think of the hull as a sponge. It soaks up water albeit slowly.
Now if the hull is stripped back and washed/dried and epoxy applied no more, or very little water can enter from the epoxied side, however any moisture remaining in the glass/resin of the hull can still continue through the hull and out on the inner surface.

Epoxying the outside does not seal in the moisture nor does it prevent the hull taking up moisture from the inside of the hull such as in the bilge area for those of us with wet bilges.

I would prefer to see a boat that had been treated rather than one that had not. At least I would have some confidence that the potential problem had been addressed.

Remember ALL plastic boats suffer from osmosis to some degree or other but it is not fatal. A little preventative treatment even on older boats can slow down the rate of moisture absorption to a point where what is absorbed from the outside balances that which is released on the inner surface - equilibrium.

The application of gel shield and the like is not rocket science and is quite within the ability of the majority of boat owners. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a "doom and gloom" merchant at the best.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[capt_courageous]

There should be some evidence available of the dampness (or not) before the coating was applied. I would want some definite evidence, preferably some meter readings verified by a surveyor.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[cliff]

And to what standard would you have the meter calibrated? - Any honest marine surveyor will tell you that the meter reading can be pretty meaningless when it comes to the condition of a hull. It is only that the gullible public have come to expect "meter readings" and it helps the surveyors justify their extortionate fees.

This subject has been thrashed to death several times on previous threads so a little search on epoxy or osmosis will reveal the information and some comments from professional surveyors, as compared to the opinions of amateur owners.

As for the "diy owner's" honesty, just have a look at the boat in general and see how it is finished and looked after - this will give a good indication as to the care the owner takes with work on his boat.

If the treatment was not done correctly the epoxy will come off very quickly so unless the owner likes lifting the boat out and all the work involved, he will take care to "do it right" - So it is a good point that is done in the last few months - have your surveyor check it carefully but if a year or more since it was done, and there are no signs of the coating debonding one could be reasonably confident that the hull was "dry" and well prepared before the epoxy was applied.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[scarlett]

Preventative?

If it was 'preventative' there was no osmosis. Otherwise it is not 'prventative but remedial. As well as a survey I would want the owner to wite down that there was no osmosis proir to the treatment.

I did my almost new boat prior to coppercoating it and I would be willing to sign a promise there was nothing there prior to the work. I spent two weeks scraping some Gelshield off so I know the bottom very intimately.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[brianhumber]

I suspect lots of opinions on this. Mine has been expoxied from new and still no signs of blisters after 16years. Moisture readings for what they are worth are consistent every winter ( I have my own meter) and it is any changes I am looking for. I know this is not logical as damm all I can do about it if they suddenly start increasing.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Birdseye]

I cant see how epoxy treatment can make a problem worse, nor how it can cover anything up. You can use a meter to check for moisture when a boat has been epoxy coated just as easily as when it has not been. So if the readings indicate a dry hull, you do at least know it is likely to stay that way since the epoxy is much more water resistant than the normal gel coat.

And how would it cover anything up? It would not prevent blisters showing through nor a damp hull showing up.

Mind you, I can think of worse probs than osmosis. What if your sandwich deck (as most modern boats are) has had water ingress via the self tappers used to hold down small fittings? The balsa will rot and there is no cure other than removing one skin, replacing the balsa and then re laminating. On a complex deck moulding this must be horrendous. So get your surveyor to use his moisture meter on the deck too. And avoid screwed and plugged teak coverings like the plague, I reckon.

<hr width=100% size=1>this post is a personal opinion, and you should not base your actions on it.