We are about due for new bottom paint and the Port of San Diego is offering a co-op of about 65% off if you use non Copper. Can you all help me with the +'s and -'s of non Copper? I assume it costs more, hence the co-op. But does it last as long, work as well? Thanks for your thoughts.
Copper vs non Copper Bottom Paint
- Thread starter rfrye1
- Start date
- Status
My understanding is that you must remove the old paint, therefore your bottom job will be $5000 instead of $1800 like normal, so with the 65% off the cost comes out about even.
There is some debate regarding non-copper paints effectiveness, it seems a tough call to me, you may have to switch in the future. So far I've been avoiding it, there have been a couple attempts to require non-copper but so far they have not been enacted because of questions regarding suitable alternatives.
There is some debate regarding non-copper paints effectiveness, it seems a tough call to me, you may have to switch in the future. So far I've been avoiding it, there have been a couple attempts to require non-copper but so far they have not been enacted because of questions regarding suitable alternatives.
I think if you do the research (check Practical Sailor) that the current generation of non-copper paints have a useful life 50% to 66% of copper standards in SoCal like Trinidad.
Wow $1,800 for a normal bottom job? I can have my boat bead blasted and painted for alot cheaper than that here on the east coast.
i have fared and sanded my hull smooth at the beginning of this past seasons, i use Aquagard, it take a lot less paint to do one coat, i painted my whole bottom with one quart! it took about 2/3 a gallon before with the hard stuff i used to use. there was little growth under the boat at the end of the season and it washed away really easily. my rudder on the other hand was in the sunlight and had long filament on it, so my take on it is under the boat its okay in the sun not so much. but at least i feel good that i did my part to help the environment
- Status