Our Experience With Hydrocoat

[Maine Sail]

It always seems to be this way in a bottom paint thread. Same thing around a boatyard even--if you ask around you'll get different opinions on the same paint in the same yard. There are lots of variables in how boats get used: some are fast and some are slow, some spend a lot of time not moving at all, some have deeper keels where the bottom is shaded a lot of the time, plus some years the water is warmer than some others. Not to mention the huge differences in water temperatures and fertility of the water between places like Maine, Narragansett Bay, and Long Island Sound. Plus, I wonder how much of a difference it makes if you launch as soon as you can vs. waiting for a few weeks after you paint. In the old days you had to launch quickly, but supposedly the ablatives are fine staying out of the water, but I wonder what difference it makes.

Waters are different...

I am however 100% perplexed that ANYONE could view this paint as soft unless they have made some DRASTIC changes to the formulation. Sea Ray ships 100% of their painted boats with Hydrocoat because it holds up at 40 knots, we do 4-7 knots.. I only found this out from a Pettit rep who I feel was honest with me and admitted it IS harder than Ultima. This was of course after I had already applied it and found no pluming during bottom cleaning...

Every year with solvent based paints such as PCA Gold, Ultima and Horizons my bow gets worn right to the barrier due to the morring pendants rubbing it in calm weather. This year it was still black...

It is pouring rain today and I am in the barn working. I just rubbed four fingers across the wet hull and got ZERO black on my fingers. With Ultima, Horizons or PCA Gold my fingers are as black as night if I do this. That is what I expect from an ablative paint...

 

[Kettlewell]

It does seem strange--like I said the boatyard manager where I am warned me that it is unusually soft even for ablatives, and it definitely is softer than CPP Plus and ACP50. Mine dried for a couple of weeks before launch. How long did yours dry before launch?

 

[Mike G.]

Some of you may recall a post that I made after Irene showing Hydrocoat results compared to another section on my boat in which I used a different paint.

I had the opportunity to show the photos to the Petit Technical Rep at the recent New England Boat Show.

First, while waiting to speak with him, he told the two people in front of me that Hydrocoat was the best thing going for their sailboats. They both told him that they were on moorings in rivers. He said: "I'm a technical guy, so I have no incentive to sell you something that isn't appropriate for you." (let's not bash sales people on this thread as I am one)

My decision to use Hydrocoat was based on a Petit Reps recommendation at the Defender WH sale. I made sure to tell that rep where my boat was located.

Now my turn to speak with him--- He looks at the photos and tells me that if I had called, they would have sent him to look at the boat. He then tells me that since I am at the entrance to the Mystic River in Noank, the water is too brackish and my bottom paint needs slime resistance.

He suggested that I use the SR 40 or SR 60 or West Marine equivalent. I also remembered MS mentioning in previous posts that Hydrocoat is too hard. I asked his opinion on that. He told me that yes Hydrocoat may be too hard for sailing cruisers!!!!

Ha, next time, I'll wait for MS to be the guinea pig and give us his recommendation!!!!!

 

[Maine Sail]

This was posted by my friend Paul D., another Mainer, just yesterday regarding his Hydrocoat. He posted it on another forum. He still plans to use it because of its ease of use.

"I've posted this before. I don't think it's great but I'll probably keep using it because it's easy to apply, relatively cheap, and very easy to clean up."

Paul is obviously more accepting of poor performing paint than I am, but after a 10k bottom job, that level of growth in MAINE is just totally unacceptable to me...

 

[captainpat]

Prop Speed: A friend and I used it for the first time last year. Expensive but it works. The expense averaged out over the expected usable life actually makes it cost effective.

 

[Warren Milberg]

I don't read "Pratical Sailor" anymore, but does anyone know how they rated Hydrocoat? They used to test bottom paints in two separate locations and usually had very different results with the same paint.

 

[captainpat]

see below

 

[captainpat]

BIO BOOST:
It is compatible only with the paints listed on their web site. DO NOT USE IT ON ANY PAINT NOT LISTED.

BOTTOM PAINT:
I find it amazing that there are so many completely opposite observations about Hydro Coat. For example; one contributor states that he can wipe his wet hand on the bottom and come away clean, whereas, my hand comes away covered in black paint. Another observes that the paint does not ablate, while, on my boat, the trace color shows through in some areas. I will admit that I apply a VERY THIN coat of paint and thin it with water by about 10%. Many of those contributing to this thread are very experienced boaters and, through their posts, have established themselves as very informative and quite knowledgeable. How, then, can these differing observations be explained?

I’m thinking that bottom paint effectiveness is determined by many factors that are not considered in the various test procedures. Possibly the warmer temperature of the waters in the Chesapeake have an effect on the hardness or softness of the paint, Hydro Coat in particular, compared to the colder more northern waters. Whenever I read anything about bottom paint test results the tests are executed in the same location under similar conditions. Those conditions may be made to change but they are the same for all test panels. Perhaps the tests should take into consideration other factors such as; water salinity, temperature, pollutants, current speed and frequency flowing in the slip or mooring field. Other factors such as the shape of the boat’s bottom, the amount of time running with the motor, the frequency of boat use, etc. may contribute to divergent results. One thing seems apparent; if your bottom paint works for your boat, in your location, and under your boating conditions, there is absolutely no reason to change – no matter what anyone, or any test, may say.

 

[Gunni]

I don't read "Pratical Sailor" anymore, but does anyone know how they rated Hydrocoat? They used to test bottom paints in two separate locations and usually had very different results with the same paint.

In the Practical Sailor long-term bottom paint write up from Winter 2011 the Hydrocoat was highly rated and recommended. It was a big reason I chose it. That and the experience of a Sabre owner next to me. I noticed his old bottom paint was in good shape, and free of growth. He was rolling on a fresh coat of Hydrocoat and said he had been using it for several years, with only a pressure wash prep.

 

[Argyle38]

I don't read "Pratical Sailor" anymore, but does anyone know how they rated Hydrocoat? They used to test bottom paints in two separate locations and usually had very different results with the same paint.

As Gunni mentions, it was one of the higher rated ablative paints. The price/performance was why I chose it.

I believe that Practical Sailor does most of their northern tests in Norwalk, CT. It would be interesting to see if they would get the same positive results if they tested the paint at locations farther up into New England. Like I said, it works fine in Milford, but another poster in Noank had poor performance as did Maine Sail.

Seems like New Haven might be the boundary for it's usefulness. Maybe the hydrocoat engineers are all Yankees fans and this is their little joke.

 

[Quoddy]

Hydrocoat

We have used Hydrocoat in Maine, with seasonal haul out and re-coat for about 4 years with the boat on a mooring with some currents. It is quite hard. We get some slime and hard growth, which seems about equal to Horizon. Environmental advantage of water base is worth it. I just read Alan in NY has had luck with Aquaguard, also a water base. Maybe we’ll try some.

 

[ifmdalvey]

MaineSail
I have used the Interlux Bottomkote ACT ablative for the last 3 years and am extremely pleased with it. I am in the same water as you, never scrub the hull while she is in for 6 months and my bottom looks a lot cleaner than yours when hauled, give it a try.

 

[captainpat]

Act is a SINGLE SEASON ABLATIVE. As such you cannot touch up each season; you must completely re-coat.

 

[Marc14857]

Went to the marina this afternoon to start scoping out spring commissioning. Here are some pictures which led to my earlier post about the poor performance using hydrocoat.

 

[Maine Sail]

Hydrocoat Update

I had the local Pettit rep come out to my house and examine the boat. He said it is clear the paint was "not releasing" or ablading but he had no idea why. "Never seen that before." The paint also did not adhere well to the properly prepped Ultima SR that was under it. I spent considerable time in the fall and this spring with both the sander and the 2800PSI pressure washer to try and blast and sand the rest of the Hydrocoat off. I hope I was successful..

Pettit was VERY good to me and sent me replacement paint "whetever I wanted" so I chose Ultima SR as that is what I have had great experience with.. It was on my door step two days later. I'm still a little frustrated with my experience and the lack of an answer as to "why" but free paint was a great way to deal with it. I did not ask for replacement paint just wanted an answer but Steve insisted...

Thanks Pettit!

 

[Rich Stidger]

Another update

I had a similar experience with Pettit as with Maine Sail above. When I went to the Defender Warehouse sale I took pictures of my hull after the hurricane Irene haul-out. It was clear that the paint was not performing well as there was loads of soft growth. The rep at the show agreed that it should work better and offered to send me two gallons of the Hydrocoat SR (I had used their plain Hydrocoat formula- no slime biocide for soft growth) with their dual biocide if I would use it and report to them how well it worked. I agreed and told them I needed it within two weeks as I had a plan with helpers to prep and paint. "No problem" I was told.

Well the short version is that I didn't get the paint in time and when I finally got to talk to a live person I was told that the Hydrocoat SR would not be available to me because the factory wasn't satisfied with the paint's performance. They would be happy to get me some for next year, though. Well since I was counting on that paint and consequently didn't buy any at the warehouse sale, they told me that they could give me an alternate paint- Ultima 40 SR. Then they found that they didn't have any of the 40 SR in blue, so they said that they would send some Ultima 60 SR, plus some thinner- but it would be another 10 days before I would receive it.

I am waiting now. With luck it will come next week before my next scheduled boat work trip.

The bottom line is that they seem to have a problem with this paint and they are trying to make good and satisfy their customers. It sounds like everything will eventually work out but I am getting nervous about the delays and my impending launch date.

 

[Maine Sail]

Then they found that they didn't have any of the 40 SR in blue, so they said that they would send some Ultima 60 SR, plus some thinner- but it would be another 10 days before I would receive it.

That is what they sent me, Ultima SR 60. I usually use the SR 40 but certainly won't complain about 60% copper... Clearly my situation is not as isolated as the rep led me to believe...

 

[FourPoints]

Little late chiming in here, I haven't used the hydrocoat, but I used the WM CPP Plus my first two seasons and was very turned off by just how soft it was. I am still washing the blue off of things that got near the hull.

Last year I switched to WM PCA Gold and had very good results. It ablated just right. It was just hard enough to not leave a blue plume when it was gently touched, but cleaned easily with a soft brush. I had zero hard growth, and minimal soft growth even though I was in an area (Stamford Harbor, East Fork) known for heavy soft growth.

My only problem is that I never took off all of the CPP before applying the PCA Gold, and the undercoat of CPP keeps flaking off...

My hull was inadvertently shown off to some other sailors when a wind shift left me in too shallow of water on an outgoing tide while I was away from the boat (no problem, we kept drinking nearby, and just waited it out until we could move her to deeper water once she was floating again), but I had 3 different people tell me they were surprised at how clean the hull was.

 

[Stu Jackson]

Not Hydrocoat, but flix of our bottom before and after a pressure wash.

Kinda seems what you'd WANT to expect.

It's not Hydrocoat,Petit Trinidad SR paint

but I understand the differences between ablative and hard.

Just sayin' that all that crap on the bottom shouldn't be there.

2+ years since last haul, quarterly diver scrubbing.

 

[Maine Sail]

Last year I switched to WM PCA Gold and had very good results.

PCA Gold is Ultima SR40. According to the rep all the other WM paints are old Woolsey formulations (Pettit bought Woolsey). The PCA Gold is Ultima SR40, a newer Pettit formulation, which is an excellent paint. I have used PCA Gold, would have used it this year if not for the replacement paint, and I've had great results with it.