Is Tom Begnal out there?? – In your most recent article, you applied the various finishes according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. I understand the principle of doing it this way, however, I would be very interested to know if 7 coats of either the water-based polyurethane or the marine spar varnish would have held up as well as Epifanes product. In other words is it the product or the application that makes the difference. Even an educated guess would be useful.
Thanks
Dan
Replies
Any exterior finish that contains UV inhibitors will be more effective with more coats. UV inhiditors are something that gets used up as they do their job. The thicker the coat, the more inhibitors and the longer they will be effective. That said, Epifanes is a very effective marine finish and even when compared to other marine finishes with UV inhibitors, it out performs them.
Somewhat on the same subject, McCloskey is no longer a marketed brand. The brand is now owned by Cabot. Cabot makes a non-poly marine spar varnish but I'm not sure if it is the same formulation as the McCloskey Man-O-War.
Finally, polyurethane performs poorly when exposed to UV. It rapidly deteriorates, yellowing, becoming dull, cracking and peeling. That's the reason to avoid big box poly "spar" varnishes.
I get boating magazines that rate various marine varnishes. Epiphanes is always at the top of the pack if not the top in every test. It has good UV inhibitors, but I'm sure some of it's success is due to it's flexibility.
Other tests have also placed Epifanes at the top, notably the tests conducted periodically by Practical Sailor Magazine.
A bit better performance might be had from the others with more coats, but I strongly doubt the change would have closed the gap. There is a big difference in performance between the high end marine spar varnishes such as the Epifanes, and the consumer grade spar varnishes and exterior finishes.
The one thing not mentioned in the article is what happens next. Even with Epifanes or the Smith/Epifanes, the beginning of a new season means maintenance is require. They should be sanded and a fresh coat applied, about every year.
Steve is wise beyond his years. Even the best finish will be compromised by the sun. Your best protection is multiple coats of varnish followed by a cover made from Sunbrella.
I just read the article about the "Torture Test...". Altough it is conclusive regarding the Epifanes, I feel that throwing in a sample using Smith's Clear Penetrating Epoxy Sealer was not apporpriate.
The product is receiving the "brush-off" unfairly in the author's conclusion. It's the best product I have found for not only restoring old wood but for preserving new wood as well, and for "attaching" fresh varnish to stained or bare wood.
Although the surface epoxy will deteriorate from UV rays eventually and, thus, requires maintenence coats with UV filters, it has far out-lasted my sample applications with and without the CPES primer (if you will). My samples were done with Interlux "Scooner" Marine Varnish which is comparable to the Epifanes (The Epifanes may be a little better, don'e know).
My point is that the CPES was not a necessary component of the test. It was the only sample that received any sealer, simply not a fair conclusion.
Al Benton
The reason it was included is that a recent article by one of FWW's contributors had felt that it made for a superior exterior finish.Obviously, not all finishes or combination of finishes can be tested. I personally would have included one of the big box consumer brand "spar varnishes". Many folks use them for exterior applications. Had one of those been included I would have expected it to have performed poorly.All in all, I think is was a good and fair test.Howie.........
Thanks for your reply, Howie.
It was a fair test, I didn't mean to imply that it wasn't. The results most certainly are conclusive that 7 coats of Epifanes (with or without the epoxy sealer) out-performed the other outdoor finishes for the test period of one year.
My point is that the test is not conclusive in comparing the long term advantages of using the epoxy sealer compared to not applying it under the Epifanes (or other comparable brands). Thus, the author should not have implied that it adds no value to the finish. I agree that it did not improve the finish for the year-long test but I have found that the long-term affect is much different.
Therefore, to throw the CPES into this mix on this product test is not fair to the product.
Al
FWW No. 205 has an outdoor finishes test, Epifanes was the favorite.
Life is what happens to you when you're making other plans.
When your ship comes in... make sure you are not at the airport.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled