materials for boatbuilding
arbarnhart
researching and looking around the net, in the library and getting tips from
individuals. It seems to me one can really go overboard, but on the other
hand, bad choices can have disasterous consequences. Anyway, here is a
smattering of what I have found...
Some "good old boy" advice from GatorBoats. Most of their boats are intended
for day use (not left in the water for extended periods) in flatwater and
they are all small boats. They also sell inexpensive plans and their target
market is definitely budget minded boat builders. With all those
disclaimers, here is their FAQ page:
http://www.gatorboats.com/Frequently-Asked-Questions.htm
One of the things they claim is that for the last several years, exterior
plywood has used the same glues as marine plywood (I have seen this claim
numerous other places as well), but marine plywood is void free and treated.
So if you pick through the exterior ply for void free boards and treat it
yourself, is that any different?
OK, now let's stoke the lauan fire, which is all some boat kit and plan
companies think luaun is good for:
http://www.clcboats.com/shoptips_lauan.html
However, in the book "The Kayak Shop : Three Elegant Wooden Kayaks Anyone
Can Build" by Chris Kulczycki, luaun is mentioned as a possible alternative
though not as the optimum choice. Still it is a far cry from the previous
opinion. The interesting thing about this is that there seems to be a
connection to CLC (the plans in the book are CLC plans).
In the free (yeah, I know, you get what you pay for) "canoe" (it's really a
pirogue) plans from bateau.com:
http://www.boatbuilder-online.com/free/ccanoeUS.PDF
they go as far as saying "Some varieties of Lauan plywood are perfect".
And there is the plywood boatbuilding FAQ:
http://www.boat-links.com/plyfaq.html
Here is an interesting article on using exterior latex enamel house paint.
It's by a chemical engineer with lots of boat building experience:
http://home.att.net/~DaveCarnell/articles.html#A1
And here is the one sheet skiff page:
http://www.planet.eon.net/~hmcleod/skiff.htm
I know, it's primarily a kid's boat, but if you follow the links you will
find people using all manner of adhesives including Liquid Nails with good
results.
Adhesives are another hostpot. the Instant Boats book says Urea powder work
fine and there are a lot of these boats remaining seaworthy. LocTite claims
their poly glue is completely waterproof. moreso that epoxy. But you can't
beat epoxy for filling gaps and it is cheaper than poly. The Liquid Nails is
an interesting entry also.
OK, so why am I posting all this?
I am trying to make up my mind what materials to use on my starter projects.
I am a little cheap by nature, but in this case I am doubly so because of
the risk of failure due to my own incompetence while learning rather than
jus poor material choice. In other words, if I mistakenly cut a piece too
small or out of the wrong spot to fit all the other pieces, I would rather
it be out of a $10 board than an $80 one. OTOH, I really think I will do
fine, so I want the boat to "work" if completed properly.
Here is my plan:
I am going to build a 12' partially decked pirogue with thin exterior lauan.
I will use fiberglass tape and marine epoxy on the outside of the seams and
Liquid Nails inside the hull. I will prime it and paint it with exterior
latex enamel.
If all goes well with that, I am going to build a 16' Yare kayak from the
"Kayak Shop" book using similar techniques, except I will glass the entire
bottom half of the exterior.
I am looking for feedback as to why this is a bad idea. A lot of people seem
to think it is. But a lot of the research (referenced above) indicates it
should be fine. I would also appreciate any good feedback also. It does seem
that most of the people who think the cheaper materials do not do the job
have not tried them, and that most people who have tried them report good
results. So please let me know what your opinion is based on (actual
experience, technical knowledge, love of craft or just an opinion).
-Andy
P.C.
arbarnhart skrev i meddelelsen ...
.
>So if you pick through the exterior ply for void free boards and treat it
>yourself, is that any different?
Yes it is.
There are two way's of making the veners , one is "cutting" the other is
"rolling". ------ Extiour is "rolled" from the tree making a continous vener ,
like if you roll paper from a roll. Marine ply are "sliced" , much like if a
big plane make the vener.
This indicate that ext. ply will be much cheaper to manufactor , and then it's
quite natural to ask why not make marine ply the same way.
Problem is that vener made by rolling the veners of a boiling hot log , tend to
try getting into it's "old shap" again. You can se this when that type of ply
have delaminated that the vener round itself back into shape, or cracks in vener
layers that come from that force. Beside wood cut the way rolled vener are
made, expand double what vener cut center out will do, ------- the vener in
marine ply are simply cut in a better way, makeng a more stable material.
What you say about the glue is also true, ----- for many years the glue for ply
have been the same film type for both interiour, exteriour and marine.
Why bother with different kinds of glue when you can get one type that is more
handy and cheaper than the others.
IL'L leave the rest of the answer to others.
P.C.
Frank Kapp
I have been building boats as a hobby since 1950 and have tried many
methods. I had little trouble with any of the methods you mentioned and
indeed a racing pram that I built 50 years ago still endures. I glassed it
in 1954 with fiberglass cloth given to me by an insulation contractor.(it
was used over asbestos on steam pipes) I used polyester resin. I have
repaired boats as well.
The worst problem I had was regarding the luan plywood from Home Depot.
It has paper thin outer plies and the plies have some tendency to
delaminate. This became evident when I struck a coral head in shallow water
while under sail in a small dingy. The luan had 6 oz e-glass on the bottom
and while repairing it I noticed I could "crumple" pieces of the trunk and
hull bottom in my hands. The glass was the only strong part of the pieces
that I cut out during repair.
If you want to try a cheap plywood call a cabinet shop in your area and
see if they have exterior meranti. I have just finished a canoe/pirogue with
it and it seems OK.
Best of luck on your project,
Frank
"arbarnhart" <arbar...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:tbetvpm...@corp.supernews.com...
arbarnhart
news:997upu$m4m$1...@news.inet.tele.dk...
> Why bother with different kinds of glue when you can get one type that is
more
> handy and cheaper than the others.
I would agree, but since I stumbled across so many people using Liquid Nails
inside the hull (some appear to be using it outside also, but I am not
planning to try that), it muddies the water a little bit. The price is
pretty good and it comes in tubes that you use in a caulk gun, which makes
it convenient (no mix, easy to apply) and potentially lowers the hard cost
by limiting waste and the soft cost by saving time.
It does say in their on line FAQ that it is waterproof but should not be
used below the waterline or immersed for "long periods of time". that seems
odd; is it waterproof or not? The one scary thin is that question #1 in
their FAQ is who to contact for medical emergencies. It's pretty toxic stuff
(no worse than the gas for your mower), but if you ventilate and store it
properly it should be okay.
P.C.
According "liquid nails" I only know one type and that's maby not what you are
talking about.
"My" liquid nail are rather used when no nails must be visible, and work from
two holes oppisite eachother where you place a bronce rod between, and fill
holes with epoxy.
Then whan both holes are poxy filled and if the rod is added have a head each
end, the "nail consist of two plugs in each invert conic hole with one or two
rods inbetween , sealed in epoxy.
That's an epoxy nail.
Liquid nails need to be qoite warm I think ;))
P.C.
arbarnhart skrev i meddelelsen ...
arbarnhart
I am talking about the brand name product Liquid Nails (see
www.liquidnails.com). It comes in a lot of different formulas, but the one
that you find at all the hardware stores is the non-latex general
construction adhesive LN 601 or sometimes the heavier duty LN 901 (at a
higher price).
"P.C." <per.c...@gentofte.mail.telia.com> wrote in message
news:998hu7$702$1...@news.inet.tele.dk...
arbarnhart
If you don't mind my asking, how much did you pay for meranti and what part
of the country are you in?
What are the specs on it (thickness, sheet size, comparative weight)?
Thanks for the feedback. It is encouraging.
-Andy
"Frank Kapp" <sfk...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:998028$g00$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net...
Doug Wilde
You mention that these materials and techniques are for your "starter"
boats. This implies that you will be building more and perhaps more
complex/higher quality boats later?
In that case, why learn to use materials that you will leave behind as your
building program progresses?
Why not start out with the materials and techniques you likely will use in
later boats and therefore have that much more experience when you start the
big projects?
As far as mistakes go...you'll make them...I make them...Glenn and Lew make
them. Luckily all are recoverable and rarely cost too much. And if you
don't point them out to everyone, few will ever notice (thank goodness).
Doug Wilde
T. hink
> Here is my plan:
> I am going to build a 12' partially decked pirogue with thin exterior
lauan.
> I will use fiberglass tape and marine epoxy on the outside of the seams
and
> Liquid Nails inside the hull. I will prime it and paint it with exterior
> latex enamel.
> If all goes well with that, I am going to build a 16' Yare kayak from the
> "Kayak Shop" book using similar techniques, except I will glass the entire
> bottom half of the exterior.
I built a slightly modified version of the Yare using exterior 1/8" luan.
The boat turned out very well except for one spot in the starboard aft where
there must have been a void in the inner plys. The result was a small
wrinkle in that part of the hull but I was able to fix it by laminating a 6"
X 6" square of luan to the inside of the hull over the wrinkle.
I think that luan is more brittle than okume so my boat probably isn't as
durable as one made of better wood. On the other hand, I don't think I would
glass the hull as that would ruin one of the best aspects of the design
which is its light weight. If you start building a yare you will find that
the bottom of the hull, where all the tortured curves are, is suprisingly
stiff and strong already.
The weak spot in my boat was the deck, which cracked slightly when I
accidentally sat between the cockpit coaming and the aft hatch cover. I took
care of it with some sanding, a coat of epoxy, some varnish, and remember
not to sit there again. If it didn't have the hatch openings in it, the
curved deck would be very strong. Otherwise, some glass tape around the
inside of the hatch opening might be good too.
My brother used latex primer and paint over the epoxyed bottom of his
Six-Hour-Canoe last fall. After one duck hunting season of heavy use there
are quite a few scratches on the bottom and some of them expose the epoxy. I
think it is probably a bad idea to rely on a latex paint to seal plywood
that isn't encased in epoxy, especially below the waterline.
John Kohnen
After building two small boats using el-cheapo materials (AC exterior ply
for one, Lauan ply for the other) I've decided that it's just not worth the
extra effort. Next time I'm going to spend a few dollars extra for decent
plywood and I'm sure I'll enjoy the building process much more! If I wanted
to go quick and dirty again I'd use the AC fir ply and just forget about
trying to make the boat look good, the lauan ply looks better at first, but
it's awfully flimsy stuff. :o(
I'm going to use epoxy next time, but plastic resin glue really isn't such
bad stuff and it's easy to work with. You've got to make fairly tight
joints, mix it well and make sure the temperature is warm, do that and it
lasts fine. I built side boards for a pickup using Weldwood, exterior fir
ply on fir stringers, and the joints outlasted two pickups in Oregon's
usually wet weather even though I never painted the things. However, joints
where I lapped 1x4s cross grain failed, probably from the opposing
contraction and expansion of the pieces. Last summer I saw a 14' plywood
Coos Craft motorboat that was built in the early '50s using Weldwood
plastic resin glue and it was doing fine. Of course it hadn't spent its
whole life in the water, and the builders (I met one of them) were used to
using glues that require a little more care in their use than epoxy (which
they'd probably never heard of back then).
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:34:31 -0500 "arbarnhart" <arbar...@aol.com> wrote:
> ...
> OK, so why am I posting all this?
> I am trying to make up my mind what materials to use on my starter projects.
> I am a little cheap by nature, but in this case I am doubly so because of
> the risk of failure due to my own incompetence while learning rather than
> jus poor material choice. In other words, if I mistakenly cut a piece too
> small or out of the wrong spot to fit all the other pieces, I would rather
> it be out of a $10 board than an $80 one. OTOH, I really think I will do
> fine, so I want the boat to "work" if completed properly.
> ...
--
John <jko...@boat-links.com>
http://www.boat-links.com/
No man will be a sailor who has contrivance enough to get himself into jail;
for being in a ship is being in a jail, with the chance of being drowned...
A man in jail has more room, better food, and commonly better company.
<Samuel Johnson>
arbarnhart
You inferred that I will build more boats. That is correct. More complex?
Maybe. I am really into small paddle craft, though I do like the idea of
fitting some for sailing. You also inferred that I would learn to use
material that I will leave behind. I did not mean to imply that, for a
couple of reasons. First, plywood is plywood as far as learning to measure,
cut and assemble. Using fir or lauan might be a quality issue, but the
techniques are the same. Second, whay would I not use Liquid Nails on the
interior of later boats if it does a fine job? Or if I didn't, wouldn't I
just be using some other adhesive instead? For that matter, squeezing a bead
of adhesive from a caulk gun is not a new skill.
-Andy
"Doug Wilde" <dbw...@cox-internet.com> wrote in message
news:tbgbsld...@corp.supernews.com...
arbarnhart
As a later poster points out, the flimsiness of lauan is necessary for the
sea kayak project, but his experience with lauan is making me rethink its
use for that project. For my pirogue projects, I am now leaning toward fir.
I am not really considering plastic resin. I am thinking of using epoxy on
tape on external seams.
The "quick and dirty" notion bothers me a little. It seems to be an
assumption that I don't care about quality because I don't want to spend
more than I have to. That is not true. Evidence seems to support the notion
that reasonable quality does not have to be so expensive. Beauty is another
issue. Fir will likely get painted or have a "homey" look. And if I want to
build ultralight, I should probably spring for Occome (or however you spell
it).
-Andy
"John Kohnen" <jko...@boat-links.com> wrote in message
news:aBEu6wAr...@boat-links.com...
Pat Ford
wrote:
>"P.C." <per.c...@gentofte.mail.telia.com> wrote in message
>news:997upu$m4m$1...@news.inet.tele.dk...
>> Why bother with different kinds of glue when you can get one type that is
>more
>> handy and cheaper than the others.
>
>I would agree, but since I stumbled across so many people using Liquid Nails
>inside the hull (some appear to be using it outside also, but I am not
>planning to try that), it muddies the water a little bit. The price is
>pretty good and it comes in tubes that you use in a caulk gun, which makes
>it convenient (no mix, easy to apply) and potentially lowers the hard cost
>by limiting waste and the soft cost by saving time.
>
>It does say in their on line FAQ that it is waterproof but should not be
>used below the waterline or immersed for "long periods of time". that seems
>odd; is it waterproof or not?
It is not.
If it is waterproof then there should be no problem with immersion.
You are misquoting the manufacturer or the manufacturer is
misrepresenting his product.
>
>
Pat Ford
wrote:
See comments in body and at end.
>for day use (not left in the water for extended periods) in flatwater and
>they are all small boats. They also sell inexpensive plans and their target
>market is definitely budget minded boat builders. With all those
>disclaimers, here is their FAQ page:
>http://www.gatorboats.com/Frequently-Asked-Questions.htm
>One of the things they claim is that for the last several years, exterior
>plywood has used the same glues as marine plywood (I have seen this claim
>numerous other places as well), but marine plywood is void free and treated.
>So if you pick through the exterior ply for void free boards and treat it
>yourself, is that any different?
not "treated" whatever that means. Fir marine plywood is notorious for
having voids. These guys state that "Elmer's" is an adequate glue.
A quote from their FAQ:
"For most boats, any water-proof exterior wood glue works fine...we
haven't found any particularly good or bad ones...we usually use
Elmers brand because it is readily available."
>Here is an interesting article on using exterior latex enamel house paint.
>It's by a chemical engineer with lots of boat building experience:
>http://home.att.net/~DaveCarnell/articles.html#A1
I presume you ask a plumber for advice when your television set goes
out? Why do you think they call it house paint? Why do you think they
call it marine paint? Is someone trying to fool you into buying an
more expensive product? Is there a conspiracy?
>And here is the one sheet skiff page:
>http://www.planet.eon.net/~hmcleod/skiff.htm
>I know, it's primarily a kid's boat, but if you follow the links you will
>find people using all manner of adhesives including Liquid Nails with good
>results.
Liquid Nails is used to stick up rec room paneling. It is not a marine
adhesive.
>I am looking for feedback as to why this is a bad idea. A lot of people seem
>to think it is. But a lot of the research (referenced above) indicates it
>should be fine. I would also appreciate any good feedback also. It does seem
>that most of the people who think the cheaper materials do not do the job
>have not tried them, and that most people who have tried them report good
>results. So please let me know what your opinion is based on (actual
>experience, technical knowledge, love of craft or just an opinion).
You have every right to build a trash boat and to use inappropriate
substandard materials. You are only putting your life at risk and
those of your passengers.
The chances are that the boat will float and last some length of
time. But they thing I just can not understand is why one would spend
precious free time to build something that is compromised from the
beginning.
I don't have to use substandard materials to know that they are no
good. Does a race car driver need to test using bad tires in a race to
see if they might work? The best materials sometimes last too short a
time in the demanding marine environment.
You will get plenty of support for building trashy boats using
substandard materials in this newsgroup. It is full of those that have
been brainwashed into thinking that is all they are able to do. Try
asking a professional boatbuilder what they think of using Weldwood
and luan plywood and see the reaction you get. (Don't even ask about
Liquid Nails. sheesh.)
But you can do much better. The trash boat movement and those making
$15 for a set of plans and bad advice don't want you to know this.
Your sense of accomplishment will be much greater if you do not do
business with these people.
I sometimes despair at the lack of nerve and resolve of those new to
the hobby of boatbuiding these days. From another era here is an
example of what a high school junior (17 YEARS OLD!!!) could
accomplish. Still want to build a trash boat?
Check out:
http://www.paddlin.com/fivelakes/iam_canoe_article.html
Peter Wiley
wrote:
>Adhesives are another hostpot. the Instant Boats book says Urea powder work
>fine and there are a lot of these boats remaining seaworthy. LocTite claims
>their poly glue is completely waterproof. moreso that epoxy. But you can't
>beat epoxy for filling gaps and it is cheaper than poly. The Liquid Nails is
>an interesting entry also.
IMNSHO, anyone who uses Liquid Nails for immersed joints is nuts. I
used the stuff for its intended purpose - gluing plywood flooring to
stud timbers when building my house. It was marginally acceptable
there but fortunately I trust no magic labels; I screwed the ply every
6" as well.
A couple years later, I needed to cut a hole in the floor. Backed out
the screws, pulled up the ply section very easily. Marginal adhesion
between the Liquid Nails beads and the timber.
I'd use a good glue, then add screws as well.
Peter Wiley
P.C.
Pat Ford skrev i meddelelsen <3ab90087...@news.halcyon.com>...
>On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:34:31 -0500, "arbarnhart" <arbar...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>See comments in body and at end.
> http://www.paddlin.com/fivelakes/iam_canoe_article.html
I do agrea in some of your points but I just mailed with an old friend, and he
pointed to some facts worth a thought.
You se , I think that in this newsgroupe those of us who can hardly bear to hear
about vorse quality used for building boats, shuld point to that the reson
mahogony is a bit more expensive than ply, is that it is acturly easyer to
handle.
So when someone buy a low quality ply, he buy a more difficult boat to build.
Also my friend told me a truth that you shuld not forget ; that is that many
people have acturly made cheap boats in medium quality materials, and are quite
pleased with these.
So _my_ demands for first quality materials also tell something about my
lazyness.
Also I think that it shuld be "our" duty, ---- those of us who keep the old
craft's alive, not to be to hard on those who want to use the materials they can
afford. I think , ------- and this count for both materials and designs, that we
need to tell how things are, and _why_ a good marine ply are better than an
exteriour, that is then better than an interiour . Just think how the
confution about why veners are cut that way in marine ply's and how this decide
the ability of the material compared with exteriour.
--------- True the last couple of weeks been bad ;))
Still I rather have the aproach, that if someone make his own boat as he please,
then what. ------ as long as he stand up to the responsibility getting rit of
it, when it is vorn out or within a period of time rather shuld be scrapped than
sold.
P.C.
HLAviation
>>that most of the people who think the cheaper materials do not do the job
>>have not tried them, and that most people who have tried them report good
>>results. So please let me know what your opinion is based on (actual
>>experience, technical knowledge, love of craft or just an opinion).
>
Well, I'll relate a experience of mine to you. I was living out at anchor and
working at a construction site. I got home from work one day to find my dink
had been stolen. I went back to the site and built an 8'dink out of scrap
plywood and 2x4s which I ripped down as required. I assembled it with 3M 5200
and my nail gun, I also sealed the eges of the plywood with 5200. I painted it
with several coats of exterior grade latex, and slept at the site that night.
The next evening I launched it and rowed home. I had $40 in that dink (used
oarlock sockets and
5200) and it was ugly, none of the cuts was planed, sanded or finished, how it
came off the table saw was the finish that got painted, but for the next 5
months it was my faithfull and good rowing dink and never leaked a drop. Then
someone decided to steal it too (why anyone would want to steal "Frankenstiens
Dingy" as it was named, was beyond my imagination). The moral? You figure it
out. If I was building a boat, I would do it first class, If I need to get
home, I build what I can quick and cheap.
Frank Kapp
Hi Pat,
I know that you build very fine boats and take great pride in doing so.
I, on the other hand build boats and enjoy doing so very much. I have built
7 boats in the last 3 years and another dozen between then and 1950 when I
built my first one. I have very well equipped wood working shops just for my
hobby. My boats have improved through the years though they may be very
rough to junk in your opinion, but what is the harm in using epoxy and
meranti or fir or pine. I want to turn out a boat that I can enjoy for a
while and give away if I become tired of it. I also sew my own sails and
have tried among other things; tyvec paper, plastic polytarp, polyester
material designed for rain coats as well as dacron. The common multiple in
all of this is I do it because it is fun and in no way to detract from what
a skilled master craftsman can create using the finest materials available.
I respect you and other craftsmen as well and hope you haven't read anything
into my posts that would lead you to think otherwise.
Best regards,
Frank
"Pat Ford" <pf...@halcyon.com> wrote in message
news:3ab90087...@news.halcyon.com...
Pat Ford
<sfk...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>Hi Pat,
> I know that you build very fine boats and take great pride in doing so.
>I, on the other hand build boats and enjoy doing so very much. I have built
>7 boats in the last 3 years and another dozen between then and 1950 when I
>built my first one. I have very well equipped wood working shops just for my
>hobby. My boats have improved through the years though they may be very
>rough to junk in your opinion, but what is the harm in using epoxy and
>meranti or fir or pine. I want to turn out a boat that I can enjoy for a
>while and give away if I become tired of it.
You, and perhaps others, may have understood me. By NO means do I say
that a hobbyist should build the most complicated boat they can find
and finish it to the highest level.
I see nothing wrong with a plain finished flat bottom skiff, for
example.
What I am saying is that a novice should not be forced to believe that
they should build sloppily with substandard materials. Those that
tell newcomers that are little more than crooks in my book. Maybe a
stronger word could apply.
I do think that amateurs should aim high and use proper materials. It
will be more pleasant experience.
arbarnhart
> wrote:
> having voids. These guys state that "Elmer's" is an adequate glue.
> A quote from their FAQ:
> "For most boats, any water-proof exterior wood glue works fine...we
> haven't found any particularly good or bad ones...we usually use
> Elmers brand because it is readily available."
Check out www.elmers.com; they make a *lot* of different glues and in the
statement you just quoted they say "water proof exterior wood glue". They
are likely referring to the ProBond poly glue which is waterproof according
to Elmers (and every review I have read on poly supports the claim).
> >Here is an interesting article on using exterior latex enamel house
paint.
> >It's by a chemical engineer with lots of boat building experience:
> >http://home.att.net/~DaveCarnell/articles.html#A1
> I presume you ask a plumber for advice when your television set goes
> out? Why do you think they call it house paint? Why do you think they
> call it marine paint? Is someone trying to fool you into buying an
> more expensive product? Is there a conspiracy?
I am not sure what the plumber comment is about. An opinion from a chemical
engineer who worked with paints and builds boats is more like getting help
from a electrical engineer who tinkers with TVs. You have a lot of
questions; I see I am not the only one without all the answers. :-)
No, I don't think there is a conspiracy and I think the marine paint may be
marginally better. But there are good points in the article well supported
which you are just dismissing out of hand.
> >And here is the one sheet skiff page:
> >http://www.planet.eon.net/~hmcleod/skiff.htm
> >I know, it's primarily a kid's boat, but if you follow the links you will
> >find people using all manner of adhesives including Liquid Nails with
good
> >results.
> Liquid Nails is used to stick up rec room paneling. It is not a marine
> adhesive.
Which formula? There are several.
> You have every right to build a trash boat
I understand; I will file your opinion in the "love of craft" category. That
is not a slam. It does seem that you are inspired more by belief that it
must be done a certain way rather than any evidence that any alternatives
work. I have seen you post that "poly isn't waterproof" despite all the
manufacturers saying it is, despite other posters saying they boiled it and
jints held, despite reviews supporting the claim. But you believe otherwise.
> http://www.paddlin.com/fivelakes/iam_canoe_article.html
A broken link.
Pat Ford
wrote:
>
>"Pat Ford" <pf...@halcyon.com> wrote in message
>news:3ab90087...@news.halcyon.com...
>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:34:31 -0500, "arbarnhart" <arbar...@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>> having voids. These guys state that "Elmer's" is an adequate glue.
>> A quote from their FAQ:
>> "For most boats, any water-proof exterior wood glue works fine...we
>> haven't found any particularly good or bad ones...we usually use
>> Elmers brand because it is readily available."
>
>Check out www.elmers.com; they make a *lot* of different glues and in the
>statement you just quoted they say "water proof exterior wood glue". They
>are likely referring to the ProBond poly glue which is waterproof according
>to Elmers (and every review I have read on poly supports the claim).
A few years ago a friend of mine said that Gorilla glue was
waterproof. He insisted that it says so right on the bottle. Now, I
haven't checked lately, but some time ago when I checked it said that
it was water resistant and that it was not for underwater use. That
does not make it waterproof.
Unless things have changed, the criterion for waterproofness is
boiling for a length of time. This length of time I cannot recall but
it is substantial, many hours as I recall. The test piece is boiled,
not in anticipation of being sailing in a boiling hot springs, but as
a way of attempting to approximate durability over time.
There is only one common adhesive which passes this test:
resorcinal. Epoxy is not, strictly speaking, a waterproof adhesive,
but it has proved itself over 30+ years of use. With proper use, it is
considered by most to be an appropriate adhesive for marine use.
Many glues are water resistant. No matter what you saw or _think_ you
saw, _true_ waterproofness is a quality which very few adhesives have.
>> >Here is an interesting article on using exterior latex enamel house
>paint.
>> >It's by a chemical engineer with lots of boat building experience:
>> >http://home.att.net/~DaveCarnell/articles.html#A1
>> I presume you ask a plumber for advice when your television set goes
>> out? Why do you think they call it house paint? Why do you think they
>> call it marine paint? Is someone trying to fool you into buying an
>> more expensive product? Is there a conspiracy?
>
>I am not sure what the plumber comment is about. An opinion from a chemical
>engineer who worked with paints and builds boats is more like getting help
>from a electrical engineer who tinkers with TVs. You have a lot of
>questions; I see I am not the only one without all the answers. :-)
>No, I don't think there is a conspiracy and I think the marine paint may be
>marginally better. But there are good points in the article well supported
>which you are just dismissing out of hand.
Unless his expertise is very closely allied with coating technology
should not a more appropriate person to ask to information be a boat
painter?
The same person has issued strange claims for antifreeze including
curing solving problems with Mr. Happy by dipping in a jug of
Prestone. Myself, I would be wary of his claims.
Anyone can proclaim themselves an expert in any field on USENET.
Why someone would think that since latex paint on house subsists
outside all the time it therefore is an marine paint is strange.
Houses do not float, do not rub up against each other and are not
regularly scrubbed as well as other differences.
Latex does not have good leveling characteristics nor is it a good
marine primer. It will cover the boat and give a more or less unform
color. If that is all you are looking for fine, but that's not the
criteria for marine paint.
<snips>
>I understand; I will file your opinion in the "love of craft" category. That
>is not a slam. It does seem that you are inspired more by belief that it
>must be done a certain way rather than any evidence that any alternatives
>work.
But the alternatives DO work. For a while. Sort of. If you keep the
boat out of the water. If you keep it covered. Building something so
compromised from the beginning just does not seem very satisfying to
me.
In twenty five years of boat restoration, I know that you don't use
nonwaterproof glue and you don't use wood which will likely soon rot.
You owe it to your customer to use proper materials and to work them
to the best of your abilities. If that is "love of craft" I plead
guilty and I am not ashamed of it.
> I have seen you post that "poly isn't waterproof" despite all the
>manufacturers saying it is, despite other posters saying they boiled it and
>jints held, despite reviews supporting the claim. But you believe otherwise.
My friend, several posters have said polyurethane is not waterproof.
It has been reported here that it says on the bottle that is not for
"continued immersion." How can yu then conclude that the product is
waterproof? Your logic baffles me.
>> http://www.paddlin.com/fivelakes/iam_canoe_article.html
>
Sorry, it worked this morning, it's a flakey server. It's a two person
decked sailing canoe built by a high school junior. It's inspiring.
Well, it is to me. No doorskins or Liquid Nails used at all.
I have no hope of convincing you that you are mistaken. You have every
right to do as you please with your free time. For my part I hope to
end my part in this discussion. But I do hope that I may have
convinced other with open minds to build challenging boats of proper
materials. In the long run you won't regret it.
Remember, this newsgroup is currently heavily populated by those
advocating the quick and dirty approach to building.(By the way, few
years ago, it was full of guys building "stripper" canoes.) There
opnions would not stand the test in other venues. Try the Woodenboat
magazine forums to check out some of these ideas.
I'll finish by saying, as I often do, that nobody should not take my
opinions as sactified truth. Check my opinions and facts out with
experienced boatwrights and boatowners.
Happy boatbuilding to you!!
arbarnhart
> Happy boatbuilding to you!!
And to you as well. I do not completely ignore these posts. I will be more
wary of certain aspects.
-Andy
arbarnhart
BTW, I did get "talked" (email correspondence) into doing inside chine
construction instead of stitch-n-glue or tack-n-tape. You will probably be
surprised at the source of the advice - Henry of GatorBoats (you know, the
Elmer's guy, who also suggest using galvanized sheetrock screws because they
"bite like a wild dog").
-Andy
William R. Watt
> Why do you think they
> call it marine paint? Is someone trying to fool you into buying an
> more expensive product? Is there a conspiracy?
I recall reading that "marine" paint is an old term for products made to
stand up to the salt in sea spray. I don't know if there are "marine"
latex paints or if there needs to be a special formulation to withstand
ocean conditions.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Capital FreeNet www.ncf.ca Ottawa's free community network
website: www.ncf.ca/~ag384
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
arbarnhart
Your experience is not all that confidence inspiring. Would you use lauan if
you had it to do over? Would you be able to test bend the plywood at the
yard and spot a piece that would wrinkle? I am not planning to put a hatch
in the Yare.
-Andy
"T. hink" <hink_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3ab848e5$0$18888$272e...@news.execpc.com...
DLewis0163
18 1/2 foot skiff-cruiser. She is beautiful, but now I wish I had spent the
extra money for Okuome or Mernti ply, rather than the marine fir ply. Granted,
the fir was already 48 dollars a 4x8 sheet, and the others a bit more, but had
I used them, I could have "brightwork" and not have to paint over my lovely
craftsmanship.
In the long run, if you can't save enough money to buy really good wood and
then don't have the restraint to do careful work, you will probably end up
disappointed anyway.
You ALWAYS get what you pay for.
Don Lewis
William R. Watt
>
> What I am saying is that a novice should not be forced to believe that
> they should build sloppily with substandard materials. Those that
> tell newcomers that are little more than crooks in my book. Maybe a
> stronger word could apply.
where did you read any of that?
>
> I do think that amateurs should aim high and use proper materials. It
> will be more pleasant experience.
Spending money sends some people into a deep depression which is not a
pleasant experience. Boating is a pleasant expereince. People have enjoyed
the experience in boats made of skin, bark, and paper. People have enjoyed
the experience on rafts. (The name Huckleberry Finn comes to mind.)
I think you are setting the bar too high.
Hans Valk
> arbarnhart skrev i meddelelsen ... . >So if you pick through the exterior
> ply for void free boards and treat it >yourself, is that any different?
>
> Yes it is. There are two way's of making the veners , one is "cutting" the
> other is "rolling". ------ Extiour is "rolled" from the tree making a
> continous vener , like if you roll paper from a roll. Marine ply are
> "sliced" , much like if a big plane make the vener.
I don't know what in your opinion is 'marine plywood' and what is not,
but some of the highest quality plywood around (Bruynzeel okume, for
instance) mainly uses veneers made by what you call the 'rolling'
technique.
The sliced veneers you refer to are use pretty rarely, even in high
quality plywood. Sliced veneers are intantly recognisable by the more
'flame-like' wood grain they show at their surface. Sliced veneer are
mainly used for plywood that, besides being used structurally, has to
serve some decorative purpose.
--
Hans Valk
P.C.
Hans Valk skrev i meddelelsen <1eqs1i8.st8tve9obkowN%a.j....@bk.tudelft.nl>...
>P.C. <per.c...@gentofte.mail.telia.com> wrote:
>
>> arbarnhart skrev i meddelelsen ... . >So if you pick through the exterior
>> ply for void free boards and treat it >yourself, is that any different?
>>
>> Yes it is. There are two way's of making the veners , one is "cutting" the
>> other is "rolling". ------ Extiour is "rolled" from the tree making a
>> continous vener , like if you roll paper from a roll. Marine ply are
>> "sliced" , much like if a big plane make the vener.
>
>I don't know what in your opinion is 'marine plywood' and what is not,
>but some of the highest quality plywood around (Bruynzeel okume, for
>instance) mainly uses veneers made by what you call the 'rolling'
>technique.
These are not the highest quality.
>
>The sliced veneers you refer to are use pretty rarely, even in high
>quality plywood. Sliced veneers are intantly recognisable by the more
>'flame-like' wood grain they show at their surface. Sliced veneer are
>mainly used for plywood that, besides being used structurally, has to
>serve some decorative purpose.
>Hans Valk
Not just for that, ------ but you are proberly right that the first class
materials are not just rare, they also are quite expensive.
Here in Dk there is only one factory left that make first class quality ply, but
then you can ask for outer layers of 1.5 mm. teak and with such a product you
don't need to vorry about if the bulkhead will blow the screws or what tensions
could occour in a salt inviroment.
You are quite right that the looks of these ply's are a strong argument when you
have to pay up to tree times what "normal" ply cost. But I can garentie, that
with this material a sheet will never buckle or like you se in a building site
when a pallet of exteriour ply sheets been laying outside for a month , that the
lot split buckling in each different direction.
Still the nice look is just a sideeffect:
The nice look you refere is just the result of good materials, ------ when
veners are cut from the experience gathered by generations, it simply look nice,
but it's not true that the only reson to cut veners the way first class is cut
is that it shuld look nice . If you check any book describing wood, you will se
why one way to cut the veners are better than others, this simply deal with
expansion in various directions, depending how wood is cut and there is _no_ way
around fact's. First class marine ply is simply cut so that it is most stable.
----- Besides this, there is a reson for marine ply ; You don't cut first
quality materials into veners without there is a reson. Reson is that made
right ,marine ply is acturly "better" than the materials it's made of. Then you
shuld not be supprised that marine ply can be more expensive than the planks and
logs it's made of ; how can anyone wonder ;))
By laminating good quality mahogony into ply, you simply get a material that is
more stable than the original wood, ----- then no wonder it can be more
expensive. Have you ever seen a good quality marine ply ? Have you ever worked
with one.
P.C.