Epoxy is Crap

[John R Smith]

There seems to me to be something of a strange, blind enthusiasm for epoxy and CPES amongst the members of this Forum. I say strange because in other contexts, say relating to similar materials in fibreglass boats, there are howls of derision and derogatory comments like "snot buckets". Yet recently these catalytic resin compounds in a new guise have been hailed as the holy grail for wooden boat construction and maintenance.

I had thought we we had all been here before and seen the error of our ways. Some years ago, it was all the rage to slather the outside of elderly wooden hulls in resin and fibreglass mat. This step was many times undertaken as a last desperate measure to keep the old girl afloat for a few more seasons, or much worse, performed on a perfectly sound hull with reduced maintenance as the only object. I think almost everyone agrees now that this was an appalling thing to do, and far from prolonging life and reducing maintenance it has often pretty well finished off the boat it was intended to save.

So how come epoxy, CPES, and glass cloth are that much different? Aha, you say, but epoxy and CPES are far superior to polyester resin in this context. They bond to wood in a way that resin could not, and they are impermeable to water. And of course, you say, we are applying these techniques to new build, not bodging up an old clunker. Hmm. Here's why I don't agree:

I've probably told you before, we have this sweet little clinker 12 foot dinghy, only 5 years old. A while ago, I wanted to modify the rowlock points and fix an attachment point below the side-benches for a line to prevent the rowlocks jumping out of their sockets. To do this, I needed to drill a couple of holes into the stringer just below the side-bench. No problem, thought I, I'll just unscrew the side-bench, lift it out, drill the holes, and re-assemble. Duh... no screws. Looked underneath, and guess what? Yes, the side-benches, and ALL the thwarts, are epoxy glued in place. So that's why there are no knees. No possibility of ever dismantling, or repairing, the thwarts and side-benches on this boat without a chainsaw. Terrific.

Take this a step further with all-glued lapstrake ply construction or similar, and what do you have? An un-repairable boat, period. And don't try to tell me that it will never need repair - maybe not in your lifetime (you hope), but one day it will either be repair or Doc's marshmallow bonfire. One of the joys of wooden boats with traditional materials and construction is (should be) that such artefacts are infinitely repairable and re-buildable. If you glue the thing together with epoxy it simply defeats the object.

CPES doesn't sound much better to me. A lot of folks seem to be regarding it as some sort of maintenance panacea. Slosh it all over the dodgy bits, use it as a prep before painting, seal the planks and seams on new build. Well, if it penetrates and or sticks half as well as it's been hyped up to do, once again heaven help you if you need to dismantle that bulkhead or stringer some years down the line. You might undo the screws, but if the CPES has done its job it'll take a crowbar to move it.

The idea of encapsulating wood within any sort of layer of glass or epoxy or resin is fatally flawed. Why? Because the encapsulating layer is bound to be punctured eventually. When it is, water will penetrate and saturate the wood. Snag is, unlike paint which is always permeable and allows the wood to breath, the epoxy layer will trap and contain the water within the wood. You can then expect rot, delamination of the wood to epoxy interface, and resultant big trouble. The jury is out on this technique, because it is so new. Why is everyone so anxious to be a guinea-pig? Because they have been seduced by this nonsense of the low-maintenance wooden boat. If you wanted that, why not buy or build in fibre-glass?

John

[Keith Wilson]

Well, I don't feel argumentative enough this morning to dispute this one. The point about repairability is well taken, that's certainly one of the advantages of a traditionally-built boat. Composite wood-epoxy boats can, of course, be repaired, usually by methods using lots more epoxy, but you can't unbolt and replace pieces. Some of us would argue that this is outweighed by other advantages of epoxified construction, at least for some applications, but to each his own. These methods are not exactly new, there have been cold-molded, sheathed-strip, and taped-seam plywood boats for at least twenty years. However, traditionally-constructed boats still work as well as they always did, so if that's what you like, that's what you should build (or sail). I kinda like epoxy, but gluing a thwart into a small boat is just plain stupid.

One point - CPES is not an effective adhesive, and won't stick things together even when slathered all over an assembly. It's supposed to be a sort of super primer/sealer, which penetrates the wood, reduces water absorbtion, and bonds chemically to the first layer of paint or varnish. We'll know in 20 years or so how well it really works, but it won't prevent you from disassembling your boat for repairs.

Epoxy softens with heat, BTW - you can use that fact to remove screws that are epoxied in, to scrape up hardened drips, and maybe even to take out that thwart without a chainsaw, if you can figure some way to get the glue joint up to 140 degrees F or so. Gluing it in was still a really bad idea.

[Scott Rosen]

Kate kick you out of bed last night? This is uncharacteristically cranky of you, John, although you make lots of fair points that others have been debating without resolution for some time now.

I'm trying CPES for the first time on my Nutshell, which is a plywood clinker glued with epoxy. I can tell you this. The reason I'm building in these materials is because I don't yet have the confidence, or the time, to undertake more traditional construction. That will be for my next boat. I'm well aware of all of the limitations of epoxy, and I don't pretend in the least that my plywood clinker is in the same league as a traditionally made boat.

The jury's still out on CPES for me. But from what I've seen, it's going to live up to its promises when use with glued plywood construction. I don't think I'll try it on Patience's teak brightwork or on any kind of traditional construction with seams and joints that are designed to move and get wet. Although, there are some perennial trouble spots, like the quarter-round trim pieces that might benefit from CPES. I suppose when I wood the brightwork (might not be for years) I might consider CPES depending on how it held up on the Nutshell. I wouldn't hesitate to use it under paint on a stable piece of wood. I'd be reluctant to use it on anything under the waterline for all of the reasons you give. But lets be honest with ourselves. Our criticism is based in large part on speculation on our part. We really don't understand the chemistry of CPES, and other who have used it swear by (not at) it. I applied it to the Nutshell's white cedar seats and then varnished over it. It looks beautiful, and the sealing qualities probably saved me a couple of coats of thinned out varnish. In fact, it brings out the depth of the grain as good or better than varnish alone and even better than a wet-sanded oil sealer. It affects the wood color exactly as varnish would, so you can't tell there's anything but varnish.

There's nothing wrong with epoxy and ply, as long as you recognize its limitations. If you expect it to have the same qualities as traditional construction, you'll be disappointed. But if you're looking for a boat that a person with average skills can build, and that will handle the repeated wet/dry cycles that a tender or dinghy is subjected to, and that is very strong for its weight, then glued plywood is a good choice.

I think you're wrong on one point. Any thing that slows the absorbtion of water into plywood will extend its life. Once you are committed to glued wood laminate (plywood), you should treat it as glued wood and not pretend it's traditional. CPES and epoxy coating may not be perfect water barriers, but when it comes to coating and sealing plywood they're way, way better than nothing. In my experience, plywood treated with only with linseed oil, pine tar, paint, etc. will not hold up and will delaminate even faster than it will rot.

Some days I feel like a big ol' lunker just waiting in the weeds for the right bait....

[Don Olney]

Epoxy is not Crap. Although I am not an expert in this field, I would say that Crap's composition is a bit different and its strength somewhat less. Notwithstanding its universal availability and attractive price as compared to epoxy, I would not recommend bonding two pieces of wood with crap---unless the customer requests so in writing.

[Ian McColgin]

Nothing like a bit of stimulating debate, but it's better to tilt at windmills than straw horses, to wit:

- Regardless of the resin, glass over wood has been shown to be a bad idea (about 20 years ago) except in new plywood construction engineered for that. Epoxy has been well used to bed wood sheathing and judging from the excellent results of such hard ranging boats as the Carr's Cerlew is a good process.

- Epoxy encapsulation works fine if you understand that the stuff's not vapor proof and therefore your wood will gain some moisture content - easy to plan for - and you don't encapsulate existing rot.

- Epoxy splining & encapsulation have worked fine for Granna - She was built in '64, well rebuild in early 70's with epoxy & splines and the result is a good structure easy to maintain and easy to spot problems and repair.

- Even traditional boats have things that don't want to come apart, whether from wasted fastenings or because the deck was built after the engin was installed.

It's also true that 'traditional' methods are terrific in their place, though many of us super traditional types think anyone who uses metal fastening rather than trennels, who use dacron rather than egyptian long staple or flax, who have abandoned manila, who use a CQR or other 20th century anchor rather than a rock, who have electric running lights rather than parrifin . . . are betraying the highest traditions . . .

ah well.

[Eb]

Flax? Manila? Parrafin?
"Hurrmph, newfangled nonsense" he says as he lifts a palm frond to the breeze while clinging to a driftwood log.


Eb

[Snark]

...and Crap is King...

[NormMessinger]

Of course epoxy is not crap. But your sure got our attention, eh, John.

As to CPES, heck fire, there's not enough epoxy in it to matter much. It does seem to work as a sealer or "undercoat" for varnish, etc., but then so does thinned varnish or whatever for a give system.

--Norm

[landlocked sailor]

And boy, does it stink! CPES that is.

[John Gearing]

John, when "Trimaran" Jim Brown (he of Searunner fame and a fervent adherent to wood-epoxy composite construction) wrote about wood-epoxy composite construction for Woodenboat a few years ago, he admitted that "you have to keep it dry", meaning the wood. Hence the importance of laminated, one piece structures with as few joints as possible. And fanatically sealing all surfaces and taking immediate action when the epoxy layer is breached. Also an excellent reason to keep epoxy away from traditionally built boats. They just weren't designed for it. Judging from Curlew and some other trad hulls that have been sheathed with epoxy laminations, this can work --at least over the timespans we've seen so far. However Dr Jagels' recent discussion as to whether epoxy bonds are truly waterproof should make any of us pause.

And lest we forget, John Guzzwell used resorcinal to cold-mold his big cruiser Treasure nearly 40 years ago and she's still going strong. Epoxy is not the only adhesive out there although it often seems that way. It is the most forgiving in terms of it's gap-filling qualities. In fact, Brown makes the point that epoxy performs better if it has a gap to fill (i.e. no starvation caused by tight joins). This has, IMHO, led to epoxy being seen as an antidote for lack of skill in working wood. This is sad, as it has discouraged many folks from learning how easy it is to build a basic boat, like a skiff, out of solid timber with all it's attendant advantages. But for boats where strength, light weight, and dimensional stability are important (e.g. kayaks) plywood and epoxy seems to work fine.

You are quite right about traditional boats being repairable and rebuildable. One thing that may be driving buyers to laminated hulls is the comparatively high cost of repairs. I could perhaps afford the $30K to buy the used boat, but if it needed an $80K rebuild in a year or two I would either have to sell her or go buy a bag of marshmallows and invite Doc over. When you buy used you are paying the labor rates of many years ago--when the boat was first built--but to have her rebuilt or repaired you have to pay current rates, which are higher than my wages as an experienced aerospace engineer. Of course, one can undertake the work oneself, but the rub is learning the skills, finding the time, etc. I think this is why so many shy away from traditional construction unless they are truly smitten.

Side note on trad construction and longevity. I read Roger Taylor's article about the English smack Boadicea, which was built in 1808 and was still going out fishing nearly 200 years later! She's said to be the oldest working boat in the world, and I wouldn't doubt it. Sure, she has been rebuilt a couple of times. Sure she probably started as a clinker hull and is now carvel. But she's still at it, and that's the point.

[Scott Mason]

John, in spite of the name of this forum and in spite of the fact that most of us own one or more wood boats, I think what binds (dare I say glues) us together is more the types of boats (generally traditional, definitely not mass produced) than the material or the means by which our boats are fastened. So we all have different needs for our boats and we all have different boats, constructed by various methods. Glued plywood works for me in my circumstances but it may not work for you.

This is said so much better by John Gardner. In his last book "Wooden Boats to Build and Use" (Mystic Seaport Museum, 1996), John Gardner describes a lovely little 13'7'' glued plywood lapstrake Swampscott Dory that he provides plans and details for as follows:

"The boat we are considering here is an old-fashioned boat. The design is traditional and it is built largely of wood, the traditional building material per se. But wait - the wood is glued together, and with epoxy, no less. This is enough, I am afraid, to degrade and disqualify it in the eyes of the deep-eyed purists. So much the worse for them, I say. This boat is traditional and right in the things that count, in its shape, looks and the way it behaves on the water. What holds the wood together is hidden and out of sight, and if glue does that job better than metal fastenings, then, glue by all means."

I know you didn't say plywood is crap; but regarding plywood, Gardner says "I daresay Herreshoff would now be specifying Bruynzeel and similar high-grade marine plywoods if he were designing yachts today."

If you are a fan of Gardner's (and if you're not what the heck is wrong with you?) then his last book is a must. The title says it all and the first Chapter "The Future of Wooden Boats" drives it home. John believed that the future of wooden boats was in building AND using them, not in preserving them in museums. So although most of the boats covered in his books are traditional even to the purists, he used other methods such as plywood and epoxy when it made a boat better for its purpose and/or made a boat buildable by us lay folk.

P.S. AS you say, gluing the thwart to the hull eliminated the need for a knee, making the boat lighter and perhaps stiffer. Gluing the thwart was one of the many choices the builder made. It wasn't right or wrong, just the wrong choice for you and your needs.

Scott

[dasboat]

Hi John, another day when you didn't have enough to do?
Regards,Darryl

[James Word]

I could walk over to your wooden boat with the tools of one of my trades , say hog ring pliers,staple puller,webbing,stretcher,sewing machine,ect,and not be able to work on your hull.This meens I brought the wrong tools and knowlege,not that your wood hull is crap. thanks J.W.W.

[John Weigandt]

I am indeed an expert in crap from all species,(That is All Creatures Great and Small... All things Bright and Beautiful... All Things Wise and Wonderful)

I've taken courses in comparative gasteroenterology, parasitology, epidemiology, and public health.

I can assure you after building my non traditional wooden boat, epoxy is not crap, nor is crap epoxy.

I can attest that the crap of some species sticks to things almost as well as epoxy (laundry in particular), so if you want traditional and organic, you may want to spread dung anywhere googe might have been called for.

Now then... last time I checked the name of the magazine was still not "TRADITIONALLY BUILT WOODEN BOAT MAGAZINE"

Theres room here for all.. and none of you have a purdier boat or wife than I do, for beauty is in the eye of the beholder. (no epoxy content in the wife however).

John T Weigandt Sailing Vessel "Herriot", Veterinarian, Non traditional boatbuilder, and know it all.

[rickprose]

John-o, I'm with you mate. Plywood and epoxy are the frozen burritos and Mama Celeste pizza of the boatbuilding world - hey, it's not really Mexican food, but, hell, I'm too busy making money and watching television to acquire the skills and take the time to actually cut up some onions and mash some avocados, and it looks like Mexican food (sorta), and it smells like Mexican food (a little)so, even if it's made of preservatives and doesn't taste like Mexican food, let's just stop quibbling and call it Mexican food... It's all food, you see, and people are very particular about food, and a lot of boaty people are really particular about food and insist that a salad with any other kind of lettuce than Romaine isn't a salad at all, and beefsteak tomatoes from the Giant Grocery Store aren't tomatoes at all, they taste like plastic, and you certainly wouldn't want to do swordfish any other way than to barbecue it in this marinade, and, my God, that's not Croatian wine you're drinking? In fact, they're so fussy about their food and the atmosphere in which it's eaten and the whole aesthetic gestalt of the thing that it's a wonder they ever get fed and they're certainly pretty smug when they see you sit down to your frozen burrito.

So, they should be able to understand it when those of us who prefer steak au poivre boats, asparagus-lightly-steamed-with-a-little-butter boats or pollo con mole boats sniff a little at their frozen burrito boats. Opinions are like ***holes, as me dear old pater used to say, everybody's got one and everyone but its owner thinks it stinks...

[This message has been edited by rickprose (edited 05-26-2000).]

[NormMessinger]

Awe now Rick, hit don't matter what cha eat. It all turns to crap in the end.


--Norm

[Jim Goodine]

John, At first I thought this post was a little rabid to be coming from you. But then I looked at your boat pictures again and thought about your great stories. Then it was clear to me that I'm taking part in this great hobby in a very different way than you are.
I could be one of the "enemy of traditional boats" given my history but I'll try to explain. I bought a classic little 16 foot daysailer that had been rolled upside down in a guy's backyard for a few years. He stopped using it when he moved to this area - too far from the water to let it swing on a mooring after taking up every spring. And, the mast was too tall for him to rig it alone. It also needed some repair.
I made a lot of calls, listened to cautionary tales, and went to work. Paint stripper and heat wouldn't touch the hull paint I ground it all off with a belt sander and did a little plank repair. Then the deck was stripped with a heat gun and it got a few new pieces. I then used epoxy and glass on both the hull and deck, then good marine enamel. I replaced the rub rails and cockpit combing, then spar varnished the interior. Next I took the handsaw and cut 8 feet off the mast and made a Gunter spar, and recut the sail. Finished it off with a custom full cover. After 3 years of living on the trailer and heavy summertime use, it is tight. And it takes me less than 1/2 hour to rig it alone at the ramp. Without epoxy, this boat would have been of no use to anyone by now - uh - except Doc with his marshmallows.
I also have a 14 foot glued lap ply canoe built to Tom Hill's plans. It has about a million miles on it and looks new. I was at Tom's shop when he was repairing one of his canoes that the owner had rolled in the surf. He didn't seem to be having any trouble with the repair and it was looking great.
Any chance that Cleek has stolen John's username? I wish I could keep a boat in the water and then I would try to pirate Lulu away to have for my own. But I need to spend 2 hours going 55 MPH directly upwind before I can even see a lake. I am a test case but for now, I'm satisfied that I couldn't be sailing in such style for less money.

[thechemist]

Bob Cleek lives within all of us...The Committee parcels out a ration of Cleek here-and-there in Its various Personnas from time to time To Suit Their Purposes.

This is obviously not a serious rant concerning epoxies ( and here let's have an aha, gotcha! for all who took it seriously ), but merely a gambit to evaluate the mood of the public on the subject. The Committee has Its Reasons and Purposes....

Further, let us remember that there are epoxies of varying qualities, just as the quality of oats varies. Prime quality oats cost a certain price, while those that have been through the horse cost a little less (getting back to the subject of the thread).

[This message has been edited by thechemist (edited 05-27-2000).]

[mariner]

All hail the epoxy gods......I haven't found a better way to keep my 69 year old iron fastenings to keep from bleeding, than epoxies. West from time to time, and now I have great expectaions for CPES. As far as the smell of CPES, that might explain all the old hippies from my era hanging around my boat during the application. Seems we didn't even need a ladder...

[Dave Hadfield]

John, I've enjoyed all your posts, even this one, which seems curmugeonly but gives cause for thought.
People have always tried to create beautiful boats (though beautiful is sometimes a personal aesthetic) as easily and simply as they can. Epoxy is just a phase of experimentation in a tradition that goes back as far as our relationship with things that float. Who knows what will come out of it? I expect epoxy will in time be discredited for some things and recommended for others. But your choice of methods, as a creator of wooden boats, becomes wider and wider.
Nothing wrong with that. You can still build any boat you like, any way you please.
And I hope you shall.

[Kermit]

As the old Scot said, "If it's na Scotch, it's cr-r-r-rap!"

Ergo, epoxy IS crap. But that doesn't mean I don't use it--I just don't drink it. It may be better on toast than marmite is.

[This message has been edited by Kermit (edited 05-28-2000).]

[jlhillman]

Epoxy can't be crap! I would'nt spend almost $80 a gallon on crap! Although I once...

[tjs]

If the builder had glued the seat in with resorcinal or even hide glue wouldn't it be just as hard or even harder to remove than the epoxy glued one. Has anyone had experiance with the new gap filling resorcinal when glueing plywood lapstrake ala Tom Hill's ultralights

[clark]

I just spent 8 hours of Memorial Day teaching my daughter to wakeboard behind my 1955 Century Coronado. As noted in previously in this forum it leaks a bit, but overall performs quite well. The bottom is original, and has not had so much as a screw replaced. In the early 80's I bought a Chris-Craft utility that had a single layer fiberglass bottom poorly applied to the waterline. Though I spent many hours repairing and maintaining the boat this ugly bottom never leaked a drop for over a decade.
While working on that boat my reading led me to believe that the "west system" epoxy bottom was the only way to go. Now any number of restorers either swear by epoxy bottoms or decry them as the worst thing that can be done to a classic boat. One of the major participants in this forum is a staunch advocate of what appears to be encapsulation or semi-encapulation with 3M 5200. The logic semms solid. It is obvious that the jury is still out on bottom restoration, and the only thing that seems to certain is that the person who feels there is only one correct way to redo a bottom is probably wrong.

[Cedar Hill Boatworks]

Sounds like somebody woke up on the wrong side of the shop.
We seem to spend a lot of time tripping over the word traditional.
Traditionally, crafts and methods evolve, from birchbark and pine gum, to canvas and seam filler for example. Was Cutty Sark not a traditionally built ship because it used iron frames in stead of wood? I think not. Certainly the Herreshofs would be specifiying plywood by now. There is no reason that we should not take advantage of the advances in technology as they apply. If silicon bronze had been available a century ago would builders have insisted on iron fastenings? Shall we eschew the use of galvanised bolts because the material is not traditional..... you get my point.
Traditionally Ian Oughtred's boats have been built of plywood/epoxy. Nice looking boats most of them.
The point previously made about coming to the repair with the right set of tools and skills seems to wrap it up nicely.

[TomRobb]

Do I hear some one say Amen!?

[redjim777]

I don't think any one has mentioned it but most crap floats...

[wandiwise]

Since this subject matter seems to have a life of its own, one feels moved (pun?) to ask, why does the W'Boat Censor accept the C R . . . word and not the S H . . word?

If memory serves, I was about twelve when my father finally got tired of my constantly using the newly discovered C R word and asked me if I knew what it meant. My reply, naturally enough, was "Nor, sir." (Yes, best I used that Sir word) He told me what it meant, the S H word, which he proceeded to spell for me. Then he suggested rather strongly that I was not to use either word in his presence, else I wasn't too big to be reduced to doing either one in a standing position until my sit-down region healed.

One wonders!

www

[John Weigandt]

Perhaps crap should be censored because it is derived from a proper name, Thomas Crapper, who invented the first practical and popular indoor loo.

To say crap is in a way a direct insult to a person and his memory...

Now, if I can just figure out why people go to the John instead of the Thomas....

John Thomas Weigandt (wouldn't help me either way)

[Ian Wright]

Epoxy is crap?
Not quite, it's just a way of doing a bad job better.
There *are* uses for it, as glue and filler in a stitch and glue boat for example, but real traditional boats have no need of it. There are older, better more suitable and cheaper glues, fillers, primers and coatings than epoxies. You just need to know about them, know where to get them and acquire the skill to use them.
For non-traditionalists a boat sized autoclave would help,,,,,,

Just as only a "real" teak deck is real, only a *traditional* plank on frame or clinker boat is the real deal. Copies using ply and epoxy or strip and epoxy are simply less than the real thing, substitutes in fact. It may be all we can afford, or all we can manage to build, and any boat is better than no boat, but let us at least aim higher next time,,,,,,,
WoodenBoat does us no favours by pretending that wood reinforced plastic is any closer to traditional construction than glass reinforced plastic. It (often) looks better, but that’s it.


Ian.

[Bruce Hooke]

OK, I'll take the bait (and stoke the fire). Exactly what is it that makes a "traditional" teak deck inherently better than a teak over plywood deck because I find it much easier to come up with arguments in favor of the latter (less weight, fewer leaks, more strength, more rain forest left when your done...). The one argument I won't accept is "because its the traditional way to do it" because on that basis maybe we should all be building dug-out canoes!

On a more philosophical note, maybe where the real debate lies is in questions like, is one being visually deceptive (i.e. lying in a sense) when one builds a teak over plywood deck and makes it look like a traditional teak deck. That, to me, is a difficult question because throughout history our most timeless creations have almost always had a visual integrity that might be said to be lacking in a teak over plywood deck. A classic example of what I mean by "lacking integrity" is an architectural column that supports no weight. On the other hand, one could argue that when you build a teak over plywood deck you are not trying to imitate a traditional deck you are just trying to use technology to have the advantages of a teak surfaced deck without the disadvantages of a traditional teak deck. However, I don't completely buy that argument because it seems like most of the teak over plywood decks I have seen contain many details whose only justification is that they make the deck look more traditional. So, maybe if we are going to build boats with wood and epoxy we should lean more towards the aesthetic of that hot pink, ultra-streamlined iceboat that graced the covers of WoodenBoat a few years ago. I'm not sure what the 'best' answer is but it is an interesting point (IMHO) to contemplate. For better or worse I love that pink iceboat but I also love the designs of the likes of Albert Strange and I love thinking about how the two relate to each other.

One small note in closing. I would dispute the idea that WoodenBoat magazine is in any way "pretending that wood reinforced plastic is any closer to traditional construction than glass reinforced plastic." At least in recent years it seems to me that they have made it quite clear that the magazine is about building boats with wood, by whatever means, and not about building only "traditional" wood boats. I realize that approach on their part does not please some people, but I, at least, would rather read about all approaches and then make my own choices.

- Bruce

[Scott Rosen]

Excuse me while I interrupt your mental masturbation for a moment.

Epxoy is glue. Boat builders have been using glue for all sorts of things for a very long time. Epoxy has different qualities than many other glues, which make it either more or less suitable for some applications. There are very few things now being done with epoxy that weren't already being done with some other kind of glue.

As you argue yourselves ever closer to the holy of holies in boat building, when you finally get there, please let me know if the name of your lord turns out to be "Tradition" and if the presence of epoxy will defile that most sacred of places.

[Ian Wright]

>Excuse me while I interrupt your mental masturbation for a moment.<

You are excused,,,,

>Epxoy is glue. Boat builders have been using glue for all sorts of things for a very long time.<

Getting close to the point,,,,,,Epoxy CAN be glue, or paint or varnish, but it is not the ONLY glue, paint or varnish,,,,,,,,

>As you argue yourselves ever closer to the holy of holies in boat building, when you finally get there, please let me know if the name of your lord turns out to be "Tradition" and if the presence of epoxy will defile that most sacred of places.<

The Holy of Holies (?) is fitness for purpose, and God is in the detail.Build up to the highest standard and not down to a price or down to time and if epoxy is the answer,,,,,,, well fine, use it. Use it to make a boat cheaper and worse, or use it as a substitute for skill and you devalue the boat you build.
,,,,,,, and what's wrong with dug out boats?

Ian.

[Bruce Hooke]

Ian (Wright): I have no objection to dugout canoes, I just wouldn't want them to be the only choice in the wooden boat world.

Other than that I agree with you completely. If someone is using epoxy to build a boat cheaper, quicker or more easily that's fine as long as they are aware of the compromises they are making. On the other hand, if someone is using epoxy to build a boat of the highest caliber I see no reason for them to apologize for using epoxy.

- Bruce

[jlhillman]

John posts an epoxy rant, then takes a powder. Whats going on? Was it Col. Mustard in the library with the lead pipe?

[John R Smith]

Oh lord... I owe you folks an apology, I think. Smith has gone and put his big foot right in it, it seems. I stimulated some debate alright, but also upset quite a few people, some mightily. I even had a seriously outraged personal e-mail.

The background: it was Friday afternoon. I'd cleared my in-tray. I was bored. The Forum seemed a bit, well, sleepy. I was feeling depressed about the whole issue of traditional skills and crafts being neglected and disappearing. A red mist swam in front of my eyes, and almost without realising it I had composed my very uncharacteristic polemic. Perhaps the shade of Cleek hung over my shoulder. As I was about to post the topic I hesitated, realising that it didn't really hang together anyway, for all the reasons that various people have pointed out. Then I made the first BIG mistake. Knowing that probably no-one would read the piece if I titled it "Some views on catalytic adhesives" (yawn), I wrote "Epoxy is Crap". Ha, that'll get 'em going, thought I. Yes, well it did a bit, didn't it. As I went home I was already regretting it. The second BIG mistake was to post this just before I took 5 days leave, so I couldn't check on the result or enter into the subsequent debate.

Very silly title. Of course epoxy isn't crap, it's a really useful adhesive which I have used a lot for all sorts of things (though never on a boat). The chemist should have been the one who would be most affronted, but I think he understood that my tongue was firmly in my cheek when I wrote this. And of course I should have realised that I would really offend all those folks who are building or have built boats using ply and epoxy or similar techniques. To them I say sorry. I have never built a boat in my life, and I don't suppose I ever will. I have nothing but admiration and respect for those who do and have, no matter what you built it of or how. Brilliant, more strength to you.

Fortunately, this Forum is a broad church. One of its strengths is that it has room for all shades of opinion (even mine). It also has room for the occasional over-the-top rant which isn't too serious but was intended to stir things a little. I have certainly enjoyed reading the responses and debate anyhow, which as usual have been measured, informative, and often very witty.

So what do I know? I'll stick to my funny little copper nails with round thingies on the end...

John

[NormMessinger]

Ah, there your are John. Somehow I didn't think you'd kick an antpile and not hang around to watch the fun if you could. I hope the leave was satisfactory. Excellent choice of topic. Nothing to apologize for.a

"...seriously outraged personal e-mail." Good grief! Well, it's your's now to do with what you wish, right? How about sharing it with us. It should be worth some general amusement.

Best wishes.

--Norm

[Scott Rosen]

John, don't feel bad. We're having fun.

Epoxy can be paint or varnish?! The epoxy we're talking about here has no UV protection and is not suitable for an exterior finish coat. Plus it doesn't flow well and is extremely difficult to sand fair. In the most literal sense, it can be a coating, but it's a very bad one at that. Most of the two-part paint and varnish products on the market today are not epoxies; they are linear polyurathanes and other stuff like that, designed specifically for finish coating. Chemist described it in a different post.

Aside from all of the wood wasted during "construction", nothing's wrong with dugout boats that a little CPES and epoxy can't cure.

Oh my! Looks like I've been caught engaging a little of that mental self-stimulation, myself.

[Ian McColgin]

'Course my use of epoxy to lubricate a trennel certainly falls in with the idea that this is becoming a self-abuse thread . . .

[Ian Wright]

Ian, You will Never get that trennel out again,,,,,,not without a good auger anyhoo,,,,
and another thing,,,,, if I ever find out who first dipped a woodscrew in epoxy he is **Dead**, Dee Ee Ay Dee, Dead.

Ian W.

[Ian McColgin]

You raise a couple interesting points but:

Trennels don't come out anyway - boring is pretty miserable since it's with the grain but anyway, trennels will out live me and my unborn children so what the hay . . .

Epoxy around a screw, depending on the application, is not always a bad idea. The screw can still be pulled out since epoxy's grip on the metal is pretty weak. I've seen it used ok as a dodge to avoid larger screws in places where the fitting has been put on and off a few times, like on a mast.

I've also happily used epoxy to settle bolts, especially ones that will be put in and out. I usually bore out enough to drop a nut in the hole, put a bit of slick on the bolt threads (but not the nut) with the nut near but not at the end of the threads, and let the nut & bolt set up in the hole with epoxy. Then the bolt can be easily extracted, fitting put on, and bolt threaded down with great security. Easier than the googe bros approach to drill and tap an epoxy plug and the metal of the nut near the bottom of the hole makes me feel better.

But maybe it's all a chemical dependency . . .

[redjim777]

You can remove an epoxied wood screw by heating it with a soldering iron, I've tried it and it works.

Jim

[Ed Harrow]

You bet it works. My question is, if you've got some old keel bolts that don't want to come out, can you hook an arc welder across them to heat them up sufficiently that they loose their grip on the wood without needing Doc and his marshmellows.

[John Gearing]

Well, John R, you sure swatted a hornet's nest, didn't you? If Bob Cleek were still among us I think he would tend to agree with Ian Wright. Bob and I used to have some Titanic battles over the issue of plywood or non-traditional construction vs. traditional. I always argued that there was a legitimate place for glued lap and sheet (e.g.) boats but Bob reminded us all that when all is said and done what you have in the end is a "plywood boat" that has very little resale value and cannot, on a the basis of craftsmanship and materials, hold a candle to traditional construction. I will go out on a limb and say that my interpretation of Bob's position is that there is an aesthetic value, an accomplishment of craftsmanship, a continuity with the best practices of the past, that non-trad construction methods just don't have. I'll concede that.

I have built some plywood solo canoes in my time, and they are very light and handy and cheap to throw together. And I have held a Culler-designed trad lapstrake double paddle canoe in my hands as well. There is no doubt in my mind that the craftsmanship in the Butternut (Culler) is on a plane above mine. On the other hand, my boats weigh half as much and were so cheap and easy to build that if they get smashed up it's no great loss. I built them with those limitations and benefits in mind. But I have to admit that my next canoe will be a Butternut.

[redjim777]

Ed, I would probably try a propane torch. As long as you cover every thing around the bolt with asbestos it should'nt take too long to transmit that kind of heat through the bolt. If you've ever held a bolt to a grinding wheel for any length of time you know what I mean. But you do bring up a good question, if you could run a current through the bolt like those fancy nylon rope cutters, theoretically it would heat the bolt in no time at all. I've always wondered how those cutters were wired, I'd like to make one for myself.

Jim

[Ian Wright]

Wood screws and epoxy,,,,,,,,it gets worse,,,, If those screws are cross head types and if they were put in by a careless hand using a power driver that was permited to over run and burr the slots and they were dipped in epoxy,,,, then getting six of them out can occupy a boat owner for two full days, I know this to be true,,,,,,,,,

Ian.

[redjim777]

Sounds like a job for a hammer and a plug cutter. A hammer for the careless buffon that stripped the screw and a plug cutter for the screw(s). Then you can epoxy your trennels in place!

Jim

[John R Smith]

Well, Scott and Norm and all, I'm glad you guys are having fun. That was exactly what I intended. I wasn't apologising for what I said (as usual I am completely unrepentant) but for the fact that the way I put it upset some people. In fact, the e-mail I got was from a very well respected member of the Forum whose expertise and knowledge has many times enhanced these threads. I was pretty concerned that anyone would have taken my comments so personally. It's one thing to bash each other round the head a bit in public like this, because we all have the right of reply and hell, we know it's not too serious. More like a bunch of friends swapping outrageous views in the bar of an evening after work. Our common love of boats is a lot stronger than any differences of opinion about the way to go boating. But when someone mails you personally with comments like:

"I think that the other posters on the Woodenboat Forum have been entirely too nice to you, considering your sanctimonious
attitude."

I get a little worried. And hence my apology.

Oh - and by the way - what does "take a powder" mean, for a confused dyed-in-the wool traditionalist?

John

[This message has been edited by JohnRSmith (edited 06-02-2000).]

[TomRobb]

I don't know who emailed you & it may be better to not know. Perhaps they were having a bad day. There is a bit of sanctimoniousness here occasionally. The format, the faceless anonymity of the medium seems to bring that out in us occasionally. Don't let it get you down. Your posts are always entertaining and/or interesting.

To "take a powder" is to leave, to make one's self absent. The last time I heard it in a sentence was in an old gangster movie. I've no idea of the derivation. Perhaps it comes from the way women used to leave one's presence to go to the "powder room." (yet another euphimism for the loo) Who knows?

[Scott Rosen]

Epoxying screws is one of those things that nobody wants to talk about, but everyone does it.

My experience is that a little epoxy in the screw hole won't do much harm, but I'm not sure it does much good either. A goop like polysulfide would work better at keeping water out and would make it easier to remove the screw, as it will stay flexible. On the other hand, I've never had great difficulty removing an epoxied in screw.

The Right Ian hit the ring nail right on the head when he alluded to the problem of epoxy in the slot. I you're using plain slotted screws, you can, with some difficulty and damage to the surrounding wood, knock the epoxy out of the slot and remove the screw. If, however, you should find epoxy in cross-slots, phillips head, hex slots, etc., you'll spend many hours cursing the **** fool who put the stuff there and contemplating the best method for his slow and painful death. You'll spend a lot of time ruining good wood and a few screwdrivers as well.