Date   

Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Solar Energy System

Bill & Judy Rouse <yahoogroups@...>
 

Duane,

I agree completely with your logic.

One thing to consider is if the pole mounts work, they will be far cheaper than an arch to support solar panels. I have not regretted adding 3 of the 135 watt Kyocera panels with a solar arch that looks really good. Generator time has been cut to about 1/3 of what it was before the solar, and the batteries do not discharge as much.

Bill
BeBe 387

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:11 PM, sailor63109@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Bill,

Thanks for your reply.  I agree with you about Cruisers Forum in general.

I saw the comment here several months ago that angle to the sun isn't a large factor anymore.  However on all the sizing programs there is a reduction in efficiency (larger in higher latitudes) for mounting the panel horizontal.  I haven't seen any discussion in Kyocera's literature about the angle of the panel being countered by the panel construction.

I found an article that had the following graph to demonstrate the impact of tilt (angle from Horizontal) "Iann" is the "annual incident solar radiation on a surface" for a panel oriented due south.


from: http://www.builditsolar.com/References/EFFECTS_OF_TILT_AND_AZIMUTH_ON_ANNUAL_INCIDENT_SOLAR_RADIATION.pdf

  Based on the graph, in Miami tilt doesn't have much impact, so a fixed mount may be just as well.  Also the recommended tilt angle is less in lower latitudes.  The swivel pole mount I found was over $500 each (not including the pole) so it's a pricey add, and probably not worth it. 

What got me started on the pole mount is that we have a stainless pole on the aft stbd quarter now supporting a Thrane Sailor 250 sat phone.  The Thrane is too pricey a monthly fee for me so I can use the pole for something else.  I also don't like having the panels along the rail, too prone to cause injury and not very aesthetic.

Duane
Wanderer, SM#477



Re: Solar Energy System

Duane Siegfri
 

Bill,

Thanks for your reply.  I agree with you about Cruisers Forum in general.

I saw the comment here several months ago that angle to the sun isn't a large factor anymore.  However on all the sizing programs there is a reduction in efficiency (larger in higher latitudes) for mounting the panel horizontal.  I haven't seen any discussion in Kyocera's literature about the angle of the panel being countered by the panel construction.

I found an article that had the following graph to demonstrate the impact of tilt (angle from Horizontal) "Iann" is the "annual incident solar radiation on a surface" for a panel oriented due south.


from: http://www.builditsolar.com/References/EFFECTS_OF_TILT_AND_AZIMUTH_ON_ANNUAL_INCIDENT_SOLAR_RADIATION.pdf

  Based on the graph, in Miami tilt doesn't have much impact, so a fixed mount may be just as well.  Also the recommended tilt angle is less in lower latitudes.  The swivel pole mount I found was over $500 each (not including the pole) so it's a pricey add, and probably not worth it. 

What got me started on the pole mount is that we have a stainless pole on the aft stbd quarter now supporting a Thrane Sailor 250 sat phone.  The Thrane is too pricey a monthly fee for me so I can use the pole for something else.  I also don't like having the panels along the rail, too prone to cause injury and not very aesthetic.

Duane
Wanderer, SM#477


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Things Recently Learned:Outboard engines, Dinghy, & NMEA connections

Danny and Yvonne SIMMS
 

I agree, nothing beats the 2 stroke 15 HP Yamaha outboard.
Danny
SM 299 Ocean Pearl



From: "Germain Jean-Pierre jgermain@... [amelyachtowners]"
To: amelyachtowners@...
Sent: Wednesday, 9 March 2016 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Things Recently Learned:Outboard engines, Dinghy, & NMEA connections

 
Hello Gang,

I passed on 3D tenders when shopping for a new dinghy… I’d spotted the design problems.  I bought an AB with double alu bottom capable of 15 HP.  I luckily found a brand new Yamaha Enduro, bought and placed in a garage and the bloke died 3 days later. Had never been run.  The Yamaha is the best OB i’ve ever owned.

I had a Honda 4 ST on my last boat and it was a PITA.  Vibrations were its key feature.  Hard to start too.


Jean-Pierre
Eleuthera SM 007


On 9 Mar 2016, at 08:50, mkbiz@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 
Thanks Bill, for the introduction to the joys of 3D tender :)

I am awaiting my own first 3D (UL 270) these days now. So the oars really prevent sitting on the pontoon ? Wonder how the French ride a dinghy...
I didn't order the frontlocker to keep the weight light. So storing them in the alternate position should work I hope.

Have you any other issues with the dinghy by now ?

Michael
Sioned, Maramu # 148

Posted by: mkbiz@...
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5)




Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Solar Energy System

Bill Kinney <greatketch@...>
 

Bill,

Angling solar panels  to the sun is not a panel technology issue, it is simple physics.  The benefit has not changed.  It is true that some panel manufacturers make use of internal reflections, back side generation, and such, it makes a VERY small difference in overall output if the panel doesn’t track the sun.

When the sun is at 45 degrees the panels only “see” about 70% of the incident solar radiation they do when at 90 deg. What they don’t “see” they can not generate power from.  That’s physics and hasn’t changed.

The hard part is deciding if it is worth it to mount adjustable angled panels on a moving platform like an anchored sailboat.  I don’t have an easy answer for that one...

Bill Kinney
Harmonie, SM #160
Cape Canaveral, Florida



On Mar 9, 2016, at 12:45, 'Bill & Judy Rouse' yahoogroups@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:


Duane,

Regarding the size "gravitation," I think it is because what will fit on liferails and what will fit on an arch.

Regarding the rotation to the sun, it is my understanding that with modern solar panels that this is not as important as in the past, albeit some benefit still exists. That benefit needs to be quantified before you go to a great deal of trouble and expense. You should check this out with a reliable source...in other words, not Cruisers Forum. There has got to be a good, knowledgeable and honest source for this information, although I do not know where to go...maybe someone else can refer you.

Bill
BeBe 387

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Bill Kinney greatketch@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Duane,


The reason the 140 W panels are popular on boats, is they are the largest standard panels that easily fold flat against lifelines.  Larger panels start to get too wide to easily store vertically inside the standard lifeline height.

If you are shopping with eMarine for panels in the 320 W size range, you might consider the LG panels.  They have a higher efficiency than the Kyocera panels, hence a bit smaller, and the price is attractive.

Bill Kinney
Harmonie, SM#160
Cape Canaveral, Florida


On Mar 9, 2016, at 11:59, sailor63109@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

I'm considering adding solar panels and an MPPT Controller to the boat.  I'm wondering why everyone seems to gravitate toward the 100 to 140 watt panels (these have 36 cells).  Manufacturers also make larger (by wattage and size) 260 to 325 watt panels (having 60 and 80 cells respectively).  The Kyocera 140 watt panels sell for $2.12 per watt and the 325 watt panel sells for $1.31 per watt (about 62% of the 140 watt panel, prices from eMarineInc.com).  For the same wattage I think you'll need the same controller (especially if you wire the panels in series).  If you wire the 140 watt panels in parallel the total voltage would be less so you would save marginally on the controller.

The reason I'm asking is I'm planning on mounting them on poles at the stern quarters with rotating mounts so they can be positioned.  The only real downside that I know of with the 325 watt panels would be their size and weight.  60 pounds is a lot to dismount if heavy weather was expected (I wouldn't think this be too much of an issue).  I'm still researching whether it makes sense to pole mount these 65" by 52" panels.  Kyocera also makes a 260 watt panel (60 cells) that's only 41 pounds and 65"x39".  That would seem easier on me and the pole!

Any thoughts or experiences with pole mounts and these larger panels is appreciated.

Duane
Wanderer, SM#477









Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Solar Energy System

Bill & Judy Rouse <yahoogroups@...>
 

Duane,

Regarding the size "gravitation," I think it is because what will fit on liferails and what will fit on an arch.

Regarding the rotation to the sun, it is my understanding that with modern solar panels that this is not as important as in the past, albeit some benefit still exists. That benefit needs to be quantified before you go to a great deal of trouble and expense. You should check this out with a reliable source...in other words, not Cruisers Forum. There has got to be a good, knowledgeable and honest source for this information, although I do not know where to go...maybe someone else can refer you.

Bill
BeBe 387

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Bill Kinney greatketch@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Duane,


The reason the 140 W panels are popular on boats, is they are the largest standard panels that easily fold flat against lifelines.  Larger panels start to get too wide to easily store vertically inside the standard lifeline height.

If you are shopping with eMarine for panels in the 320 W size range, you might consider the LG panels.  They have a higher efficiency than the Kyocera panels, hence a bit smaller, and the price is attractive.

Bill Kinney
Harmonie, SM#160
Cape Canaveral, Florida


On Mar 9, 2016, at 11:59, sailor63109@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

I'm considering adding solar panels and an MPPT Controller to the boat.  I'm wondering why everyone seems to gravitate toward the 100 to 140 watt panels (these have 36 cells).  Manufacturers also make larger (by wattage and size) 260 to 325 watt panels (having 60 and 80 cells respectively).  The Kyocera 140 watt panels sell for $2.12 per watt and the 325 watt panel sells for $1.31 per watt (about 62% of the 140 watt panel, prices from eMarineInc.com).  For the same wattage I think you'll need the same controller (especially if you wire the panels in series).  If you wire the 140 watt panels in parallel the total voltage would be less so you would save marginally on the controller.

The reason I'm asking is I'm planning on mounting them on poles at the stern quarters with rotating mounts so they can be positioned.  The only real downside that I know of with the 325 watt panels would be their size and weight.  60 pounds is a lot to dismount if heavy weather was expected (I wouldn't think this be too much of an issue).  I'm still researching whether it makes sense to pole mount these 65" by 52" panels.  Kyocera also makes a 260 watt panel (60 cells) that's only 41 pounds and 65"x39".  That would seem easier on me and the pole!

Any thoughts or experiences with pole mounts and these larger panels is appreciated.

Duane
Wanderer, SM#477






Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited

Peter Killen
 

I had exactly the same experience with Coppercoat some years ago, and reverted to normal anti fouling as a result. 
Peter killen
Pure Magic
SM433


On 9 Mar 2016, at 14:22, 'Bill & Judy Rouse' yahoogroups@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

As some of you know I am prejudiced against Coppercoat because of the experiences of others that I know and what I have seen. I am also prejudiced against Coppercoat and any other product that makes claims of endurance 2-4 times the normal range.

I received this from a Canadian Professor (Chemistry PhD) and active cruiser to the Med, Caribbean, Pacific, Indian, South Africa, and North America:

"There was a discussion about Coppercoat some time ago and I said that
we had it for 3 years and were happy with it. Well, I just want to
post an update:

We've noticed bubbles on our Coppercoat. There were a few, but then
regularly more and more started appearing all over the place. We were
sure that it was because of unprofessional application of Coppercoat
back in South Africa.

We've just hauled out at a yard who used to be a Coppercoat supplier.
It turns out that our issue with bubbles is not unique, but rather a
byproduct of Coppercoat design. They said that the issue is with the
primer being solvent-based and Coppercoat being water-based. If
Coppercoat is applied even on slightly not-cured epoxy primer, then
the primer will off gas resulting in bubbles. On the other hand if
Coppercoat is applied to the dry primer it won't be able to adhere
well resulting in larger areas falling off. That's why this yard
stopped distributing and applying Coppercoat.

So now we're up to redoing the bottom paint including epoxy primer
frown emoticon. There is a quite new large Catana next to us that also
had to strip falling off Coppercoat. An expensive lesson in chemistry,
eh?"

I thought that you Coppercoat believers should know and be aware of this.

Bill
BeBe 387
Rodney Bay Marina for a week


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Solar Energy System

Bill Kinney <greatketch@...>
 

Duane,

The reason the 140 W panels are popular on boats, is they are the largest standard panels that easily fold flat against lifelines.  Larger panels start to get too wide to easily store vertically inside the standard lifeline height.

If you are shopping with eMarine for panels in the 320 W size range, you might consider the LG panels.  They have a higher efficiency than the Kyocera panels, hence a bit smaller, and the price is attractive.

Bill Kinney
Harmonie, SM#160
Cape Canaveral, Florida


On Mar 9, 2016, at 11:59, sailor63109@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

I'm considering adding solar panels and an MPPT Controller to the boat.  I'm wondering why everyone seems to gravitate toward the 100 to 140 watt panels (these have 36 cells).  Manufacturers also make larger (by wattage and size) 260 to 325 watt panels (having 60 and 80 cells respectively).  The Kyocera 140 watt panels sell for $2.12 per watt and the 325 watt panel sells for $1.31 per watt (about 62% of the 140 watt panel, prices from eMarineInc.com).  For the same wattage I think you'll need the same controller (especially if you wire the panels in series).  If you wire the 140 watt panels in parallel the total voltage would be less so you would save marginally on the controller.

The reason I'm asking is I'm planning on mounting them on poles at the stern quarters with rotating mounts so they can be positioned.  The only real downside that I know of with the 325 watt panels would be their size and weight.  60 pounds is a lot to dismount if heavy weather was expected (I wouldn't think this be too much of an issue).  I'm still researching whether it makes sense to pole mount these 65" by 52" panels.  Kyocera also makes a 260 watt panel (60 cells) that's only 41 pounds and 65"x39".  That would seem easier on me and the pole!

Any thoughts or experiences with pole mounts and these larger panels is appreciated.

Duane
Wanderer, SM#477





Solar Energy System

Duane Siegfri
 

I'm considering adding solar panels and an MPPT Controller to the boat.  I'm wondering why everyone seems to gravitate toward the 100 to 140 watt panels (these have 36 cells).  Manufacturers also make larger (by wattage and size) 260 to 325 watt panels (having 60 and 80 cells respectively).  The Kyocera 140 watt panels sell for $2.12 per watt and the 325 watt panel sells for $1.31 per watt (about 62% of the 140 watt panel, prices from eMarineInc.com).  For the same wattage I think you'll need the same controller (especially if you wire the panels in series).  If you wire the 140 watt panels in parallel the total voltage would be less so you would save marginally on the controller.

The reason I'm asking is I'm planning on mounting them on poles at the stern quarters with rotating mounts so they can be positioned.  The only real downside that I know of with the 325 watt panels would be their size and weight.  60 pounds is a lot to dismount if heavy weather was expected (I wouldn't think this be too much of an issue).  I'm still researching whether it makes sense to pole mount these 65" by 52" panels.  Kyocera also makes a 260 watt panel (60 cells) that's only 41 pounds and 65"x39".  That would seem easier on me and the pole!

Any thoughts or experiences with pole mounts and these larger panels is appreciated.

Duane
Wanderer, SM#477



Re: Coppercoat revisited

Ian Park
 

I was pushed by Peakes in Trinidad to have two coats of primer on the hull before applying the Coppercoat. They had stripped the hull and sanded it for me.
When I discussed with Coppercoat UK they said to apply it directly to a sanded hull - don't put and epoxy primer on it. Copper coat is an epoxy so not required.
I put the Coppercoat on myself and it is fine. It replaced the previous Coppercoat (unknown age) which had performed well.

Interesting to note the chemical reaction between the sovent based primer and the water based Coppercoat epoxy. Perhaps therein lies the problem?

Ian 'Ocean Hobo' SN96
Currently in Antigua


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited

Andrew & Kate Lamb
 

I pinged this post across to Coppercoat for comment  (I have always found them very responsive to advice both before and during the application process) – this was the response.

 

“My first point would be that most Coppercoat is applied directly to bare gel-coat. For most boats, especially those made of GRP (such as Amel yachts), no primer is necessary. Coppercoat bonds perfectly and permanently with appropriately cleaned and abraded gel-coat, so pre-treating with a primer is unnecessary.

 

However, for those people that do want to apply some epoxy primer beforehand, there are some basic rules to follow. These rules are common sense and not unique to Coppercoat.

 

In the simplest terms, there are two general types of protective epoxy primer on the marine market, (a) solvent-based and (b) solvent-free. Both are good but have different characteristics when applying and (more importantly for this discussion) when over-coating.

 

Solvent-based epoxies are physically thinner and easier to apply. But by virtue of being heavily solvented, they need to be allowed to fully cure before “sealing” them with another epoxy, such as Coppercoat. For most of the commonly used systems (such as International Gelshield 200, Hempels Light Primer, Awlgrip Hullguard ER, and so on) this full cure normally takes about 7 days (depending on temperature). As these solvent-based epoxies normally cure to a matt surface, they usually require no further preparation before over coating with Coppercoat. However, to be really safe, it is of course sensible to lightly abrade the surface to be sure of a good physical key.

 

It is true that if you over-coat a solvent-based epoxy with another epoxy, before the solvent-based system has been allowed to cure, the second epoxy can trap in the remains of the solvent, and this can lead to micro blistering later down the line. Of course, anybody that reads the instructions provided with all coatings schemes, and indeed any reputable boat-yard, would already know this.

 

If a professional boat-yard applies Coppercoat (or any other such epoxy coating for that matter) over an uncured surface of solvent-based epoxy primer, they are not following standard guidelines and potentially would be liable for any repairs subsequently proved necessary.

 

The rules for using solvent-free epoxies are different. Solvent-free epoxies are normally thicker and more difficult to apply, but therefore take fewer coats to achieve the required thickness. One of the advantages of using solvent-free systems (such as West System epoxy or International Gelshield Plus) means that normally you can apply Coppercoat whilst the solvent-free epoxy is still curing and just slightly tacky to the touch. As there is no solvent to worry about, you do not need to wait a week or so, which shortens the time needed to treat the boat. By applying the Coppercoat to the solvent-free epoxy while it is still just tacky and not quite cured, a strong chemical bond can form.

 

If this over-coating window is missed and the solvent-free epoxy is allowed to fully cure it will give a hard and glossy finish. To over-coat such a surface (with Coppercoat or any other coating), it must be thoroughly abraded so that a good physical key is provided.

 

In conclusion, Coppercoat can (and is) applied successfully to boats with no epoxy primer, to boats with solvent-based epoxy primer, and to boats with solvent-free epoxy primer. All that matters is that you follow the guidelines appropriate for the boat/products in question.

 

I am delighted to say that we are fast growing to the stage whereby 10,000 boats per year will be treated with Coppercoat. And while this is good news for the owners, the environment, and for us as a business, it does mean that there are up to 10,000 opportunities each year for people to make mistakes with their applications. Of course, we try very hard to avoid these by providing written instructions, an application demonstration video, and constant telephone and email support. But unfortunately not everyone follows this advice and occasionally mistakes (such as using primers incorrectly) do occur. Dealing with such cases is just part and parcel of what we have to do.”

 

 

Ronpische

SM 472

Canet–en-Roussillon

 

 

 

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: 9 March 2016 16:10
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited

 

 

 Hi Bill,

 

 Well, that's a first ! not heard of any other supplier who has had that problem. Nor we, now in our sixth year. It's not perfect, but for us it has saved us endless sandings , fillings and paintings, to say nothing of hauling charges. There are many recorded instances of people using it happily in all waters for ten years and more.

 

I guess that, as with all paint jobs, fail to prepare and prepare to fail.

 

   There are at least 50,000 boats worldwide, including many commercial ( oil service vessels etc,) and multimillion dollar yachts who use Coppercoat.  If you google  Coppercoat you can read of  issues that people have raised, but actually extraordinarily few.

 

 Up with the Coppercoaters!

 

 Ian and Judy, Pen Azen, SM 302 Preveza Greece

 


From: amelyachtowners@... <amelyachtowners@...> on behalf of 'Bill & Judy Rouse' yahoogroups@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...>
Sent: 09 March 2016 13:22
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited

 

 

As some of you know I am prejudiced against Coppercoat because of the experiences of others that I know and what I have seen. I am also prejudiced against Coppercoat and any other product that makes claims of endurance 2-4 times the normal range.

 

I received this from a Canadian Professor (Chemistry PhD) and active cruiser to the Med, Caribbean, Pacific, Indian, South Africa, and North America:

 

"There was a discussion about Coppercoat some time ago and I said that

we had it for 3 years and were happy with it. Well, I just want to

post an update:

 

We've noticed bubbles on our Coppercoat. There were a few, but then

regularly more and more started appearing all over the place. We were

sure that it was because of unprofessional application of Coppercoat

back in South Africa.

 

We've just hauled out at a yard who used to be a Coppercoat supplier.

It turns out that our issue with bubbles is not unique, but rather a

byproduct of Coppercoat design. They said that the issue is with the

primer being solvent-based and Coppercoat being water-based. If

Coppercoat is applied even on slightly not-cured epoxy primer, then

the primer will off gas resulting in bubbles. On the other hand if

Coppercoat is applied to the dry primer it won't be able to adhere

well resulting in larger areas falling off. That's why this yard

stopped distributing and applying Coppercoat.

 

So now we're up to redoing the bottom paint including epoxy primer

frown emoticon. There is a quite new large Catana next to us that also

had to strip falling off Coppercoat. An expensive lesson in chemistry,

eh?"

 

I thought that you Coppercoat believers should know and be aware of this.

 

Bill

BeBe 387

Rodney Bay Marina for a week

 


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited

ianjenkins1946 <ianjudyjenkins@hotmail.com>
 

 Hi Bill,


 Well, that's a first ! not heard of any other supplier who has had that problem. Nor we, now in our sixth year. It's not perfect, but for us it has saved us endless sandings , fillings and paintings, to say nothing of hauling charges. There are many recorded instances of people using it happily in all waters for ten years and more.


I guess that, as with all paint jobs, fail to prepare and prepare to fail.


   There are at least 50,000 boats worldwide, including many commercial ( oil service vessels etc,) and multimillion dollar yachts who use Coppercoat.  If you google  Coppercoat you can read of  issues that people have raised, but actually extraordinarily few.


 Up with the Coppercoaters!


 Ian and Judy, Pen Azen, SM 302 Preveza Greece




From: amelyachtowners@... on behalf of 'Bill & Judy Rouse' yahoogroups@... [amelyachtowners]
Sent: 09 March 2016 13:22
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited
 


As some of you know I am prejudiced against Coppercoat because of the experiences of others that I know and what I have seen. I am also prejudiced against Coppercoat and any other product that makes claims of endurance 2-4 times the normal range.

I received this from a Canadian Professor (Chemistry PhD) and active cruiser to the Med, Caribbean, Pacific, Indian, South Africa, and North America:

"There was a discussion about Coppercoat some time ago and I said that
we had it for 3 years and were happy with it. Well, I just want to
post an update:

We've noticed bubbles on our Coppercoat. There were a few, but then
regularly more and more started appearing all over the place. We were
sure that it was because of unprofessional application of Coppercoat
back in South Africa.

We've just hauled out at a yard who used to be a Coppercoat supplier.
It turns out that our issue with bubbles is not unique, but rather a
byproduct of Coppercoat design. They said that the issue is with the
primer being solvent-based and Coppercoat being water-based. If
Coppercoat is applied even on slightly not-cured epoxy primer, then
the primer will off gas resulting in bubbles. On the other hand if
Coppercoat is applied to the dry primer it won't be able to adhere
well resulting in larger areas falling off. That's why this yard
stopped distributing and applying Coppercoat.

So now we're up to redoing the bottom paint including epoxy primer
frown emoticon. There is a quite new large Catana next to us that also
had to strip falling off Coppercoat. An expensive lesson in chemistry,
eh?"

I thought that you Coppercoat believers should know and be aware of this.

Bill
BeBe 387
Rodney Bay Marina for a week



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited

Andrew & Kate Lamb
 

Hi Bill

 

Thanks for that information – it is early days for our Coppercoat experiment.

We were advise to either apply directly to the GRP or use one of two Epoxy primers. We decided to apply 4 coats of 3M GP120 Epoxy Primer which goes over metal. The application of Coppercoat could then be applied when this is fully cured after fine abrasion or  while the epoxy is still tacky. The advice was also to never use any solvents to clean the application area.

 

Sounds like maybe they didn’t follow the instructions properly.

 

Regards

 

Andrew

 

 

Ronpische

SM 472

Canet–en-Roussillon

 

 

 

From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: 9 March 2016 14:23
To: amelyachtowners@...
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Coppercoat revisited

 

 

As some of you know I am prejudiced against Coppercoat because of the experiences of others that I know and what I have seen. I am also prejudiced against Coppercoat and any other product that makes claims of endurance 2-4 times the normal range.

 

I received this from a Canadian Professor (Chemistry PhD) and active cruiser to the Med, Caribbean, Pacific, Indian, South Africa, and North America:

 

"There was a discussion about Coppercoat some time ago and I said that

we had it for 3 years and were happy with it. Well, I just want to

post an update:

 

We've noticed bubbles on our Coppercoat. There were a few, but then

regularly more and more started appearing all over the place. We were

sure that it was because of unprofessional application of Coppercoat

back in South Africa.

 

We've just hauled out at a yard who used to be a Coppercoat supplier.

It turns out that our issue with bubbles is not unique, but rather a

byproduct of Coppercoat design. They said that the issue is with the

primer being solvent-based and Coppercoat being water-based. If

Coppercoat is applied even on slightly not-cured epoxy primer, then

the primer will off gas resulting in bubbles. On the other hand if

Coppercoat is applied to the dry primer it won't be able to adhere

well resulting in larger areas falling off. That's why this yard

stopped distributing and applying Coppercoat.

 

So now we're up to redoing the bottom paint including epoxy primer

frown emoticon. There is a quite new large Catana next to us that also

had to strip falling off Coppercoat. An expensive lesson in chemistry,

eh?"

 

I thought that you Coppercoat believers should know and be aware of this.

 

Bill

BeBe 387

Rodney Bay Marina for a week


Coppercoat revisited

Bill & Judy Rouse <yahoogroups@...>
 

As some of you know I am prejudiced against Coppercoat because of the experiences of others that I know and what I have seen. I am also prejudiced against Coppercoat and any other product that makes claims of endurance 2-4 times the normal range.

I received this from a Canadian Professor (Chemistry PhD) and active cruiser to the Med, Caribbean, Pacific, Indian, South Africa, and North America:

"There was a discussion about Coppercoat some time ago and I said that
we had it for 3 years and were happy with it. Well, I just want to
post an update:

We've noticed bubbles on our Coppercoat. There were a few, but then
regularly more and more started appearing all over the place. We were
sure that it was because of unprofessional application of Coppercoat
back in South Africa.

We've just hauled out at a yard who used to be a Coppercoat supplier.
It turns out that our issue with bubbles is not unique, but rather a
byproduct of Coppercoat design. They said that the issue is with the
primer being solvent-based and Coppercoat being water-based. If
Coppercoat is applied even on slightly not-cured epoxy primer, then
the primer will off gas resulting in bubbles. On the other hand if
Coppercoat is applied to the dry primer it won't be able to adhere
well resulting in larger areas falling off. That's why this yard
stopped distributing and applying Coppercoat.

So now we're up to redoing the bottom paint including epoxy primer
frown emoticon. There is a quite new large Catana next to us that also
had to strip falling off Coppercoat. An expensive lesson in chemistry,
eh?"

I thought that you Coppercoat believers should know and be aware of this.

Bill
BeBe 387
Rodney Bay Marina for a week


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Dinghy - 3D Tender more details

Bill & Judy Rouse <yahoogroups@...>
 

Michael,

I am not sure that the oars will prevent riding on the pontoon, because I removed them very early...but they are mounted on top of the pontoon, and I believe that you would have to sit on the oars to sit on the pontoon.

Here is more detail for you are anyone considering a 3D Tender as compared to an AB:

There are many advantages to the 3D Tender. I really hope that the PVC made of Mehler Valmex® (German fabric) is as good as everyone says it is. The Aluminum 3D tenders made with this fabric are almost half the price of the same tender made of Hypalon. My AB Hypalon lasted 13 years...if this lasts more than 6.5 years, I am ahead. I know enough about PVC fabrics to know that there are poor (China) PVC fabrics that lack the plasticides to endure UV and there are PVC fabrics that have the plasticides to endure UV. The more plasticides, the higher the cost. So, we will see. BTW, the US Navy and US Coastguard have changed their specifications from Hypalon to Mehler Valmex, and the last advertisement I saw from AB did not even mention Hypalon...only Mehler Valmex...possibly there is a change brewing with AB.

We were going to buy a 290 3D, but "stepped up" to the 310 3D because Judy liked the storage compartment. It is easier on her bad knees because by stepping on the compartment, she does not have such a big step. The gas tank fits in the storage compartment, and the locking cable runs from the engine to inside the compartment through a small opening in the middle near the hull...the fuel line also runs through this hole...open the compartment and remove the cable to secure to the dock. I may grind/cut a slot for the locking cable so that I can also lock the compartment. The paddles (oars) were about 20mm too long. They are two-piece aluminum oars. I cut 20 mm off of one piece and drilled a new pin-locking hole, and put them back together.

The biggest difference between the AB and the 3D is that the oar locks are attached to the oars on the AB and the oarlocks are attached to the dinghy on the 3D. I was able to remove the oar locks from the 3D and have them in a Ziploc in the storage box if I ever use them. I think I used them 2 times in 13 years with the AB. Since buying the 3D, I notice that almost all of the EU-made dinghies that I have seen have the oars affixed with oarlocks and on the top of the tubes. I guess European's are much greener than us Americans...we believe, why row when you can motor?...I think they believe, why motor when you can row?

The powder-coated paint on the 3D is far superior to the "it will chip-off" paint that AB uses...BTW, there was no primer used on our AB...this is really poor specifications on the part of AB. The fact that the 3D Tender PVC seams are welded, rather than glued like on the AB Hypalon is far superior. In fact you cannot weld any Hypalon...it will not weld. The newest models of 3D have a over-pressure vent which is important in places with high temperatures such as the tropics. The way the aluminum seat works on the 3D is ingenious. It attaches to a integral bolt rope on each tube and has about 3 feet forward or aft adjustment by sliding it fore and aft on the bolt rope. I have found this very, very helpful.

I hope that you have a similar experience.

Bill
BeBe 387
Rodney Bay Marina

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 7:50 AM, mkbiz@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:
 

Thanks Bill, for the introduction to the joys of 3D tender :)

I am awaiting my own first 3D (UL 270) these days now. So the oars really prevent sitting on the pontoon ? Wonder how the French ride a dinghy...
I didn't order the frontlocker to keep the weight light. So storing them in the alternate position should work I hope.

Have you any other issues with the dinghy by now ?

Michael
Sioned, Maramu # 148



Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Installation problem for stainless steel cast mixing elbow for YANMAR engine 4JH3

Alan Leslie
 

I also have one of these and yes the flange is thicker than the original fabricated unit, but the length of the studs accommodated it, just.
It is a much much better design than the original
I too am very happy with it
Cheers
Alan
Elyse SM437


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Things Recently Learned:Outboard engines, Dinghy, & NMEA connections

Germain Jean-Pierre <jgermain@...>
 

Hello Gang,

I passed on 3D tenders when shopping for a new dinghy… I’d spotted the design problems.  I bought an AB with double alu bottom capable of 15 HP.  I luckily found a brand new Yamaha Enduro, bought and placed in a garage and the bloke died 3 days later. Had never been run.  The Yamaha is the best OB i’ve ever owned.

I had a Honda 4 ST on my last boat and it was a PITA.  Vibrations were its key feature.  Hard to start too.


Jean-Pierre
Eleuthera SM 007


On 9 Mar 2016, at 08:50, mkbiz@... [amelyachtowners] <amelyachtowners@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Bill, for the introduction to the joys of 3D tender :)

I am awaiting my own first 3D (UL 270) these days now. So the oars really prevent sitting on the pontoon ? Wonder how the French ride a dinghy...
I didn't order the frontlocker to keep the weight light. So storing them in the alternate position should work I hope.

Have you any other issues with the dinghy by now ?

Michael
Sioned, Maramu # 148


Posted by: mkbiz@...
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5)


Re: Things Recently Learned:Outboard engines, Dinghy, & NMEA connections

mkbiz@...
 

Thanks Bill, for the introduction to the joys of 3D tender :)

I am awaiting my own first 3D (UL 270) these days now. So the oars really prevent sitting on the pontoon ? Wonder how the French ride a dinghy...
I didn't order the frontlocker to keep the weight light. So storing them in the alternate position should work I hope.

Have you any other issues with the dinghy by now ?

Michael
Sioned, Maramu # 148


Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Re: Installation problem for stainless steel cast mixing elbow for YANMAR engine 4JH3

eric freedman
 

This is the elbow I purchased from eBay.

Being a jeweler and an engineer I can honestly say it is a beautiful machined casting and a great improvement from the original Yanmar elbow. It fit perfectly on my Yanmar 4jh3hte and I am very happy with it.

 

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stainless-Steel-Exhaust-Mixing-Elbow-Replaces-Yanmar-129671-13550-/231826692526?hash=item35f9f299ae:g:GosAAOxyVaBS5WXr&vxp=mtr

 

 

Fair Winds

Eric

Kimberlite Amel Super Maramu #376

 


Re: Installation problem for stainless steel cast mixing elbow for YANMAR engine 4JH3

jjjk12s@...
 

Vladimir,

 

It sounds like your studs (pins as you call them) might be screwed in too far and anyway need replacing due to corrosion. Have you tried two nuts together on the stud to make a lock nut and then unscrew the studs and replace with new ones?

 

John, Maramu #91 Popeye


Re: Yanmar Engine issue

jsrogers@...
 

I have read many post of the subject of the Amel floating ground system and how this applies to the engine, and starter.  I have also heard that the Perkins M80T was the only engine made for a floating ground.  So I would like Amel owners, who have repowered their Super Maramu with Yanmar, 4JH80, how they addressed the floating ground issue.  Was the engine modified  at the factory or did the installer make modifications to the starter, alternators etc.?
Thank you

John Rogers
SM #105
Deltaville, VA