Jump to content
Dick Nites Water Reducable Top Coat Durability
46 replies to this topic
Posted 11 March 2011 - 10:46 AM
I tested the S82. I used it on several crankbaits that I was building at the time for my own use, so I could give it a fair hard-fished evaluation. Since I don't normally store my lures in water, or troll them behind my pickup truck, I could find no validity in testing them anyway but by fishing them. I had no preconceived notions other than Dick's initial findings, and I came away being very impressed with the S82. I have found it to be as durable as S81 while strafing snag and rock incrusted shorelines. While I've had to replace ground-off circuit board lips, and sand the roughness from the edges of the Lexan lips, I haven't had to fix the lure bodies themselves.
Some time ago, I found a system for building baits that worked for me. If a lure failed, I figured out why it did so and corrected the failed lure. While most times it would have been expedient to toss the failure and start over from scratch, the lessons that this method taught me became invaluable in learning what works, what doesn't, and why. Rather than contantly introducing new variables into my system and then having to solve all those new problems, I worked on refining each new variable that I brought into play, after I'd learned the basics of building a durable dependable lure, and then changed one aspect of the lure at a time.
All that is to say is this: When I began testing S82, I already knew that prepping the bait to accepting any topcoat is the most vital, and also the most overlooked step that most luremakers make. I made many, many mistakes to learn this, even with a background in coating application that helped me learn how to achieve successful coatings on lures. Perhaps that is why I didn't experience any coating failures with S82.
The only coating failure I've had with S81, is over epoxy, which use on foiled lures. I learned that it is essential to properly prep the epoxy to achieve total adhesion. S81 is probably still my favorite, simply because I have a long track record of success, while S82 hasn't been around long enough for me to know how it will be a few years down the road.
Dick, you da man!
Posted 11 March 2011 - 02:12 PM
Ro, I've learned here on TU that relatively few coating combinations work really well. But necessity is the mother of invention. Experimentation is good, but only as long as you don't necessarily expect to get a fishable crankbait at the end of the experiment. My concern is that we hear so often from newbies who try random combinations of coatings which end in disaster, usually followed by posts asking "What did I do wrong?" We have no answer because none of us ever tried that one. Instead, we had our own distinct disasters, then read TU and adopted a few "known-good" coating combinations to avoid all the drama. But I do see where you're coming from.
Posted 13 March 2011 - 07:28 AM
I would slightly disagree.
“Experimentation is good, but only as long as you don't necessarily expect to get a fishable crankbait at the end of the experiment.”
Remember all the discussions here about using plastic cups dissolved in acetone to make a fishable crankbait? If my memory serves me right, there was even a “how to” tutorial about this subject on this site. That’s how I started anyway. And then, I tried to find new types of plastics which could be dissolved in different types of solvents. I have even managed to dissolve polycarbonate, and right after dipping the first coat I got a perfect clearcoat. Sadly, it didn’t last more than a minute (it started to peel off), because the evaporation process of the solvent was too quick. So I ran into another problem – how could I slow down the evaporation process? This is where I had to stop, because I couldn’t get the necessary additive to slow down evaporation. Anyway, why not trying to make your own clearcoat ? Just because there are too many types of clearcoats readily available on the market? If we would apply the same principle to the lures we use, TU would have never come into existence.
“My concern is that we hear so often from newbies who try random combinations of coatings which end in disaster, usually followed by posts asking "What did I do wrong?" We have no answer because none of us ever tried that one. Instead, we had our own distinct disasters, then read TU and adopted a few "known-good" coating combinations to avoid all the drama.”
I cannot remember of any such “ending in disaster” case.
Instead, I would show here some of the “good” coating combinations:
1) Epoxy + propionate.
In fact, thinned epoxy + propionate. I have lightly sanded the epoxy, for a better bond with the propionate solution, then I have applied as many propionate coats as I wanted. I have also applied propionate solution to non sanded epoxy, and it seems OK. True, I have not tested any of these lures in hard conditions ( like trolling a lure behind a pick up truck ), not even in harsh conditions in the water (rocks, sand on the bottom, structures in the water, etc), but up to now I have nothing to complain about this combination. In fact, my idea was that since Devcon 2ton was reported in some cases to be brittle, causing the clearcoat to crack and go off the lure, why not protect the epoxy with something softer, but waterproof as well, which would lessen the chance that epoxy would crack, when you hit the lure on a rock? Anyway, since I cannot be 100% sure yet that this combination is a proven one, I see no reason why others could not try it, to see for themselves if it fits their demands for clearcoats.
2) DN WRTC (S82) + epoxy. A combination which works and satisfies customers. See comment by Yardape in this thread.
3) If I remember well, epoxy + DN 1 was also tested with good results. (I think Lure – Proof tested it, but I am not sure).
4) Some have even mixed up epoxies. Here I mean Devcon 2 ton and Etex. Devcon cures a little bit too fast, and it may be brittle, while etex needs a very long time to cure. So what the would happen if I would mix up the 2 of them? That’s the question some have asked themselves, and the result was a longer cure epoxy than Devcon 2 ton, which would not be brittle, and would not make you let your turner run overnight.
Maybe there are other combinations I can not remember of. Anyway, I think we are all here because we have asked ourselves a fundamental question - WHAT IF ?
Posted 13 March 2011 - 10:14 AM
Really some good points there Rofish!
I recently coated DN's S8-2 with S8-1, just to see if it would work. After cleaning the S8-2 with a quick scrub with Dawn at the kitchen sink, I scuffed the gloss off and wiped it thoroughly with a clean microfiber cloth, and brushed on a coat of S8-1...I've encountered no problems at all thus far. Potential advantage to some people would be the ease of use of the water dilutable S8-2 for the initial coats, and a final coat of the moisture cure S8-1 for its proven near bulletproof properties. When using mutiple coats, this would minimize the handling and exposure of the moisture to a single coat.
I often combine epoxies to get the properties I desire...in my case BSI Finish Coat with Etex-Lite, for both sealing balsa and other woods, and sealing foil, before painting and finishing with DN. I prep the epoxy surface the same way as I did the S8-2 above, adding another scrubbing step at the sink after scuffing. If these surface preparation steps sound like a lot of trouble, they are not nearly as much trouble as a failed coating, and besides, they only take a minute or two...and your finished product is only as good as your surface prep.
Seeking a better way has always beenan underlying attitude here at TU. If more new builders would search this great site for answers to their questions, 95 out of a 100 of which have been answered before, more of the advanced builders would stay around here and contribute even more avanced problem solving. Most of the older members I talk to who no longer, or very seldom contribute anymore, are simply tired of looking at a board and seeing the same old questions asked over and over, and most have tired of answering them again and again. Thank you all who hang in here year after year and work to further the knowledge base; you know who you are!
Posted 13 March 2011 - 01:20 PM
Rofish, I take your point but would also point out that all of your examples include epoxy. I hope newbies take note. Epoxies are the Gold Standard of coatings because they are chemically inert when cured and will not react with other coatings. And that's a bigger deal than many people realize. I've rarely built a wood crankbait that did not include a layer of epoxy somewhere in the finish. What I really had in mind are the many posts we see concerning failures from using a grab bag of aerosol rattle can finishes that guys pluck off the shelves of their local home center.
I stand by my comment on experimentation. If an experiment cannot fail, it's not an experiment. And a failed finish experiment = unfishable crankbait. Maybe we're getting bogged down in semantics? My point is not to criticize experiments. If you never experiment, your crankbaits will never get better. It's to suggest that we label untested experiments for what they are: a guess that a method might work if tested, acknowledging that it might not and that we haven't tried it yet.
Posted 13 March 2011 - 04:15 PM
I build and sell musky and pike lures. If I could use a water based clear like Seal Coat or DN water based clear I most certainly would. I would love to use a water base clear and get away from using a respirator and a lure dryer but the fact is they don't work! I have tried water-based clear coats and if the lure gets too wet everything comes unraveled and the lure is destroyed. It takes a long time to cut a lure, sand it, shape it, weight it, seal it, prime it, and paint it and after all this work I want to be sure that my investment is protected with a proven product.
The first time I tried Seal Coat I really liked it, went on milky white, dried clear, odor wasn't bad. I applied three or four coats by dipping the lure, everything was great. I then took the lure to the river and sat on anchor with the lure fishing (for salmon) an hour underwater at a time. At the end of the day I set the rod down in the front of the boat and the deck was really wet from rain. It sat on the wet deck another couple hours. Got back to the launch at the end of the day, picked up the rod and guess what, part of the paint was sitting on the deck of my boat! After being underwater just one day the clearcoat failed. My guess is the lure was probably underwater a total of about 8-10 hours. I have epoxy coated lures I have fished in this same way for 5 years and dozens of trips that are totally fine.
For now, proven clearcoats include Devcon Epoxy, Etex Epoxy, and DN original formula. I am hoping that some time soon we will also discover a UV cure epoxy.
Edited by RiverMan, 13 March 2011 - 04:21 PM.
Posted 15 March 2011 - 09:27 AM
Jed, it is not really fair to pass judgement on Dicknite's S8-2 water reducible by a bad experience with CS Coatings water base Clearcoat. They are really two completely different animals. The S8-2 is a vastly superior coating to anything I've ever used with "water" in its description.
There are a lot of other epoxies that I consider better than Devcon now too, especially considering how darn fast D2-T cures these days. BSI Finish Cure has it all over D2-T, with its much longer pot life, easier bubble-free application and clear hard shine. (It is labled as "20 min. Finish-Cure", and I don't know where the 20 minute thing comes from, as this stuff cures much slower than their "30 min SLOW-CURE). BSI is private labled by many different companies such as HobbyTown, where I buy mine.
WASCO offers good epoxy, as does WOODCRAFT, and WEST SYSTEMS...and there are others that have their champions too, that are proved beyond a shadow of a doubt to those who use them.
But, comparing DN S8-2 to CS Lure Coat is comparing a ripe Florida Orange to a rotten apple as far as I'm concerned.
Edited by Lure--Prof, 15 March 2011 - 09:29 AM.
Posted 15 March 2011 - 05:52 PM
With all due respect to your opinion, we have had discussions here on TU about clearcoats for years and everyone has their own opinion. Back in the day it was Etex vs Devcon and each had their own favorite. BTW, I agree with you on the Devcon, the 30 minute stuff cures way too fast now.
The test Bob did pretty much told me everything I needed to know about the DN water clear. These findings are very consistent with what I have found testing two other water based clears. I pasted his findings below.
bobv, on 28 November 2010 - 06:15 PM, said:
However after 24 hrs under water the entire bait was covered with pimples and the clear and white could be scraped off with your fingernail. Assuming it was ruined I set aside and watched football all day and that evening went in to see about stripping the lure. I was amazed to find all the pimples gone and the finish had rehardened to a point I couldn't scrap it up even where I had cut the finish. It also appears to have bonded with the paint better. Not sure what to think at this point. Any ideas out there.
Again, you can coat a lure with Devcon or etex, Wasco (I like it too) and sink it for weeks with no ill effects. Your typical rapala, lucky craft, or storm lure can be left in the water for a month and it would still be fine and I expect the same from my lures. The DN water clear couldn't hold up to a 24 hour test. Maybe some here are satisified with a clear coat that fails after a 24 hour soak..............I am definitely not one of them.
Edited by RiverMan, 15 March 2011 - 06:01 PM.
Posted 15 March 2011 - 07:59 PM
If you want a bullet proof water cured urethane, try Target Coatings exterior urethane, EM9300. For a $30+- investment, you aren't out that much, and, if it works out, whoopee!!!
Posted 15 March 2011 - 10:31 PM
I know I'm beating this poor dead horse. I see Bob V's results as being much better than your disaster with C.S. coating where you had your paint peeling on the boat seat on a rainy day for about a 10 hour exposure resulting in total failure, and he had his bait submerged for 24 hours without failure. That is a huge difference!. And I don't know the specifics of his procedures either. After his lure dried though, the coating seemed to have bonded with the bait's paint even better!
Considering this, I just don't think that it's fair to throw the S8-2 under the same bus as the C.S. coating. I know you are using a Pass or Fail grading system here, but in fact did his lure actually fail? It didn't...Was it near failure? We really don't know, he assumed that it had probably already failed, and then learned it had not.
I do know this. I've had the S8-2 survive an impact with a concrete bridge support without a blemish, except for a broken Owner Stinger treble, and a nearly flattened belly hook hanger. I 'm quite certain some epoxies would not have survived that same encounter without toital coating faiure. The only time I've ever had lures submerged for over 24 hours was during a flooded basement ordeal, and this is during a lifetime of working, and living on or near the water, tournament fishing, and bass, walleye, and striper guiding. I've damaged a lot of lures over the years in a lot of ways, but almost all were from banging them against very unforgiving objects. Lure's soaked for over 24 hours? I'd worry more about them being damaged by lightning, seriously.
I just don't see the validity in considering what happens to baits in circumstances that have never occurred in a lifetime of fishing, save for one hidden tacklebox in a flood...i.e., a freak of nature, or an "act of God".
fellow TU oldtimer
Posted 15 March 2011 - 11:46 PM
What more could have happened? The clear was pimpled and was coming off, that's failure. Are we going to check the lure every few casts and once we see it failing set it aside until next week?
Pick any top line bass or musky lure, they can all withstand a 24 hour soak with no ill effects. I have found luhr Jensen Kwikfish that had been in the water for months, covered in algae, wash them up and they look good as new.
You and I have both been building lures a long time but some others on here may be just getting started. I see no reason to suggest to a novice builder that he use a clear coat that I know is significantly inferior to many others.
Edited by RiverMan, 15 March 2011 - 11:55 PM.
Posted 16 March 2011 - 07:02 AM
I will reiterate that in a lifetime spent fishing, including several years fishing 200+ days a year, I've never had occasion to immerse lures for 24 hours straight. If the only circumstance that I need to avoid has never happened to me in my angling life, and the lure coat is dead-simple to use and store, with near bulletproof protection of the bait except for being run over by the afore-mentioned runaway bus, it all adds up to a lure coating that Tim Hughes, the most renowned lure-painter in the bass-fishing world, tested and found to be superlative.
I have 2 lures in a box of a dozen of some of my own most-used baits which are coated with S8-2, the rest are coated with original DN. You could examine each lure, or fish with all of them, and at the end of the day, there is no way to distinguish which 2 baits are coated with the S8-2 .
This is why I'm defending this lure coating. How often have any of your own baits been soaked for over 24 hours? It has never happened to me whether guiding or tounament fishing. I'm 58.
BTW, I don't recall in this discussion that you ever said you'd used this product, DN S8-2 water reducible, yourself...
Posted 16 March 2011 - 10:13 AM
I have no alliance to any manufacturer of clear coats including DN, just sharing my personal experience with others here on TU. Over the years I have tried Devcon, Envirotex in several formulas, DN original, Seal Coat, Lure dip, Lacquers, Fasco, UV cures, several auto clears, and most recently an environmentally safe epoxy. I am always looking for a better clear coat and in the process have learned a thing or two about them.
Since you mentioned Tim Hughes, I will relate that I have sold about 3000 musky lures over the last six years and during that time I can think of only two that have come back to me with a clear coat failure. All of them were coated with either Devcon or etex. Given these lures are being used for one of the largest, toothiest, and toughest critters in fresh water I think these results speak for themselves. Had I been using a water-based clear, I would have been replacing 90% of them.
I have not tried the DN water clear because I know from Bob's experiment that there is no way it will live up to what I and my customers expect in regard to durability. I have tried the original DN and I like it although it too has some shortcomings, odor being one of them, and problems with storage being another. I have tried two other water clears and both failed miserably. Even if the DN water clear was twice as good as the other water clears I have tested it wouldn't cut the mustard with my customers, I can guarantee you that.
I would agree that most guys are not going to soak a lure for 24 hours straight. However, if the lure fails on a 24 soak that tells me it is not as durable as other commonly available clear coats (etex, devcon, etc.) that can easily tolerate a week or a month of soaking………..so why use it? I don’t intend to use my fishing reel for 24 hours straight but I expect it to hold up if I decide to do so.
At this point we will have to agree to disagree and I will let others here decide if they consider a clear coat that pimples and scrapes off after 24 hours to be an acceptable clear coat for them.
I enjoyed the lively debate with you, maybe something was learned in the process.
Edited by RiverMan, 16 March 2011 - 10:18 AM.
Posted 16 March 2011 - 09:52 PM
I too have enjoyed this debate. I think we have made most of the points we want to make. However, there is one line that you keep blurring here that I must take issue with. You keep throwing the DN S8-2 with the other water clears, and, had you used it, you would have seen that it is quite a different animal. I've never used a water reducible clearcoat that offers anywhere near the protection that this stuff does. It is tough! I would think it would be a great muskie lure coating, and I would bet you'd have fewer coating failures with this than with any epoxy. You know I don't talk out my butt. After this stuff cures for a week it is really transformed. It is much more difficult to sand or scratch than epoxy, and much more resistant to cracking than the hard epoxies. Comparing S8-2 to a product like C.S. acrylic lure coat, would be like comparing Minwax Polycrylic to an automotive clear. And that is my main point here
Nor am I allied with any clearcoat maker, or distributor. My favorite product is Dicknite's S8-1 moisture cure, simply because I've seen what happens to lures several years down the line now; They remain clear &stable, and the degree of protection is simply better than any other lure coating can provide. That is the bottom line, but I enjoy brushing it on a bait also, so smooth, fast, and bubble free.
Anyway, keep turning out those pretty lures! I guess we've lost all those guys finally who would put their trust in nothing but boiled linseed oil formulas!
Keep the sawdust flying
Posted 17 March 2011 - 09:30 AM
Well I agree with both Dean and RiverMan. I agree with Riverman that epoxy coatings are probably the toughest coating out here right now and is what should be used if you are going to soak your lures for long periods of time or, if you are going after toothy critters. In the bass fishing world the epoxy coating will work just fine for most applications. However, there are certain applications where epoxy does not fill the niche. Epoxy coatings being so thick, sometimes affects the buoyancy of say a suspending stick bait or a top water lure. Also, on painted bills where there are sharp corners or edges( some wiggle warts or the mouth of a Plaster of Paris R), epoxy coatings repel from those areas and very often allow water to get underneath and the epoxy begins to peel. This is where I agree with Dean. On bass fishing lures the S81 and 82 will fill the niche because they are extremely tough and they will adhere to these edges and reduce the weight of the clear coat. The 81 is the toughest urethane out there but has storage issues and will react to certain paints. But once cured is awesome. Now for the 82. This is the most user friendly stuff I have ever seen. You must use several coats, but when fully cured, it too is tough stuff. It is perfect for the beginner because you don't have to build a lure turner, no mixing, no fumes, no reaction to paints, and if you let it fully cure, you will have a coating that is very well suited for normal bass fishing lures. If you want something a little tougher go with the 81. You see it all comes down to the application of the clear coat. Epoxy coatings are great for toothy critters, lures that are going to see extended periods of time in the water, and bass crank baits where they will be put to extreme abuse bouncing off of rocks and timber. For top waters, stick baits, lures with sharp edges, you need something lighter and something that will cling to the edges. S81,82, and automotive clears fit the bill here. When we did production work where we needed something strong and fast. We used uv curing epoxy from epoxy coatings co. in California which is no longer in biz. So it all boils down to #1 what you are fishing for. #2 The kind of lure you are coating. And #3 how you are fishing the lure. I think RiverMan is using the right application for his lures and Dean is using the right one for his. Both of these guys make great lures and know what they are talking about.
Posted 17 March 2011 - 01:11 PM
Your point concerning the thinner clear coat on some lures is a good one. I have built some lures in the past, swimbaits being one of them, that simply will not run with a thick coating of epoxy. In this case I have used the original DN but I know others are using auto clears.
Posted 17 March 2011 - 01:58 PM
Like Hughesy I can see valid points from both sides. And while I'm not even qualified to sweep out Hughesy's shop I have developed preferences in my short time in this obsession of lure crafting. If there was one perfect clear coat, paint, hook or any component we would all be using it. I look at it this way. If you've got 100 acres of heavily timbered land you want cleared then you wouldn't be using a weed whacker. You'd be using chain saws and bulldozers. Now if your wife wants her rose garden weeded you sure as hell ain't going in there with a D9 dozer. (not unless what your really after is a divorce) I knew when I first started tinkering with lures I was going to make choices that didn't work out or didn't fit with my way of doing things. These choices cost money whether they work as planned or not. Don't think there is any way around that. If there was only one BEST way then we wouldn't have a lot to talk about here at TU. There would just be a set of instructions on the front page as to which airbrush, compressor, paint, top coat, etc. to buy (and where to buy it) and then step by step instructions on how to build and finish a lure. Thank goodness that's not the way things are. Personally I enjoy some of these disagreements as they are where I learn the most. So keep arguing guys so I can keep soaking it in. Just keep it friendly.
Posted 17 March 2011 - 07:15 PM
I have to disagree.
You're definately qualified to sweep out his shop, and don't let anyone tell you different!
Posted 17 March 2011 - 09:20 PM
Posted 18 March 2011 - 06:31 AM
Your just lucky you don't live closer to me. I'd be putting your butt to work and not sweeping floors!