epoxy coating a wooden boat

[mickjur]

Hi I am very new to this , I have bought a 26 ft wooden cruiser , I would like to fibreglass it , I purchased some r180 epoxy resin and hardner as well as dynel cloth and matting .

I have been advised to paint a thin mix of epoxy coating 1st ( CPES )

Do I do that and then epoxy resin over the top and then matting etc .

How many coats of thin epoxy and how many coats of rein and matting will I do

This is probably too much info ask for step by step instructions , but a good start would be great cheers michael

[duluthboats]

West Systems has some good information to help you.
http://www.westsystem.com/ss/use-guides/
It would be a good place to start.
Gary

[PAR]

Much depends on the type of wooden boat you have. Many types of wooden boat construction don't lend themselves well to epoxy. CPES (brand) or other penetrating epoxy is a waste of time, money and effort, but go for it if you have plenty to spare.

As a general rule, traditional wooden boat construction methods don't take well to epoxy. On the other hand, some do, particularly plywood construction.

The basic problem is, once a boat is built, you can't fully "encapsulate" the separate pieces, which is what makes epoxy so effective at preventing rot, sealing wood, etc. If you can't encapsulate the part, the epoxy is nothing more then really expensive paint and not a good idea, as it'll trap moisture in the wood, with limited avenues for it to escape, increasing the potential for rot.

In short, what do you have, it's construction method (pictures are very helpful), etc.?

Yes, there was a time when CPES cured everything and epoxy was the answer to all boat issues. Now, restorers and builders are finding out that this isn't the case and like every thing else in live, there's a time an a place for epoxy and also times when you just shouldn't use it.

The "blanket" approach with epoxy is still strongly adhered to by many, but those of us that actually do this sort of thing daily know better.

You may also find this site interesting (http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com.au/forumdisplay.php?f=29), where I also participate, but supplies, brands and locally available "stuff" is obtainable.

[mickjur]

Hi thank you for that , it is a plywood material, I was going to put a complete skin of fibreglass matting from deck to keel etc I have stripped the paint completely off and wanted to add protection from salt water ets on the outside , cheers michael

[Landlubber]

"I have been advised to paint a thin mix of epoxy coating 1st ( CPES )

Do I do that and then epoxy resin over the top and then matting etc .

How many coats of thin epoxy and how many coats of rein and matting will I do"

OK, the thinned epoxy coat (s) is to penetrate the plywood as much as is possible for this to occur. 50% thinned for the first coat, 25% second coat, then finish with a straight coat.
This is going to give the plywood the best protective coating that you can give it (using the epoxy method).

Sand down when completly cured and then start on the laminates. Before starting lamination, precut all the cloth and drape it over the boat in sections so that you know all is OK, when ready to wet out, you again paint the boat woth resin (rollers) then drape the cloth over the section you have just wet down, and continue along using this process. Only wet out as much as you intend to finish in that cycle.

Epoxy when mixed has of course a pot life, so get the epoxy out of the mix pot as soon as possible, evenly spread out on the boat it will take much longer than sitting in the pot, so tha will save a lot of waste if you did not know that.

Have fun, I did an epoxy/dynel boat in 1972 and she is still like new.

[PAR]

CPES is a waste of time as I mentioned. Use straight epoxy instead. Don't use mat. It's designed for resins other then epoxy. Epoxy doesn't need the support of mat. Use cloth instead, 8 ounce is a typical light weight sheathing.

Do not thin the epoxy! It's not paint, nor varnish, no thinning unless you really have an understanding of the chemicals involved. Judging by the nature of your questions, you don't. I've met very few people who understood what they were doing when thinning epoxy. Thinning it actually weakens epoxy a lot, which is exactly what you don't want. By the way, CPES is pre-thinned epoxy, which is why it's not any good for what their advertising claims it is. Straight marine grade laminating epoxy is 30%+ more solids then CPES and other penetrating epoxies and considerably better at resisting moisture vapor penetration in wood, which is why we use it to seal wood in the first place. Put in a nut shell, straight epoxy will easily out perform straight CPES (or other penetrating epoxies) in identical, side by side moisture penetration testing. This isn't speculation, it's proven fact, easily understood by those among us with a chemical back ground (like me).

Log onto the major formulators web sites and look at their "user guides" look up what they say about thinning epoxy. Also have a look at techniques, methods, reinforcement additives (fillers), fabrics and applications. These guides can answer a lot of your questions.

Another tip, who ever is telling you about CPES and mat for use with your boat is about two decades behind the current testing and long term durability studies that have been conducted. I suspect they are equally off base on much of the advise they're offering, so stop paying attention to them, just nod as if you believe them and move into the 21st century wiser and without insulting offers of their dated help.

[Landlubber]

PAR,

Epiglass in NZ have been recommending this technique for years, they have had exceptional results doing it....they have been making epoxies and using them longer than any of us......

[Landlubber]

They market Everdure, now by International Paints, it is a fungicidal epoxy, thinned down it certainly does penetrate plywoods, I have cut and tested and used this product for as long as I can remember, I am sure it has saved hundreds of ply boats from the wreckers.

[PAR]

You can put a lot of things in epoxy, as a formulator, but the user is strongly urged not to do so. In most cases you just cut down the molecular cross link, which weakens the epoxy dramatically. An unfortunate side effect is the lose of solids content due to out gassing of the solvent(s). This makes for a permeable membrane, not a 100% solids seal coat.

A quick look at their product sheet shows only 21% solids, compared to regular laminating resin which is 100% solids.

Repeated tests have clearly proven, it's not the depth of penetration that makes a good moisture proof product, but the quality of the coating. All these "penetrating" products make their selling points on the ability to soak in. So what, it's the quality of the product's ability to resist passage of moisture vapor, that is the trick to water proofness, not penetration depth. I don't care if it soaks all the way through, at 21% solids, it's a soup strainer compared to laminating resins, in regard to moisture vapor.

In fact all the major "penetrating" epoxy products recommend over coating with some sort of higher solids content material (read regular epoxy). Hell even there own Interprime 820 primer (epoxy) has 47% solids and it's just a paint.

This penetrating epoxy thing was a marketing tool a few decades ago, but it doesn't work in real world applications, without the assistance of high solids top coats, which naturally forces the question, why bother with the penetration coats in the first place.

The only time a penetration product is helpful is when you have slight surface damage. A penetrating epoxy can get below this, firm up the soft wood and provide a good bond coat for additional applications of top coat products. If you have more then slight surface damage, then you have to cut back to good wood or replace the piece, because no product can turn rot back into a wood like material. This is what some of these penetrating epoxies try to do.

If you flood coat a shallow pan with it, let it cure, then pull the thick film out of the pan, you'll find it's not hard, but rubbery (depending on modifiers, formulation, etc.). The idea is to reassemble (saturate and bind) the rotted wood fibers into a sort of wood like material. If it's a static piece, then this works well.

Architectural details on homes is a common place you see these products work exceptional well. A rare, hard to reproduce piece of crown molding (for example) full of rot and decay can be rejuvenated to a fair degree, though it can't take any loading, flexing or other stress, but it can look pretty hanging on a wall.

My point is, there are applications for these products, but they're not the cure all they once (and still by some) were touted to be.

If you need penetration, for whatever reason, a much better method is controlling viscosity with temperature. This way you get 100% solids resin, deep into the fibers and no need for over coating (except UV protection of course) is necessary.

Naturally, companies aren't going to stop offering something that still has a following and they're certainly not going to publish testing results that contradict their advertising claims, but they all know the truth, both chemically and physically is respect to the properties of their penetrating offerings.

A simple test can prove all the bull surrounding this. Take two pieces of hardwood, drill a large, flat bottomed hole partly through each. Of course each should be the same size, weight and hole depth. Coat the inside of the hole and top with your product of choice and the other with a good quality laminating resin. Now, fill both holes with water and see which one picks up weight across a time frame. I can guarantee the penetrating epoxy (alone of course) will permit moisture to pass through, making the wood measurably heavier. This is a clear indication of it's abilities as a moisture barrier.

One of the coolest tests I've seen was a balloon of epoxy and a CPES like product. They were molded over a Mylar balloon, then the balloon burst, removed, a tablespoon of water added then the thing sealed with a "pressure bandage". A week later there wasn't any water left in the one, but the regular epoxy balloon still had it's tablespoon full inside.

[Landlubber]

"there are applications for these products, but they're not the cure all they once (and still by some) were touted to be."

Yes, true, if you read PAR the initial post, Micheal fully intends to cover the "watered down " layers with normal laminations.

As you know, I do not ever see anything you write being "wrong", just different opinions, but you certainly feel that the penetration bit is to no avail, and I respect your opinion of course, however I am writing from many years using this system, and certainly have had very good results doing so, I fail to see why you do not think that deep penetration by the epoxy is not a good thing, surely if the wood has a thorough soaking the effect should be beneficial. I am more than happy to change if there is good reason to do so, maybe you just feel the watered down is a waste, but i see it as forming a rigid base for a good topcoat, sort of like painting alloy, no good applying a fancy linear poly over raw alloy.....it is the substrate that holds it all together in the long run.

[PAR]

Applying a less then waterproof, rubbery coating, regardless of it's penetration ability, is a step best skipped.

It doesn't dry hard like regular epoxy, it cures rubbery and permeable. Besides, you can get the same penetration using regular epoxy with temperature, which does cure hard, puts 100% solids material just as deep as the thinned stuff, plus it's waterproof.

Again, penetration has nothing to do with waterproofness. The ability of the coating to resist moisture vapor is the only consideration in this regard. If you want penetration for some reason (I can think of several) then viscosity is easily controlled without resorting to ruining molecular bonds within the cured epoxy molecule (added solvents).

Now it is a good primer, but frankly there are better primers, which offer more moisture resistance. There are applications for this stuff, but I know people that literally coat everything with it. I use to be one of these people, but then I saw some testing results, conducted my own tests and found more testing results from other sources. It didn't take me long to realize all the barrels of this stuff I've used, weren't necessary, if I'd used different techniques. I now employ those methods, save a bunch of time money and effort, with the same results and durability, which is why I consider it a waste in most building applications.

The best bond you can get with wood, is a "hot on hot" (okay hot on hot, but cooling) regular epoxy application, preferably one that gets post cured too. No diluted goo, no solvents, just 100% solids, cured, fully cross linked molecules (actually just one big molecule) of thermoset plastic as the binder and moisture barrier.

[Landlubber]

Thanks PAR for that explanation, I certainly will look into it.

[M-Sasha]

A deep penetration is desirable of course, it adds a lot of strength to any sort of wood. Years ago I used a dilution from R&G, that did not weaken the crosslink, too. That was just a waste of time and money. Later then Apex (Richard) showed me how they do in Turkey, using a very low viscosity resin and a slow hardener at high temperature. It needs to be postcured at about 120°C but gives a very strong material.
Sasha

[thudpucker]

PAR, your lectures are very good.

I was under the opinion that CPES would penetrate deeper than F/glass resin.
I put the CPES on the Deck to deepen the grip and the Fiberglass paint on top of the CPES coated deck.

So now if the Sun can penetrate deep enough to go past the Paint, and the CPES, the Lignons etc will still be destroyed by the Ultra-violet rays and eventually the CPES will come loose, and the Fiberglass paint is still stuck solidly to the CPES, it will come up too.

So how do we get the Fiberglass paint to penetrate deep enough to beat Ol' SOL and his Ultra-violet rays?

[PAR]

I'm not sure I understand your question Thudpucker. penetrating epoxy on wood isn't as effective as low viscosity epoxy (either formulated or with temperature control).

Penetration isn't as important is it appears or would naturally seem. When tested, the bond breaks through the wood fibers, suggesting the polymer exceeds the elongation strength of these wood fibers. It would seem the deeper the penetration the better the grip, but in reality the stress is transmitted through the polymer to the fibers, regardless of the depth (at least in the typical penetration depths possible with penetrating epoxy or low viscosity epoxy) where the modulus of the fibers is strained to failure. Coupled with the water proofing ability (or lack of it with most penetrating epoxies) of epoxy, it becomes just a simple business decision to discontinue penetrating epoxy use, in favor of low viscosity resins (like Raka or other specially formulated low V goo).

As far as UV penetration to a substrate, there's only one prevention that I know that's effective, top coating with a UV inhibiting material. For most applications this means paint or a clear coat of some sort. I've done some research on clear coats in regard to long term UV exposure, but my tests fall in line with what Paint manufactures and epoxy formulators already know. In short, if your UV protection is degraded, it doesn't matter what kind of goo you've employed, it will also degrade with damage to the substrate very likely as well.

I wasn't trying to "lecture" . . .

[thudpucker]

LOL, well maybe you didnt know what you were trying to tell me, but you told me what I was looking for.

I thought the CPES would go deeper into the wood than Epoxy.
But the Epoxy would bond very well to the CPES.
So using the two products, should give a good grip on the wood.

Maybe good enough to keep the UV from destroying what grip the CPES had on the wood.

Your explanation was the normal Epoxy has a good enough grip, plus the water proofing as well.

I think I read somwhere that UV inhibitors can only keep the UV from going much farther than 3/8ths of an inch.

No paint is that thick, so it didnt seem worth while to add the expense of a UV inhibitor.

[Landlubber]

thudpucker,

I think maybe you have misunderstood UV protective coatings, the paint does not need to be that thick to work, it is a reflective property of protection for the substrates, and is basically essential to use some form of UV protection over epoxy base work, the epoxy cannot protect itself.

[PAR]

Bingo Lubber.

CPES is epoxy. In fact it's an acronym for Clear Penetrating Epoxy Solution. The Smith Brothers product is about 67% epoxy, the rest is solvents (a bunch of them). Other penetrating epoxies are similar in formulation.

I have never seen something that regular epoxy couldn't bond to, but a penetrating epoxy could or could much better then regular goo.

UV can penetrate quite deeply, but this is on unprotected surfaces. Anyone who's sanded a well weathered teak deck can attest to how deep the damage goes, before you're into pretty stuff again.

[thudpucker]

Yup,
It seems like all my life I never wound up with any wood boat that wasnt done for already.
I've been pretty dissapointed when I had to make a whole new Cabin or a fore deck.
The worst was down in the bilges or the insides of the chine.
I had a 33' Chris Craft that was so badly rotted, and nail sick, I just gave up and burned it.

The one time I had some rot in the inside chine support, I used CPES and it did follow the rot and made the board pretty stable.
A long time later, I took that Chine out (booger of a job) and cut into it just to see how the CPES did. It was all through the Chine board. The Rotted stuff was pretty solid, as if a wad of dody wood was glued together.

Up on the Deck, the surface wood was pithy. I took that off and put on new. I used CPES first, then Epoxy paint. I dont know the end of that story. The boats long gone now.

I do like seeing the lectrues. It's amazing what I did when I didnt know what I was doing!

Still, if I ever make this little Jon boat I'm thinking of, I dont know for certain how I'll make the seams/joints.
On the plywood surfaces, I think I'll just paint it with Epoxy paint. Or do you put a sealer on it first?

[BOATMIK]

Howdy,

Interesting discussion. Like PAR I did think that the penetrating epoxies are the bees knees.

However, it is not really logical.

If thinning the epoxy made it bond better then all the manufacturers would be saying to thin the epoxy before gluing, or to put a thinned coat on first.

They all recommend firmly against it. So if gluing and you don't need to add solvent, why is it necessary for coating?

I think it is a hangover from when we used to use polyester resins for sheathing. Polyester doesn't bond to wood particularly well so getting to to "soak" was an attempt to get it to stick more.

Also you can look at what WEST have done with their branding. They have done more research by anyone by a long way ... it used to stand for
WOOD
EPOXY
SATURATION
TECHNIQUE

But after a lot of building one realises that epoxy doesn't and doesn't need to soak in very well at all. So now it stands for
WOOD
EPOXY
STABILISATION
TECHNIQUE

(You can probably tell I am from Australia by the S rather than a Z!)

I do know some trad boatbuilders use CPES while they are building to stabilise the wood a bit, but their reason is ... they know they can rely on water still getting into the planks to swell them and make the boat watertight.

Finally WEST published a little graph ... um ...
here

http://www.storerboatplans.com/Faq/solvent1.gif

Penetrating epoxies make no difference.

Best wishes
Michael Storer

[BOATMIK]

Just found the mother lode.

http://www.seqair.com/skunkworks/Glues/WestSystem/Thinning/Thinning.html

[gonzo]

The use of penetrating epoxies or other products to cure rot is mainly a cosmetic solution. What I have usually seen is a clump of hard epoxy/rotted wood composite poorly adhered to what's left of the wood. On of the main problems with rotted areas is the high water content.

[thudpucker]

Right GONZO. That's exatly what I found when I cut the old Chine wood up.
Proving the CPES went in the Rot, followed it to its end, glued all the rotted pith to the good wood, and restored the strength of the wood.

Shipping the CPES was the bad guy in the mix. If you can buy all the epoxy you need at the local store, why buy CPES at a shipping cost almost equal to the purchase cos.

After all this discussion I'm still confused on what to do with my Jon boat as far as painting goes.

[PAR]

I and a few other odd balls (and called worse by those who claim they knew what they were talking about) have been pissing on the penetrating epoxy parade for years, particularly those that think they can just dump some thinner in to laminating resin and "go for it".

As far as painting your boat. Prep the surface. If this includes epoxy great, but skip the bother of the penetrating goo, smooth, prime and apply top coats of choice. Epoxy is a great sealer (the best). Don't confuse epoxy paint with lamination epoxy. They're not very similar in physical properties. Paint is paint and resin is resin, they don't interchange. If the "epoxy" paint is only one part (no separate hardener) then it's not really epoxy, but gussied up polyurethane.

[thudpucker]

As far as painting your boat. Prep the surface. If this includes epoxy great, but skip the bother of the penetrating goo, smooth, prime and apply top coats of choice. Epoxy is a great sealer (the best). Don't confuse epoxy paint with lamination epoxy. They're not very similar in physical properties. Paint is paint and resin is resin, they don't interchange. If the "epoxy" paint is only one part (no separate hardener) then it's not really epoxy, but gussied up polyurethane.

Yessireebob. CPES and home-thinning epoxy is a dead subject.

"Smooth, Prime and apply top coats!"
I think I understand what your saying now.
Sand and fill, then use a primer. Is there such a thing as "Epoxy Primer?" Would that be the best to use?

So if I use Epoxy primer, then it follows that I should use Epoxy paint.
Is that correct or just another way of doing it.

What if I used plain old Oil based paint? "...and they dont mix!" is the answer to that one eh?:(

[keith66]

Thought i would throw my two penworth in! A few months ago i was at the Royal gunpowder mills at Waltham Abbey, in the museum is a powder barge, built in the 1850's of oak she had been sunk in one of the canals for many years. Of course once "salvaged" she practically disintegrated as the wood dried out & rotted rapidly. She has been treated extensively with a proprietary epoxy wood hardener, with some degree of success. Bear in mind that she lives on a concrete floor in a museum & will never float again, though now stabilised she has no more real structural strength than a loaf of bread would if you poured epoxy onto it.
Thats the thing epoxy is seen as a panacea for an old boats ills but in reality it often ends up as the kiss of death as it often makes a decent repair impossible.
It has its place but i would rather not use it!
Another case was a cold molded whitehall i built some years ago I did her brightwork in epoxy & linear polurethane varnish. It chipped as it was so hard and the water got under it & it flaked in places. After a few years i stripped the whole boat which was an absolute b'stard and refinished in oil based epifanes varnish. Paradoxically this lasted way better.

[thudpucker]

In years past I've read a bunch about wood.
It's my impression that what ever you put on Wood, it's only gonna have a grip on the outside .010 to .030 thouseant's of an inch.

Wood is mady up of three parts basically.

The UV rays seperate these parts and kill the one part. (Lignons if I remember correctly) which lets a lot of moisture reside in the wood right in the Wood/Preservative junction.

UV invasion is really the thing to beat.

Then you have the Chemicals of the Covering to deal with.

If you cannot beat the UV problem, it just dont matter a helluva lot, what you coat the wood with! It's gonna come loose. Even if the covering all sticks together and comes loose in big bunches.

Somehow I sorta got away from wood boats about the time all the info on the subject of Coverings and UV etc came along. I stopped reading all that stuff when I got a Glass boat.

Now I'm about to build this little Jon and the more I read, the more I'm confused. Mybe its my 'understander' that's the problem eh?

[missinginaction]

I don't know if mickjur is still here....this thread has taken on a life of its own!

Just a comment from an amateur if he is still here.

I think PAR is correct in his thinking about the penetrating epoxys.

I'm still restoring my 1973 Silverton (fiberglass hull, wood decks and cabin).

I've used System Three Clear Coat (which is marketed as a "penetrating" resin with "no volitile solvents"). It's somewhat thinner than regular System Three resin, but it doesn't smell of solvents.

I've found that coating new Douglas Fir ply with a thin coat of this product gives me a better base on which to apply fiberglass cloth. I've noticed that regular System Three "soaks in" to the ply in some spots, but not so much in others. I'm using 4 oz fiberglass cloth on the decks (Some might say this is too thin, but I'm only walking on the deck) finished with Interlux Perfection. Once the clear coat has set up, I can apply the cloth and the generic System Three Resin to a surface that evenly accepts the cloth and resin.

Thats the only place I use the Clear Coat.

Now the pros have likely developed better techniques to get a good base (perhaps using heat to reduce viscosity - which would get you the same result), but for me this approach has worked well. I also don't know how System Three Clear Coat compares with CPES as I've no experience with that product.

Regards,

MIA (still at it!)

[thudpucker]

LOL, Missinginaction is how I refer to my Congressman Robert Aderholt (R) of Alabama.

I always believed the Primer/CPES/Thinned Epoxy etc was to sink in and provide a good deep grip for the top coats.

Its just too much for me to read about so I rely on the guys (Par) who can back up what they say with logic.
So I'm gonna prime and paint with Epoxy. If my boat sinks, you'll be able to hear me yelling at Par as I go down.

[PAR]

If your boat sinks Thud, I suspect it have more to do with the amount of beer you've guzzled or the sharpness of the rocks you just run up on, then the quality of the coatings on your Jon boat. There was a guy in the news this weekend, his 24' center console was about 25' up into and on top of a rock jetty. The only camera shot of this fellow was him telling a county officer (who was about to take him to jail) that he didn't understand what happened, because the jetty wasn't there before, when he started out fishing that day. Apparently, he has little experience with tides and beer induced chart reading. Personally, I can read a tide chart quite well in this state, but this is my experience and fine seamanship showing.

The bottom line on this debate is simple. CPES and other penetrating products attempted to offer a product on false pretenses, suggesting that because it penetrated well, it would be a good thing. Well, the jury and separate testing has come in and their marketing ploy hasn't lived up to the advertising hype. Amount of penetration has little to do with (my other half would argue) coating performance. The ability for a coating to grip and more importantly, resist moisture vapor penetration are the keys to performance, not if one product soaks in better.

[missinginaction]

Seems to me that the only real remedy for rotted wood is to get it off of your boat.

That's what I've done with my old Silverton.

It's a lot of work, but if you stay with it you can get it done.

Since I've carefully assembled the new parts I suppose that the boat will last much longer then the original build, which held up pretty well for about 25 - 30 years (with reasonable care).

If my restoration lasts 25% longer then the original build before it rots out that would make me about 90 years old.

I'll probably be dead by then. That fact opens up another philosophical argument.

That ones for another day......

MIA

[thudpucker]

We left the Farm in 46 right after the war. We've owned boats of all kinds since.
We've never lost a boat!
No fires, no sinking, no rocks, a couple sand bars and several forced beachings, and the normal swamping as you beach with the Pacific at your back.

One time I got into water too big for the boat. I thought the end had come.
But somehow I was able to steer around the wave tops and bottoms to keep the swamping at a managable level. Almost all the floatation just floated away on that experience. I left a trail of Styrofoam for a mile or more across Prince William Sound in AK on that trip. From the air it must have looked like Laundry soap foam streaming out behind me.
All the water in the boat caused the floatation which was under the Deck to lift the Deck, tearing the rivets loose, and the foam just floated out from under that deck, sloshed over the sides and left me all alone in an Aluminum boat and I couldnt bail and run the boat at the same time and my passenger was petrified with fear and absoluty no help at all. (OK, sit there, scream, die with me or help out and maybe we'll live through this! No answer, just more screaming and whimpering) I could have used some Beer on that trip.

Paint a boat is something I rarely did. I dont ever remember suffering any from avoiding that chore either.
I painted Seats to keep the Slivers down. I painted the Deck with House paint and Sand mixed into it for traction. Bad move! The Sand caused the paint to come loose around the crumbling sand. Live and learn.

This little Jon boat will be all new wood. I'll paint it to keep the Wife's comments down to a dull roar. Epoxy Primer, and Paint. No CPES!
And no Rocks!

[seven up]

I don't know if mickjur is still here....



They seem to have wandered off ! Hmmm.

[thudpucker]

Way back, when us lay people could first by F/glass as a kit, about 52 or so, Unc n' I glassed a Cedar skiff. About a 14' rowing boat for Puget Sound Salmon fishing.
The stuff came off the Cedar (in places) in the first few months.
That was enough for me. If Oil dont do it, remove it and put a new piece of wood in its place.

[PAR]

I too remember the original miracle goo in a can craze that swept the country in the early 60's. Everyone and their brother was putting polyester on their wooden boats, because it was the cure of all cures. Well, it didn't work and a lot of folks got burned. It was enough for me to avoid epoxy for about 10 years, with the memory of polyester still relatively fresh.

Eventually epoxy proved to be far better then polyester then the other "catalyzed" resin systems. Then I went the other way, swinging into full encapsulation mode.

Now, I'm finding I need epoxy less and less, though some build styles absolutely need it, others just aren't well suited. So, I guess I've finally entered puberty and matured with my epoxy use.