Bristol Finish

[Bob Miller]

Does anyone out there have any experience with a product called Bristol Finish? Their ad in SAIL says it is a 2 part urethane and it looks like the best thing since sliced bread. I use Semco now, which is good, but this looks like my teak could really look sharp and not need any real maintenance.

Thanks.

- Bob Miller

[Jim Sullivan]

I tried it a few years ago and did not have good results at all. I got small bubbles in the finish as it dried even though it was not windy at all when applied. I followed the directions on the product exactly and called their customer service a couple of times without achieving any improvement in the finish. I removed as much of the product as I could and then went back to Cetol. You might try a search of the archives on this Board. There has been much discussion in the past on this product. As I recall, there were mixed results.

[Fred]

I'd suggest you check out Epifanes Rapid Coat. Its much easier to use. Looks a bit different though.

[Pete]

For the past three years my boats prior owner used Epifanes Rapid Coat. This winter I too have used it, great results and easy application with a foam brush.

It is great for touch ups (yes you can touch up small spots) plus due to the 'rapid' drying time, we were able to do our bowsprit in an afternoon.

One note, Rapid Coat likes it to be warm to set up. We were able to put down three coats in an afternoon.

Pete
Bellus, CD31

[Didereaux]

I used Bristol Finish on the coamings and wash boards. I am more than satisfied and have gotten some good comments(unsolicited) on how good it looks. Now for the nitty-gritty.

In order for BF to do as it is advertised to do you MUST follow the directions to the letter. You must apply the FOUR coats and you MUST make certain that the wood is SEALED completely from any moisture penetration. This last is also the key to a good long lasting finish with any covering.

My method is to apply a thorough coat of well thinned West System epoxy ( any good epoxy will suffice. While still 'green i,e, less than 24hrs and past tacky, apply the first two coats of Bristol Finish. Then I let this set up, which allows me to sand out any imperfections. I then apply the final two coats of Bristol.

I read all the time about how BF or other top end coatings failed or otherwise cause disatisfaction, I will categorically state with almost complete confidence that it was MIS-APPLIED. Will people admit there shortcomings? Damn rarely...it's always the other guys fault or the 'stuff' is no good. People lie and pigs don't fly, and you can take that to the bank!(grin)

My only downside to BF is the initial cost, at around $50 per quart it hurts(yield less than 200sqft or less for the requisite 4 coats). However given, even in the sub-tropical south, that you need only apply a single maintenance coat(more if it has been marred or damaged) per year to maintain a high quality finish, the actual cost over ten years is substantially less than other top finishes for the same length of time.

Will there be naysayers? Yes. Will I pay attention to them? No. Because over the years I have tried many. many different products and found that Bristol Finish wins. If you want quick and cheap look elsewhere. If you are willing to take the time, do the work necessary for proper prepping, and apply according to directions, you will be more than pleased.

So much for my unsolicited and unrecompensed unbias opinion. heh
Didereaux

[Ed Haley]

My method is to apply a thorough coat of well thinned West System epoxy ( any good epoxy will suffice. While still 'green i,e, less than 24hrs and past tacky, apply the first two coats of Bristol Finish. Then I let this set up, which allows me to sand out any imperfections. I then apply the final two coats of Bristol.

You did not follow the directions! No where is it mentioned in BF Application directions http://www.bristolfinish.com/application.htm to "apply a thorough coat of well thinned West System epoxy!" Where did you dig that up? Sealing the wood before using BF probably ensured a better outcome than the rest of us who followed directions.

Another problem with BF that you failed to mention is that you have to apply the finish while it is cooling down so that no "air bubbles" that come out of the wood get trapped in the coating. In addition, the mixture ratio is temperature related (God help you if a cloud comes over you while working).

People here send in their experiences with this product - good or bad. Some of us have similar experiences. I know I had lousy results when using BF. And don't you dare tell me that I didn't follow directions or prepare the wood. You've got a real problem with your choice of words.

[Didereaux]

Ed Haley said-
"You did not follow the directions! No where is it mentioned in BF Application directions http://www.bristolfinish.com/application.htm to "apply a thorough coat of well thinned West System epoxy!" Where did you dig that up? Sealing the wood before using BF probably ensured a better outcome than the rest of us who followed directions."

Where I 'dug' that up from was the instructions packed in the box with the product. I quote"BRISTOL FINISH may be applied to bare wood, epoxy saturated wood, or over conventional varnish, or Cetol if the finish is in good condition..."

Anyone with a smattering of experience in marine woodworking knows that epoxy is a pretty fair sealant as well as furnishing a strong protection against abrasion. Therefor I insured that the wood was sealed against moisture...as per the instructions. Moisture present under any finish material will cause failure, whether the moisture was present initially or enters afterward.

"Another problem with BF that you failed to mention is that you have to apply the finish while it is cooling down so that no "air bubbles" that come out of the wood get trapped in the coating. In addition, the mixture ratio is temperature related (God help you if a cloud comes over you while working)."

Ed, once again the evidence points to failure from the applicator and not the material. What you describe strongly suggests that the ambient moisture content in the wood was high. So that large temp changes (exacerbated by moisure which transfers heat more quickly than wood fiber) takes place you get a bad interaction and effect with the coating material. I have found this to be the case with Spar Varnish as well.

"People here send in their experiences with this product - good or bad. Some of us have similar experiences. I know I had lousy results when using BF. And don't you dare tell me that I didn't follow directions or prepare the wood. You've got a real problem with your choice of words."

Well, it's rather hard not to draw the conclusion that perhaps you were the major contributing factor in the bad results you achieved. Remember that it hardly seems likely that a product would remain profitable for this many years if it produced the results you describe.

Why would the following sources all disagree with your assessment?
Boatkeeper Section
Motor Boating Magazine
November 1999

Teak Treatment Tests
Practical Sailor, Powerboat Reports
March 2000

Reader Forum
Practical Sailor, Powerboat Reports
May 2000

Product Review
Northwest Yachting
May 2001

Teak Treatment Tests
Practical Sailor, Powerboat Reports
July 2001

Teak Treatment All Stars
Practical Sailor, Powerboat Reports
March 2003

New Gear section
Soundings
April 2003

Teak Treatment All Stars
Practical Sailor, Powerboat Reports
Novrmber 2003

'Nuff said. Disagreements will exist, I and apparently many others as well as reviewers and testers find Bristol Finish satisfactory...Ed Haley does not. Only way to find out which more correctly fits your experience is to give it a fair try. As I said in the beginning: ^Take your time and prep properly and thoroughly, apply according to directions, including conditions, and the odds are you will get satisfaction.

Didereaux

[Ron Turner]

Bob,

I am a first time user and doing so under less than ideal conditions. My new bowsprit is being done with BF. As has been said it is different to work with and pricy. Technique has a lot to do with it. The work I am doing is in 45 degree temps but indoors. I'll practice on other pieces that I can take off the boat until I get the hang of it. Then decide if I want to do all the woodwork. I also have used a 2 part wood sealer CPES before applying BF. Mixing small batches of the two part material at 8 to 1 requires some accurate measuring equipment. I am using a 5cc and 50cc syringe. Like a lot of stuff, some people love, some hate it.

[AnnapolisMark]

I use Bristol Finish on my Power 28. It has held up on the door for two season with no maintenance. In addition, I put it on the swim platform (even on the bottom) and steps to the bridge which get a lot of traffic. One maintenance coat each spring, and it holds up all season with no problem. Applied correctly, this is an outstanding product. As always, good prep work is 80 - 90% of the final outcome.

Mark Cline
CD28 FB #219
"Brandywine"
Annapolis, MD

[Didereaux]

Must be the time of the year ;) Same story line on SalboatOwners Forum


http://www.sailboatowners.com/forums/rv ... 6055217.79
Epoxy/Varnish
Submitted by Ellis Rogers of Guilford, CT on 03/07 at 05:52AM regarding General_interest

I have had good success with a combination finish. I start by sanding to bare wood and sand to 150 grit. Then two coats of West system epoxy, sanded with 150 between coats. After the second coat of epoxy, wash thoroughly w/soap and water, rinse and dry. Then sand before putting on five coats of Epifane's. I wet sand w/400 before the last two coats and it looks beautiful. Holds up real well, only need to recoat once a year thereafter.


http://www.sailboatowners.com/forums/rv ... 6113627.90
Alternative to Cetol and Nothing
Submitted by Robert of Lake Grapevine TX (for now) on 03/07 at 11:36AM regarding General_interest

In the Texas sun, doing nothing is not an option. After using Cetol for a few years and not being satisfied, I am now trying Bristol Finish. It is a 2-part, uv stabilized finish, rated highly by Practical Sailor. So far, so good. There is no sanding between coats needed and a 4 coat minimum is directed. The picture you see here is after 8 months including one summer in the sun. There are some spots where my application technique might have faltered that I will need to touch up, but otherwise, it gets compliments and looks like new.

[Ed Haley]

I'm not the only boater who's has a lousy experience with BF. http://www.nwboating.com/reviews/detail/30 Professional yacht restorers call it "garbage." I went to the Hinckley restoration shop in Rhode Island and they told me they would never use the stuff. They use Epithanes on new wood and Captain's varnish on old refinished wood.

You'll have to try it yourself to see if it works in your area. I would try it on a small piece of wood first and see how you like it. That way you won't have to remove the entire refinishing project using BF fom your boat.

[ldemers]

We have been watching our neighboring boat, a BCC 28, being refinished on it's exterior teak with BF.

The owner is paying a young and lovely to do the work, at $3000 for the 4 coat process. She worked almost every day for 2 months on the finish. ...and it looks Really Good!

The depth of the glow is deeper than Cetol certainly (and I have used cetol for 10 years now), and on a par with good quality spar varnishes, only more transparent. Clearly, it is the way to go if you have the $$$, the time and the technique down well.

The only negatives I have heard are the cost, the application process of 4 coats under tight conditions, and the extreme difficulty of removing the finish should it fail, or you tire of it for some reason.

The epoxy nature of this two part finish will make removal "something that you will curse" to quote one guy that sprays boat hulls.

How about anyone that has removed it telling us how he had to do it, and if it was indeed tough to remove..?

Cheers,

Larry DeMers
s/v DeLaMer
CD30c on Lake Superior

[Jim Sullivan]

Ed:

As mentioned in my earlier post, I also have had problems with Bristol Finish. I think there are certainly more failures with this product than successes. I also believe that the failure of the product is not totally due to the prep/application as one individual has pointed out. I spent considerable time in making sure that I followed the directions to the letter so as to ensure a good finish. I should have spent more time researching this product than I did before using it. Had I done so, I would definitely not have used it. I will continue using Cetol. It is noteworthy that Bristol Finish is highly toxic according to the manufacturer and it should be applied in a well ventilated area with proper personal protective equipment. In general, I think there are better products on the market that are safer to use, easier to apply, less expensive and are longer lasting. Just my two cents.


Jim

[John R.]

I've been following the comments in this thread regarding the Bristol. Reading the various user remarks on Bristol Finish has been interesting. I've had my share of experiences using this product at various times over the last couple of years.

I have had excellent results and I also had problems as well using Bristol Finish. based on my experience with it I find Didereaux's comments to be pretty accurate. In general the product can produce superb bright finish super high gloss results. Honey Teak by Signature Finishes (Fabula Inc. - Tom Fabula) is a very similar product. Both of these finishes are top quality when applied correctly and used exactly per directions and with FRESH components.

I had no problems whatsoever with Bristol Finish until later on when I discovered an aging oxidized catalyst started causing some peculiar problems with micro striations in the gloss. It took me quite sometime to figure out what was going on and ultimately I discovered the catalyst shelf life was short. I recalled catalyst issues that occurred in a the glass shops of a couple builders I worked for in the past. This made me start to suspect the catalyst shelf life. Turns out I determined the catalyst was oxidizing from air exposure through the Bristol plastic container. This changed the viscosity slightly when compared side by side with fresh catalyst and obviously caused some chemical changes as well. A fresh catalyst resolved the problem I was experiencing. Mind you that initially there is no problem but after several weeks or a few months the catalyst in the plastic container oxidizes due to the air permeation of that container. When I spoke with Bristol they totally denied any problem which is what I expected from them. The fresh catalyst solved the issue.

However, since they argued the point and would not entertain the problem I became frustrated by them and made a switch to Honey Teak even though the cost was substantially more for basically the same product componet. Both systems are Acrylic Urethanes.

I discovered Fabula, Inc. was smart enough to package their catalyst and all other components in steel containers. I've never had a problem with any oxidized components of Honey Teak because of this. I also seal the container cap of the catalyst to eliminate any chance of fresh air entering into the container.

Honey Teak has all of it's UV inhibitors in the Honey component (Part 1), you apply 3 or 4 coats of this. Then you apply a minimum of three coats of Clear (Part 2). The clear coats are for cosmetic and sacrificial uses. As these clear topcoats deteriorate away or breakdown they do not affect the UV barrier that is in the Honey coats which protects the tooth to the substrate wood.

Bristol Finish is different in that the UV inhibitors are mixed into each coat. So when applying seven or eight coats they are all the same. When the top coats begin to deteriorate or breakdown you start losing some of your UV inhibitors that are also in those coats. That may (theory) result in earlier deterioration of the base coats and compromise the tooth to the wood substrate.

Both finishes work in application the same way for the most part. They take some getting used to. They tend to run or sag easier than typical finishes like Captains 1015 or Epiphanes. They require a totally different application technique in my opinion.

I have had no problems from either of these high quality finishes except for the oxidizing catalyst issue with Bristol. They made changes to their system formulation over the last year from what I understand. I do not know exactly what changes were made. If you use Bristol I advise you to put any catalyst into a steel, tin, or glass container. Seal the container tightly and seal the cap bottom edge also. I still have a couple of plastic Bristol catalyst containers in my garage that have solid catalyst in them. The caps have been completely sealed. Air permeated those plastic containers, not good!

Bristol is much less expensive than Honey Teak. A quart kit of Honey Teak will run about $220 plus shipping (ouch). I use the 16oz kit as it seems the best value and does a lot of teak. The Honey Teak "trial kit" is not a good value. It is way too expensive for what you get (approx 22 square feet coverage). Better to go with a larger kit. You will need extra "flow fluid" no matter which kit is purchased.

Bristol is three times the cost of a high quality varnish. It gets a lot more expensive if the catalyst oxidizes.

Bristol is very clear and allows the wood grain and color to really show through the finish. It is my favorite in the appearance category.

Honey Teak is much more amber looking but extremely attractive also, just different with more color tint to the finish.

In summary I agree with Didereaux, most problems are applicator issues. I even caused myself some on a couple pieces in the past so no matter how hard you try and you think you did everything right to the letter sometimes it is inevitable a gremlin will get you and you'll have to do a little extra sanding to correct the situation. Both of these are the best finishes available in my opinion. Good luck.