This follows the discussion on Doug's u/sonic a/foul thread. We've gone off on a bit of a Propspeed tangent and I said I'd post some pics, but so as not to hijack the u/sonic debate I'm putting on a separate thread.
Pic 1 - this is the Propspeed applied, in Antibes by the local (very good) shipyard, September 2006. I wasn't there and did this by phone and they only put the propspeed on the shafts and props, not the P brackets and tabs. Ignore the scruffy a/foul paint - the boat was being lifted for an emergency repair so I didn't have the paint done, only the propspeed. The boat was re-launched 12/9/06
Pics2. This is the next liftout 6.5mths later. 28 April 2007, 6.5mths and 425nm elapsed since the previous lift. Those miles consisted of a big cruise in late Sept 06 then a few weekends out over the winter, and mostly the boat was idle sitting on berth. Incidentally, ignore the condition of the black a/f paint. I hadn't discovered soft micron 66 at this point so it's pretty scuzzy. It was on this liftout that micron 66 was applied for first time. The props and shafts are pretty good so the Propspeed did an ok job. Propspeed was NOT re-applied in this liftout
Next, pics 3, liftout was 14.4.08, 11.5mths elapsed and 1050nm since the previous lift. Miles were mostly summer 2007 and the boat was pretty idle winter 2007/8. Props quite a lot worse without the Propspeed (but the hull is just amazing - check out those pics, that's nearly a year in the med and the last few months sat on a berth going nowhere in winter, and the paint looks brand new. I'm TOTALLY convinced by soft micron66 paint.). In this lift, micron 66 was reapplied but no Propspeed was applied
Finally, pic 4, and it doesn't add much to the story, this is next liftout 24.2.09. 10mths elapsed and 590nm since the previous lift. Lousy props again but fantastic hull again (micron 66 again).
These are reasonable comparisons because it's the same boat parked on the same berth throughout
Conclusions? Micron 66 is fantastic on the hull. As for the props, actually, now I look at this again, the Propspeed is quite good isn't it. Can't really work out why I've not been more enthusiastic about it. It cost 520 ex vat, in 2006, and the bill says they applied 2 coats. That's 1/3rd the cost of ultrasonic (£1745 inc VAT for Ultra20) but it might have cost more (double?) if they'd done the rudders, P brackets and tabs, and I'd hope the ultrasonic will cure those. So if the ultrasonic works perhaps it's fair to say it pays back in 2 years compared with Propspeed. But at this point I've no idea if it's better or worse than Propspeed. Hmmmm....
Results 1 to 10 of 27
07-01-10, 22:18 #1
Propspeed - pictures with/without
07-01-10, 22:44 #2
Thanks for that jfm
One thing here - I'll be having a close look at Micron 66 now.
As for Propspeed, it looks the same as the so called Propslip that was on the Sunseeker. The problems that we were experiencing wasnt the adhesion of the Propspeed. It did stay on - its just that the barnacles grew on it.
07-01-10, 23:18 #3Registered User
Location : Northern Ireland
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
I am amazed at the performance of the Micron 66.... if its as good as that in all conditions why look elsewhere for hull antifoul!
08-01-10, 00:41 #4
It's so good that I'm sure my speed loss late in the season is ALL caused by fouling on the metal parts, and that's what I'd like u/sound to cure. That's why I'll be putting both the u/sound vibrators at the stern
Last edited by jfm; 08-01-10 at 00:44.
08-01-10, 01:10 #5
They say the barnacles will attach themselves to the (Propspeed covered) prop and shaft, but as soon as the running gear starts to move, they are 'flicked' off.
Ideally, our applicator has informed me, the gear should be run once a fortnight to be kept clean.
It is the only product we have used so I can't compare it to anything else.
08-01-10, 07:15 #6
jfm, I'm just stunned at the performance of the antifoul.... you say a great superyacht antifoul for the Med, but I surely Micron 66 would be OK for all of us? I previously used International interspeed on my old Merry Fisher, and to be honest found that OK, I was thinking of trying Cruiser Uno this year on my new boat but have not purchased anything yet... is Micron 66 horrendously expensive?
..edited bit; Oh, answered my own question.... yes it is expensive...
...but as always, you get what you pay for... but I think I will be sticking to my original plan...
Last edited by Firefly625; 08-01-10 at 07:19.
08-01-10, 07:59 #7Registered User
Location : Oxfordshire
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
Nice to hear about the Micron 66 experiences. FWIW I put Micron 55 on in Mar 07. Boat got reasonable use that summer then sat on it's mooring on the Hamble until a quick lift and jetwash at Sealift in May 08. At that point there was a light slime on the hull but nothing else. Prop wase also polished as the previous attempt with lanolin and heat was useless.
Boat was used for four weeks that summer then sat on mooring until needing an emergency lift in Mar 09. At this point there was a bit of 'moss' around the waterline on the front port qtr that faces the sun and dirt around the rest of the waterline but the rest of the hull just had a light slime. Prop was barnacled so cleaned and Seajet Peller Clean applied. Four months later there, after no boat use, there was again a light slime but half the Peller Clean had gone - but that might have been becuase it was applied in almost freezing conditions. The peller Clean had worked where it had stayed on.
I now put on two coats of Micron 66 and re done from scratch the Seajet Peller Clean on the prop. I'm definately impressed with the Micron stuff.
08-01-10, 08:21 #8
The M66, they say, somehow self-erodes while the boat is stationary. It doesn't need motion to shed its skin. That's backed up by my pictures 3 and 4, which are taken after 4 months ish of winter inactivity followed by a 4 mile drive to the crane.
I spoke to a chemist at International and get the M66 recommendation from him. He was very helpful, and adamant that M66 was International's best product and the best thing on the market, tho perhaps he would say that. He said M66 had a thin market in the retail/small boat sector partly due to price and isn't pushed to the retail market and many retailers of International dont have it and have barely heard of it. It is sold in barrel loads to the superyacht market where the saving of dry docking and fuel far outweighs the price premium.
I'm only listing my experience, not pushing any product. Fouling is different in each location and each of us has many years of personal gut feeling on antifoul, so it's very much a case of each to their own on this topic. I wouldn't disagree with any choice you make!
MBY did a test on M66 May 2008 but I dont know what it said nor have the back issue
08-01-10, 09:26 #9
I wonder how many people on here have tried just a standard eroding anti foul on their Mobo. Obviously there are plenty of other eroding anti fouls designed for raggies that are far less expensive that M66...
08-01-10, 09:36 #10
I did a bit of research into International antifoulings last night and found another product which is very well priced at the moment.
On the face of it it looks to be very similar to Micron 66 so I thought I'd ask International.
Just spoken to a really helpful guy who said that there is very little difference between the two products.
But when I said that I wanted it for a 20m boat, he definately recommended the Micron 66 product and confirmed jfm's research that this was the stuff that is used on super yachts.
I havent been 100% happy with Blakes, particularly at the end of the season, but we did put a lot of miles on during the early season so it may not be very fair to be too critical.
So, I think I'll be having a go at Micron 66 this season - just got find the best price for it now.