Canvas 43 OT

[43Yankee]

Just a note to show progress on my 43 Yankee. This is my first canoe restoration. I applied the canvas and filler over the last month. Canvas and filler from Northwoods. Canvas was attached at the gunwales and stems w/steel staples. This is what the factory had used. I don't know if the nails would have worked better but I am trying to stay somewhat original. #10 Untreated canvas. I burned the little naps off the canvas before I applied the filler. You can see where it looks like the filler sucked in more where it wasn't singed as much. So far I can see no wrinkles. I have 2+ weeks on cure time so far. It still is a little soft underneath. The weather here is not helping any (NY rain). I will primer in a week or so. All wood parts are sealed with CPES. I will be using this frequently and would prefer the wood to have an added moisture barrier. We have used this in our shop on bintage inboards and have had great luck. Stabilizes the wood for varnish coats.

Dave.

 

[Dan Miller]

Why CPES?

All wood parts are sealed with CPES. I will be using this frequently and would prefer the wood to have an added moisture barrier. We have used this in our shop on bintage inboards and have had great luck. Stabilizes the wood for varnish coats.

I'm sorry, I have to question the use of CPES on wood canoes. I have never used it, but have read a little about it with respect to repairs of bigger boats (and it seems to be considered a miracle cure).

Here are some of my thoughts on it, for whatever they are worth:

1) It is not reversible. One of the things I strive to do when restoring an old canoe is to ensure that anything I do is is easily reversible (which, of course is not always possible). If you do this, it ensures the boat is fully restorable in the future, ad infinitum.

2) I worry that the CPES will seep between the ribs and planking (and other parts), binding them together and making future repairs and replacement more difficult.

3) I worry that it will make the cedar hull more brittle, and more susceptible to damage. I realize the formulation may be different, but we see this result with canoes that have been glassed with both polyester and (especially) epoxy resins).

4) Varnish, thinned 50% for the first coat, is an adequate sealer for wood canoes. Remember too, that canoes, unlike inboard boats, are not intended to sit in the water all summer long.

5) The nature of the canvas canoe is that water will get into the wood no matter what you do. If the sealer is effective at keeping water out, it will also be effective at preventing the release of absorbed water (?)

6) Cedar is highly rot resistant, so a little water won't hurt. Canvas is the weak point with respect to failure due to rot (well, and the tips of the stems and decks...). So, to me the CPES seems an unnecessary step and expense.

These are my thoughts on the stuff anyway. Call me old fashioned!

Cheers,
Dan

 

[Ric Altfather]

I agree with you "Cranky"

As Dan knows, I am restoring a wooden boat that is not appropriate for this forum but the methods are. If you want a plastic boat...buy one. I can plasticize several parts of my project but I will not be able to work on them later...not a restoration but a band-aid and probably more work. Don't forget that CPES (Smiths) was developed for structural repairs to homes and not marine environments. I am not saying that it doesn't work but compare the cost of a rib versus a 2 pint ($35.82) kit. By the way, the ribs are running about $4.00 each...and you have original. Once replaced, no cure time, no fumes, no personal hazards, no clean up and on. As a side note, wood saturated with epoxy, clear, thin or otherwise will still soak up water...maybe slower but all the same it will...so it is not a cure-all.

Ric

 

[Michael Grace]

Dave,

I'm also not a user of CPES, so I am speaking here from thoughtful ignorance. Like Dan, I was immediately struck by this being a potentially bad idea. My first throught was that CPES may effectively glue all the ribs and planking together, making any future repairs problematic at best, impossible at worst. Others on these forums have commented about how 60s era and later Old Town canoes sometimes have planking stuck tenaciously to ribs (I've dealt with this myself, and it is not pleasant), and this seems to be only a problem of varnish. Imagine what epoxy will do.

The second big issue, as raised above, is the effect of water. While CPES may make an effective barrier against water entry from the side of a board that is treated, untreated sides allow entry of water that will then be trapped against the wall of epoxy. In a canoe of ribs and planking, particularly on wood-canvas canoes with wide ribs, there can be no way of completely encapsulating the wood, since the CPES surely won't get to all of the recesses between planking and ribs. Over time, water will get back there, though.

So, either the boat becomes completely encapsulated, in which case repairs become impossible, or it is not completely encapsulated, in which case the rate of water damage may be enhanced. CPES has become all the rage in at least some of the runabout and other boat circles. I cannot speak to its merits on runabouts, but it doesn't seem to fit the bill for antique canoe restoration.

Thoughts, Dave?

 

[43Yankee]

Cpes

I knew that I would get some negative reaction on this. Not understandably, though. This is a VERY thin epoxy. It is more of a penetrating sealer rather than a surface agent. While being applied it was amazing to watch. It soaked in to the wood quicker than water would. I tested the ability of the woods to bond together and it just doesn't work that well. I've used thinned varnish and clear sealer also and the epoxy draws into the wood better. I've sanded the parts after and it will still sand out. IT is NOT a glue. I've got enough experience w/West System to know that there is a distinct difference. Am I taking a chance? Yeah, but you don't learn by experimenting. You all know....Experience is what they call it when you don't succeed! So far I am happy with the results other than the fact that the color is a tad darker than I would have prefered. I think that would have occured with regular sealer. The wood is still flexible and repairs still appear possible. Sorry but this will not be done for assembly (cure times and all). I will be there though. Idon't live very far from Keuka Lake. I'd love to talk about this subject with anybody. Nobody even mentioned the steel staples!!

Keep the thoughts coming.

Dave.

 

[ebeeby]

speaking of steel staples...

why not use monel? They do cost more but will never provide a source of iron oxide stain or fail from oxidation.

Just curious.

Oh, and they are "reversible" as they can be removed (as can steel staples).

 

[43Yankee]

Staples

You know, I just didn't give it much thought. I've pulled staples from a lot of marine upholstry and 100% of them were steel. Yes they do rust but I'll be dead by the time someone pulls them out. They can ***** all they want!

Dave

 

[43Yankee]

CPES again

Just a question...Has anybody in this Forum had any documented negative results form the use of CPES? Just curious. There is a lot of concern about possible effects. Has anybody used this and been dissapointed or attempted a repair after usage?? I'd like to get all sides here.

Dave

 

[Dan Miller]

Has anybody in this Forum had any documented negative results form the use of CPES?

Yup, ... you did, just above:

other than the fact that the color is a tad darker than I would have prefered.

Like I said above, I've never used it, so I can't comment on definite negative aspects. But, I've voiced some concerns that I have (to go off the wall entirely, what if it turns purple after 15 years of UV exposure...? Or more realistically, if it is flexible now, as you claim above, will it still be flexible in 15 years?) There have been lots of cure-alls that have not panned out in the long term (Herter's sold an awful lot of fiberglass to fix leaky canoes....)

I'll also admit I've not researched it exhaustively, but it appears to simply be a wood consolidant, meant to make rotted bits stiff enough to make repairs without outright replacement. This can be useful in architectural terms (and I did use a similar product to help repair some sills in my house) and perhaps in larger boats, but every part of a wood canoe is easily replaceable. Why bother?

And, $100/gallon??? No thanks. You can make a perfectly good (and reversible) wood consolidant from copal resin and acetone (essentially what Minwax sells as "Wood Hardener") at a fraction of the cost. If that is what you need. Look at the Woodenboat Forums discussions on CPES. No clearcut consensus - there are those that worship it, and those that despise it. For me, it is too expensive, with no perceived benefit, and too much to risk in the long term.

As for steel staples, Chris Merigold once told me that steel staples will last longer than the canvas. So no worries there. On the other hand having pulled lots of fragments of steel staples, I suggest invoking the second rule of canoe restoration. In order, my two rules are:

1) Try not to make any repair that is not 100% reversible

2) If that repair comes back to your shop sometime in the future, will you swear at it? If the answer is "yes", figure out a different way to do it.

Stainless staples are cheap insurance against teaching your kids words they should not be using....

Enough rambling, time for bed...

 

[Ric Altfather]

Cpes

Jump over to http://www.woodenboat.com

Go under the on-line forum section then down to the building section and view the CPES/Snake Oil thread that was started yesterday...every opinion under the sun...but not replacing my opinion that it's far better and cheaper to replace a chunk of wood versus chemicals.

If you weren't confused before, you will be now.

 

[Dan Lindberg]

Not that these guys need any help but,

my main concern with using CPES is how do you get it to seal the back sides of the ribs and planking under the ribs? Maybe if some "soak in" tests were done that showed "complete" penetration maybe it wouldn't be such a risk but....

Like the others I also read the Wooden Boat BB, and hope/plan to try CPES someday, just don't know when and on what.

There are builders who seal (claim to seal) all wood surfaces during the build of a canoe, but there they have access to all surfaces before the pieces are assemblied.

I'm not sure this can be done on a restoration.

Staples - I use SS, readily available.

And a combination of staples and tacks on the stems.

Dan

 

[Michael Grace]

My rules of thumb in restoration (1) do no further harm, (2) remove any problems that may have been caused in previous attempts at restoration, and (3) do perform work in a way that will not lead to problems in the future. CPES is sworn to by many people, but (as indicated here and in the WoodenBoat forums) many people also worry about its use. I certainly don’t want to experiment on most of my boats, and I wouldn’t do so on someone else’s.

We restore or refurbish old canoes for a variety of reasons. For some, the pleasure comes from performing historically accurate restoration. For others, it is to produce a show quality product. For still others, it is to make a rough old boat into a serviceable watercraft again. If the latter is the goal, then do whatever you feel is necessary. People cut down the sheer and do other drastic alterations, so why not “seal the wood” if it feels like the right thing to do? Hopefully the boat is not historically important and work done doesn’t cause greater problems than were there in the first place. If, on the other hand, you want to restore to historical accuracy, then much more discrimination should be practiced.

CPES is one of those things that is truly long-lasting and irreversible, and therefore should be considered carefully. Staples, on the other hand, are reversible, and in fact make smaller holes in wood than do tacks. But steel staples? They readily corrode, damage the wood around them, and leave iron in the wood which will then blacken (REALLY black) as the iron oxidizes. Much better are Monel staples- they are readily available and while expensive, they are not at all cost-prohibitive.

Let me give three current examples of well-intentioned past “restoration.” I just finished a 1924 Old Town Charles River canoe. Someone had slathered the whole thing in what appeared to be roofing tar, and then green paint on top of that- inside and out, decks, gunwales and all. I’ll bet that the canoe was watertight after they did so! Removing this mess, however, was a nightmare- if it weren’t someone else’s canoe (someone with money!), I never would have tackled it. After removing all the goo that I could, the interior looked reasonable, but it is forever very dark and blotchy.

The second example is a late-1800s Rushton all-wood boat I’m currently restoring. Another well-intentioned person covered several areas in epoxy, apparently to stop leaks between planks, and to smooth certain areas. This is a wonderful boat with exquisitely beautiful lines, and is otherwise in excellent condition. But getting this epoxy off without doing further damage to those areas is excruciatingly slow and tedious work.

The final example is a canoe I just found this past Saturday. The owner apparently couldn’t describe it accurately at all, so I was surprised to arrive and find a Charles River-area long-decked courting canoe, perhaps an Arnold. The gunwales were shot, and all the decking had been replaced with luan plywood (the horror!). But these things I could handle because the hull, stems, deck framing, etc. was all intact. The deal-breaker was the fact that the interior had been slathered with thinned epoxy. I knew that I wouldn’t get all of it off, and even in those areas where I could, I knew from previous experience that epoxy soaked into the wood forever alters the wood- it doesn’t clean up as nicely and anything under the epoxy is sealed in. The owner thought this canoe had great value. Literally, I wouldn’t have paid $100 for it.

Personally, because of my goals in restoration, I avoid CPES, other epoxies, steel staples, roofing tar… Still mulling over the linseed oil…

Michael

 

[43Yankee]

Thanks

Thanks for all of your input - There are many ways to build and restore as we have discussed. Time will tell if what I have done is the best approach. Nowhere did I come across actual documented problems with a canoe after using CPES. I decided then to take the chance. Check out RotDoctor.com. Some of the posts make it seem like I caused a mortal sin. I don't approach restoration quite as rigidly. I'm always looking at different approaches. During restoration decisions have to be made from an economic, estetic, and purist points of view. Non comprimising positions sometimes also lead to bad situations. Most common is bankruptcy! It's (to me) sometimes a compomise. In the end will I have a boat I'm happy with? I think so. Looks real good so far - even though it is a little darker!! The seats (with new cane) look great. I'll post some photos of the interior later after the filler is cured a little more.

Again Thanks!

Happy Boating. Dave.

 

[43Yankee]

Lol

This is a post from the WB Forum relating to CPES usage.


I'd stick to the traditional materials in this case -- CPES is great (in my biased opinion) for what it is intended for, namely penetrating wood and making a good 'binder' for paint, epoxy or varnish.

Seems like it would really mess up the cotton caulking, causing it to both stick where it shouldn't, and to not absorb what it should.

(scampers quickly away before the "CPES is Bunk" crowd arrives waving torches and pitchforks...)

;0 )

 

[Dan Miller]

Check out RotDoctor.com.

They are hardly going to be your unbiased source of information