I used to use Pettit 1792 and then followed the max prop guidance to use Thiox. I can't exactly say that the Pettit was better or worse. I was planning to use propspeed this year but the expense is outrageous and it doesn't purport to last more than a year. TBH the only reason I stuck with Thiox so long is because the can just lasts and lasts. As a result, it is probably the most cost effective though it is not the easiest to apply and is very hazardous.
Josh Muckley S/V Sea Hawk 1989 C&C 37+ Solomons, MD On Mon, Aug 10, 2020, 20:29 Bruce Whitmore via CnC-List < cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > We are getting the bottom done on our 1994 C&C 37/40+, and at that time, I > am changing a rather old 3-blade prop in not the best condition to a 3 > blade Flexofold. The yard recommends applying Pettit 1792 to the running > gear. When I asked Flexofold about this, they said to not paint it for the > first year, and see how it progresses. > > The only thing is, I don't intend on pulling the boat again until it needs > a new bottom job. > > Do any of you folks in salt water have Flexofolds (or feathering props for > that matter), and you you recommend applying the Pettit 1792? > > Thanks in advance for your insights > > Bruce Whitmore > > _______________________________________________ > > Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions. Each > and every one is greatly appreciated. If you want to support the list - > use PayPal to send contribution -- https://www.paypal.me/stumurray > >
_______________________________________________ Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions. Each and every one is greatly appreciated. If you want to support the list - use PayPal to send contribution -- https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
