Acrylic Gelcoat Restorers

What’s the difference between acrylic coatings and conventional waxes and polishes?

4

Part of our interest in acrylic hull restorers is due to the wide range of opinions on these products. Marketing materials often position these products as “miracle cures ” for aging gelcoat, and the examples of restored boats appearing on the Internet or in brochures often seem too good to be true. While user reports are generally positive, some disappointing reports also crop up on sailing forums.

So what’s the difference between acrylic coatings and conventional waxes and polishes? Waxes and polishes fill in minor surface imperfections and give the gelcoat a reflective surface. Acrylic fiberglass coatings – an alternative when waxes and polishes won’t revive your gelcoat – leave a hard, clear plastic coating on gelcoat.

Acrylic coatings differ significantly from ordinary bottle or paste waxes in both their chemistry and how they are applied. Conventional carnauba paste waxes (those made from the carnauba bean) mechanically stick to the surface of the hull and usually require rubbing to get them to crystallize and shine. Buffing drives wax into the surface pores.

Synthetic polymer “waxes” penetrate pores and chemically bond to the boat’s surface. Some synthetics resist abrasion and chemicals better than true waxes, but the line between conventional waxes and polymer waxes is fuzzy. Even products that are true carnauba waxes often rely on polymer technology.

To read the details on our acrylic gelcoat restorers test as well as more tips and advice on the care and cleaning of your gelcoat, purchase and download the Practical Sailor ebook Gelcoat Restoration and Maintenance today.

Want to read about the cleaning and maintenance of all your boating surfaces? Available for purchase and download is Practical Sailor’s ebook series, Marine Cleaners. This three volume set contains the ebooks Gelcoat Restoration and MaintenanceEssential Marine Cleaners and Specialty Marine Cleaners.

Buy all three for the price of two. It’s like getting one complete ebook FREE.

Darrell Nicholson
Practical Sailor has been independently testing and reporting on sailboats and sailing gear for more than 50 years. Supported entirely by subscribers, Practical Sailor accepts no advertising. Its independent tests are carried out by experienced sailors and marine industry professionals dedicated to providing objective evaluation and reporting about boats, gear, and the skills required to cross oceans. Practical Sailor is edited by Darrell Nicholson, a long-time liveaboard sailor and trans-Pacific cruiser who has been director of Belvoir Media Group's marine division since 2005. He holds a U.S. Coast Guard 100-ton Master license, has logged tens of thousands of miles in three oceans, and has skippered everything from pilot boats to day charter cats. His weekly blog Inside Practical Sailor offers an inside look at current research and gear tests at Practical Sailor, while his award-winning column,"Rhumb Lines," tracks boating trends and reflects upon the sailing life. He sails a Sparkman & Stephens-designed Yankee 30 out of St. Petersburg, Florida. You can reach him at darrellnicholson.com.

4 COMMENTS

  1. I used PolyGlow on my 23 year old 53′ ketch after several DIY and professional wax jobs using a variety of different wax/polish products. The hull looked OK, not great for about 2 months, then dull again. Diesel soot imbedded in the wax required removing the wax and harsh cleansers to eliminate.
    Poly Glow was easy to apply. I used 7 coats applied one after the other in about 5 hours, most of which was spent moving ladders and planks. No buffing needed. The boat looked better than it had in the 15 years I’d owned her. Diesel soot washed off with mild detergents. 16 months later she still looked good, but when I hauled her out I put two more coats on. She looked brand new again and everyone in the yard stopped by to ask what I was using. I have no association with PolyGlow except as a customer. I’ll never wax again.

  2. It seems like there is another PS publication that is available every month – while I’m sure they are very informative, my expectation in subscribing to PS was that these in depth articles would be available in archives- what I’ve found are abridged versions. I’m disappointed as I am reluctant to shell out another $30 each time another digital version is made available – PS did not make this structure evident in its solicitations for readership.

  3. I agree that Archives are advertised as an advantage of joining. For myself it was the MAIN ADVANTAGE and so is a serious disappointment to find the additional costs associated with the e book downloads, I would not have joined if that was not seen as a real advantage. Disappointing!

  4. I agree that Archives are advertised as an advantage of joining. For myself it was the MAIN ADVANTAGE and so is a serious disappointment to find the additional costs associated with the e book downloads, I would not have joined if that was not seen as a real advantage. Disappointing! ( I not previously posted on this but others certainly have. If my comments are not not published because they support other comments this gives an unrealistic sense of the concern for this point of view.