The New Dick Nite Topcoat

[BobP]

Mark, I'd love to use a topcoat that's even better than solvent based moisture cured urethane (MCU). Maybe water-born oxygen cured urethane (OCU) like Target 9000/9300 or the candidate DN works well with a different paint system than I've tried, but there hasn't been much info here on TU about the paint system that has to be used under OCU to make a durable finish. Acrylic water based airbrush paint doesn't seem ideal. My test and posts by others, including you, tell me a crankbait painted with acrylics and topcoated with OCU has a problem - very limited protection against water infiltration. If the solution is "don't get it wet too long", or "don't let it get too scratched up", that's not gonna work for me on a bass crankbait or a crankbait used for trolling.

Do I change all the coatings I use, maybe move to lacquer paint, and learn a new way to finish wood crankbaits so I can also use OCU? Not unless the end result will be slicker, look better, and be more durable. Not yet. Noodling around the internet, I read about many problems regarding OCU topcoats on automotive finishes. Some brands work fine, some don't, some users have worked out what other coatings to use with OCU, some haven't. It's a relatively new coating family generated principally by regulations from the EPA and California. 10-20 years from now, OCU may be developed to a point where we would never consider using anything else. But not yet.

Edited November 6, 2010 by BobP

[mark poulson]

Bob,

You're right. Although I didn't know the differences between the two types of urethane (thank you for the info), I am well aware of all the issues each one has, and they all have them.

I hope the new DN deals with enough of them to be "the one".

Keep testing, and posting.

[M@TT]

I do not troll but if I was a troller for walleye or stripper etc. My lure would have a significant amount of time in the water correct. So my guess is if you are a troller or KVD the new DN is a flop.

[mark poulson]

I do not troll but if I was a troller for walleye or stripper etc. My lure would have a significant amount of time in the water correct. So my guess is if you are a troller or KVD the new DN is a flop.

From my experience with SC9000, an "interior" urethane, I don't think that will be an issue with the new DN if it's properly cured. I've fished both cranks and swimbaits that were coated with SC9000 all day, and have had no problems. When I fish a crank, it's in the water most of the time, except when I'm casting, so it stays wet. And I fish my swimbaits slowly, so they get soaked, too, and even troll them sometimes.

I can't wait to get some of the new DN to try out.

Edited November 9, 2010 by mark poulson

[BobP]

Mark, in discussing the "new DN" (we don't know yet if it will be selected by Dick), the main point I was trying to get across is that what you have UNDER the topcoat apparently has a lot to do with how it will perform. My concern is a crankbait painted with water based acrylics and topcoated with "new DN". A great crankbait the bass are crashing and you're fishing it all day, and it's getting war wounds - hook rash, scratches. Will you be able to fish it tomorrow or will you have to take the bait back to the barn and refinish the whole thing? If you give it to a friend or sell it, how happy are they going to be? Surely we can't expect fishermen to take precautions against exposing baits to water.

Everyone has to judge these things for himself. I have reservations about the applicability of a timed water immersion test but it does point in a negative direction. How many of us are willing to give up durability? If there is a way to make new DN durable with particular coatings underneath it, what are they? My gut feeling is a big majority of TU members like the ease, low cost, and safety of water based acrylic paints. I'm unwilling to switch from epoxy or moisture cured urethane if it means I have to change everything else - unless the end product is a bait that is more durable.

[Nathan]

I wasn't fortunate enough to get a sample of this to try,but it appears to me it's being thrown under the bus to soon.Bob,have you considered giving the water submersion test one more time?..Perhaps you missed a spot on the top coat.I think we need to check and recheck ourselves here..Nathan

[MikePaintsBaits]

I think the final straw here is what ever topcoat your using and feel its the one that works

best for "YOU" so be it. Not everyone is a dick nite fan and/or fans of other topcoats. I like dick nite , I can't wait to get some , I'm sure there will be a few issues I have with it , for

which I'll have to work with.

Mike

[BobP]

Nathan,

I've had great service from Dick Nite and was glad to be a tester. I think his old topcoat was the best available anywhere in terms of results and I value the relationship he maintains with TU members. I really liked most of the attributes of the new DN. When cured, it seems just as hard and smoother than the old DN. I reported all the good results back to Dick and his reply prompted me to post them here on TU, which I was hesitant to do since it may not be the final new topcoat product. After that, somebody asked me to chuck the test blocks in water for an immersion test. I was dismayed at the result and feel whipsawed by the sequence of events. If I had a "Do-Over", I wouldn't post any comment about testing, pro or con because I felt the results are really for Dick alone to judge and act on. But having posted results of the scratch test, how could I not also post results of the immersion test?

[dicknite]

Nathan,

I've had great service from Dick Nite and was glad to be a tester. I think his old topcoat was the best available anywhere in terms of results and I value the relationship he maintains with TU members. I really liked most of the attributes of the new DN. When cured, it seems just as hard and smoother than the old DN. I reported all the good results back to Dick and his reply prompted me to post them here on TU, which I was hesitant to do since it may not be the final new topcoat product. After that, somebody asked me to chuck the test blocks in water for an immersion test. I was dismayed at the result and feel whipsawed by the sequence of events. If I had a "Do-Over", I wouldn't post any comment about testing, pro or con because I felt the results are really for Dick alone to judge and act on. But having posted results of the scratch test, how could I not also post results of the immersion test?

On the contrary, Bob! I really appreciate all this feedback. I'm not looking to get a bunch of "Yes Man" answers...

One of the main reasons I put this stuff out to be tested by all you folks is exactly that - to find out the failings. I know the tests I did came out good, but I don't paint all materials in all the different ways they can be painted - so you guys are an extension of me (kind of, don't take that the wrong way... <grin>) and if I had thought to test it on wood, with water-based paint under it, I certainly would not have hidden the results from myself!

Since your posting with the picture, I have done a little re-testing of my own with similar conditions. The only real difference is I have mine over lacquer paints on metal (now that I read that, it is COMPLETELY different than your test!), but I let them cure for 12+ days, then scratched them and soaked them in water (well water, actually) for 48 hours. Not a hint of anything loosening, the water simply beaded up on the finish when I pulled them out.

There was no sign of seepage under the top-coat, and of course the lacquer would not absorb any water, so it seems that the problem in all actuality exists with the relationship the top-coat has with the underlying paint and/or the bonding of the top-coat to the product and base material.

That being said, I certainly don't want people to switch to lacquers - I want to develop a top-coat that works on ALL types (within reason) of paints and finishes.

So, it isn't necessarily back to square one, I simply have to work with the chemists to come up with a way to get the top-coat to bond better with the water-based paints and lure material to avoid the seepage that seems to have caused the catastrophic failure (I really like that phrase! Makes it like we are working for NASA or something!) on your blocks.

One person suggested to me that if the top-coat was applied to the water-base colors PRIOR to the water-base color drying, maybe they would bond together better, making a better final finish... Has anyone tried that? I know with the old top-coat, we had to make sure that the underlayment was completely dry - maybe this is the opposite...

Don't give up yet! I have had about half of the test sheets come back, and I am going to be quite open about their findings with you guys. I have no reason to keep any of it a secret, because as any of you who have worked with me know, I don't try selling something to someone that does not fit their needs or work correctly - I simply want to come up with a good product that works for a majority of the people who use it.

So, please keep up posting BOTH good and bad results - I really do appreciate it and have been checking back multiple times per day to see what is currently being found.

Keep up the good work. This might not, as you said, be the final product. It worked well in the tests I did on metal lures with lacquer finishes, so that may be the place of this particular product. I have another chemist coming out tomorrow or Thursday to try something completely different... They are ever-optimistic!

Thanks again for all your feedback!

Dick

[Nathan]

Bob,

Your comments on the top coat have been extremely helpful and well thought out.I just think we need to check and recheck ourselves as we go along.Try the same test again..If you get the same out come,then it wasn't a flook and we know there is definatley a problem there..

Dick,I'm really glad to see you haven't thrown in the towel on this!!..Nathan

[mark poulson]

Bob,

Your comments on the top coat have been extremely helpful and well thought out.I just think we need to check and recheck ourselves as we go along.Try the same test again..If you get the same out come,then it wasn't a flook and we know there is definatley a problem there..

Dick,I'm really glad to see you haven't thrown in the towel on this!!..Nathan

+1 Dick, I'm rooting for you to come up with "the one", too.

Bob, whatever happens, it's all your fault!

[BobP]

In noodling around the internet about urethane coatings used on floors, there seem to be 3 alternate chemistries to choose from: moisture cured solvent based; oxygen cured water-born; and UV cured solvent based. I haven't read about anyone trying UV cured urethane but it's interesting. Flooring contractors say it cures immediately as they roll a portable UV light cart over the flooring. UV light sources are not all that expensive, either. Hmm... There's probably a downside, like the stuff costs $1,000 per gallon or something.

[DUCBOS]

On the contrary, Bob! I really appreciate all this feedback. I'm not looking to get a bunch of "Yes Man" answers...

One of the main reasons I put this stuff out to be tested by all you folks is exactly that - to find out the failings. I know the tests I did came out good, but I don't paint all materials in all the different ways they can be painted - so you guys are an extension of me (kind of, don't take that the wrong way... <grin>) and if I had thought to test it on wood, with water-based paint under it, I certainly would not have hidden the results from myself!

Since your posting with the picture, I have done a little re-testing of my own with similar conditions. The only real difference is I have mine over lacquer paints on metal (now that I read that, it is COMPLETELY different than your test!), but I let them cure for 12+ days, then scratched them and soaked them in water (well water, actually) for 48 hours. Not a hint of anything loosening, the water simply beaded up on the finish when I pulled them out.

There was no sign of seepage under the top-coat, and of course the lacquer would not absorb any water, so it seems that the problem in all actuality exists with the relationship the top-coat has with the underlying paint and/or the bonding of the top-coat to the product and base material.

That being said, I certainly don't want people to switch to lacquers - I want to develop a top-coat that works on ALL types (within reason) of paints and finishes.

So, it isn't necessarily back to square one, I simply have to work with the chemists to come up with a way to get the top-coat to bond better with the water-based paints and lure material to avoid the seepage that seems to have caused the catastrophic failure (I really like that phrase! Makes it like we are working for NASA or something!) on your blocks.

One person suggested to me that if the top-coat was applied to the water-base colors PRIOR to the water-base color drying, maybe they would bond together better, making a better final finish... Has anyone tried that? I know with the old top-coat, we had to make sure that the underlayment was completely dry - maybe this is the opposite...

Don't give up yet! I have had about half of the test sheets come back, and I am going to be quite open about their findings with you guys. I have no reason to keep any of it a secret, because as any of you who have worked with me know, I don't try selling something to someone that does not fit their needs or work correctly - I simply want to come up with a good product that works for a majority of the people who use it.

So, please keep up posting BOTH good and bad results - I really do appreciate it and have been checking back multiple times per day to see what is currently being found.

Keep up the good work. This might not, as you said, be the final product. It worked well in the tests I did on metal lures with lacquer finishes, so that may be the place of this particular product. I have another chemist coming out tomorrow or Thursday to try something completely different... They are ever-optimistic!

Thanks again for all your feedback!

Dick

I'm a confused simple man.

Is this new DN2 moisture cured like the old? Is it heat cured, or oxygen or some othe methhod of curing?

I need to start there to figure out where to go with it.

[MR KNOW IT ALL KIND OF]

I think the new stuff is harder than the old formula.

Dean

Rumor has it the new formula has the same special chemical agent as Viagra. Any truth to this rumor Dick? and does your chemist work for them.. If so The Lure Professor said he would like the number to your chemist. He is willing to do whatever it takes to make his research through in all conditions with this new chemical.

Edited November 10, 2010 by The_Rookie

[jim45498]

As I have said in an earlier post, I have used this DN2 with Createx. I made sure to heat set with a hairdryer between each and every coat of Createx.

I use 2 coats of DN2. Waiting 5 hours between coats.

I fish my bass crankbaits very hard and for a long period of time before changing baits.

So far I have very little hook rash and zero leakage in the DN2. While fishing them I have banged the lures on rock and wood and so far no problems.

Although I did break a bill on one, that had no effect on the clearcoat.

I always wait at least 3 days before putting them in the water.

I guess my point is this...The DN2 has been working for me. It does not mean it will work for everyone but I am very satisfied with the results

at this time. JMO

[BobP]

DUCBOS, DN2 (new) is water-born urethane that can be thinned with water and hardens by exposure to oxygen over 12-14 days. DN1 (old) is solvent based urethane that hardens over several days from exposure to humidity in the air. DN1 has stringent storage requirements to limit its exposure to humidity; DN2 is apparently not as "touchy" as DN1 about how it's stored. Google "Moisture Cured Urethane" and "Oxygen Cured Urethane" for more info.

[CedarLakeMusky]

To everyone who got a sample of the new DN. How do you think it would hold up on Musky and Pike lures? Would it be possible for me to get a sample to try? I know he is still testing the new formula and it may change some but I wouldn't mind giving it a whirl.

CLM

[Lure--Prof]

As I have said in an earlier post, I have used this DN2 with Createx. I made sure to heat set with a hairdryer between each and every coat of Createx.

I use 2 coats of DN2. Waiting 5 hours between coats.

I fish my bass crankbaits very hard and for a long period of time before changing baits.

So far I have very little hook rash and zero leakage in the DN2. While fishing them I have banged the lures on rock and wood and so far no problems.

Although I did break a bill on one, that had no effect on the clearcoat.

I always wait at least 3 days before putting them in the water.

I guess my point is this...The DN2 has been working for me. It does not mean it will work for everyone but I am very satisfied with the results

at this time. JMO

Jim,

Your painting and your results appear to mirror mine. I continue to fish the lures I've cleared with DN2, and I remain very impressed!

Dean

[Hughesy]

Jim,

Your painting and your results appear to mirror mine. I continue to fish the lures I've cleared with DN2, and I remain very impressed!

Dean

I agree! I have had very great results with the new DN. Shoots great, lays flat, and dries very hard.I think the submersion tests are really an extreme. Lures rarely see that kind of water exposure.

[BobP]

I'm relieved that other testers had good in-the-water performance. Did I do something to screw up my test? I didn't think so but all my finishing details are in the first post of this thread so you can judge for yourself and point out any shortcomings you see. If your test worked great, did it differ in any detail from mine?

The difference I'm hearing so far is: my test blocks had scratches down into the underlying acrylic paint before an immersion test, while other guys fished crankbaits that had no scratches or dings when testing began or when it finished. If this is the only difference, and a finish works well in one scenario but not the other, each of us can draw his own conclusions.

[paskeeter]

I don't post much here on TU but have to add my 2 cents on this thread. I've been painting for about a year now using D2Ton for a topcoat and find it very time consuming. Just when I was ready to take the next step and get some DN it was no longer available. I am looking forward to the new DN for 2 reasons now. One being it sound very user friendly and Mr. Nite himself. If he is willing to post here and put out samples, working with his customers as he did to me that shows he is a stand up guy and I will gladly use his product.

[DUCBOS]

Bob P

Thanks

It appears from the info on the net that oxygen cured talks considerably longer to cure.

I guess that is why the storage issues are better.

It also appears that the DN2 is about as or maybe more durable thatn DN1.

We won't know about discoloration for some time.

Water durability will also be solvedwith time.

Ease of use seems good.

It seems that what is needed now is to use it.

Can DN make enough of it to sell?

[RiverMan]

I agree! I have had very great results with the new DN. Shoots great, lays flat, and dries very hard.I think the submersion tests are really an extreme. Lures rarely see that kind of water exposure.

The clear coat on a lure may be scraped and scratched from banging around in the boat, hitting the bottom of the river, bouncing off branches, or in a fishes mouth. If a clear coat can't hold up to simply being submerged for 24 hours, how will it hold up to years of fishing? Some of my favorite salmon lures are scraped from one end to the other from teeth. Any one of my commercially purchased lures can easily be left underwater for days with no ill effects. If DN2 can't take a 24 hour soak, it's definitely not "the clear coat" for lure builders IMHO.

Jed

Edited November 26, 2010 by RiverMan

[bobv]

I finally got a chance to do a submersion test with the new DN. I wanted to wait 2 weeks after coating to be sure it was cured. I took an old spook scuffed it up and shot 3 coats of white on it, heat setting each coat before applying the next. Then dipped it in new DN 3 times with 5hrs between coats. I hung it in our living room where the the temp would be the most consistent for 2 weeks. To make sure the water could penetrate I put several cuts in the clear and scuffed it to the plastic. I then put it in filtered tap water and weighted it down to hold it under. I checked on it hourly for the first 6 hours and could tell no difference in color or hardness. However after 24 hrs under water the entire bait was covered with pimples and the clear and white could be scraped off with your fingernail. Assuming it was ruined I set aside and watched football all day and that evening went in to see about stripping the lure. I was amazed to find all the pimples gone and the finish had rehardened to a point I couldn't scrap it up even where I had cut the finish. It also appears to have bonded with the paint better. Not sure what to think at this point. Any ideas out there.

[mark poulson]

I finally got a chance to do a submersion test with the new DN. I wanted to wait 2 weeks after coating to be sure it was cured. I took an old spook scuffed it up and shot 3 coats of white on it, heat setting each coat before applying the next. Then dipped it in new DN 3 times with 5hrs between coats. I hung it in our living room where the the temp would be the most consistent for 2 weeks. To make sure the water could penetrate I put several cuts in the clear and scuffed it to the plastic. I then put it in filtered tap water and weighted it down to hold it under. I checked on it hourly for the first 6 hours and could tell no difference in color or hardness. However after 24 hrs under water the entire bait was covered with pimples and the clear and white could be scraped off with your fingernail. Assuming it was ruined I set aside and watched football all day and that evening went in to see about stripping the lure. I was amazed to find all the pimples gone and the finish had rehardened to a point I couldn't scrap it up even where I had cut the finish. It also appears to have bonded with the paint better. Not sure what to think at this point. Any ideas out there.

Bob,

That jibes with my experience with SC9000, another one part urethane. I'm not sure if it's called water borne, or moisture cured, but it behaves exactly like that.

I have yet to have a lure's topcoat or finish have a problem unless it was either left to soak in water overnight, or had lain on it's side on wet boat carpet overnight.

In both cases, when I hung the lures over the workbench and they dried out, the finish was, once again, hard and tightly bonded.

The SC9000 is their "Super Clear", and it is an interior finish, but the tech guy at the manuf. said it would be the best finish for lures, and I think he was right. He said it wouldn't change or dull the paint schemes at all, and it doesn't. Not even metallic paints.

After the wetting episode, I tried some of their exterior urethane finish, EM9300, and found that, while the finished coat was even stronger and completely waterproof, it was not as super clear, and dulled the paint schemes.

I have to think that there is something in a water based urethane that's clear that make is slightly vulnerable to water, but only when submerged over time.

I fish some swimbaits all day and have had no failures.

I'm betting the new DN will perform the same, and I'd rather buy from a forum sponsor, so I can't wait to try it when he finally gets all the kinks out.