Well, I looked, for quite a while, and
found nothing challenging 303’s claim to be based on a UV-screening chemical.
An informal test… When I have forgotten my sunscreen, I have used 303 and it has worked. It sure wasn’t because it was shiny and reflective on my hoary old skin.
Yeah Bob, but the real question is
Yeah Bob, but the real question is - if you bought it would you actually paddle it? If the answer is yes let me know and I’ll be there with my camera.
Happy New Year Bob
Would resell…
Would resell half baked kayak.
Would keep Scarlett.
I think she would be a lot more fun than paddling a half baked kayak.
:^)
BOB
test
It’s been years but the test I think was done by the EAA for ultralight aircraft. Unlike a kayak if the sails of your ultralight fail due to UV degradation you can die. I’ve got the source of the tests somewhere but not sure I want to take the time to dig them out, might take a couple hundred hours and I don’t have that kind of time.
Oh sure the stuff you use on your skin would be exactly the same thing you’re use on your boat, get real.
Bill H.
FP303
Btw, FP 303 isn’t certainly a new product. It’s been on the market for at least 25 years. I swear by it btw, but not because of what most people think it does.
Bill H.
I notice that 303 supplies a somewhat
different formulation for fabric protection than what they hand out for smooth plastic or painted surfaces. That may be related to findings you saw for sailplanes. As I said, I googled many pages and saw no indication whatsoever that consumers thought 303 has no UV screening chemical. Even a pro who works for another company and obviously had much detailed knowledge of the chemistry of these products said that they all used UV screening chemicals.