I have been following this CP thread, and others. I am also not a long time rod builder. Before retiring I worked in the Airline Industry in aircraft maintance quality control,

What I don't under stand is CP is "Color Preserver" nothing in the labels or information on the three brands that I have says it is a sealant and/or an adhesive. If all it does is protect the thread form the finish, why would one want it to penetrate the thread? Won't just covering the thread do the job? Finish ( reading most of the books and on this list) is a protectant for the thread, and also is not listed as an adheasive. That leaves the thread, which in the usual case is nylon. Probably the strongest most durable thread currently available. If years ago silk thread was used and covered with a varnish why are we worried about CP penetration? Doesn't the strenght come form the thread?

I use CP if I don't want a color change, I don't use it if I want the change. I use NCP thread for color shade effect, with or with out CP.

What am I missing here?


Dan Hogan
The only way to have a friend, is to be one.

I'm with you, Dan!! The whole point is to COVER the thread to keep finish from penetrating it, period. I have used 811 CP that was so thick that I know it couldn't penetrate anything, but yet it did it's job perfectly.



Mike (Southgate, MI)
If I don't want to, I don't have to and nobody can make me (except my wife) cuz I'm RETIRED!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/09/2006 11:53AM by Mike Barkley.

Dan - I think you have got it right. Best wishes, Hogan. Here goes:

The only real reason to use Color Preserver (CP) is to prevent porous thread like nylon (and silk?) from becoming translucent when the thread finish ("TF", epoxy or non-epoxy, like PermaGloss) is applied. ...

Some guys use a drop of CP during mid-stage breaks in their wrapping process to "lock" their trim bands or their Metallic threads, an attempt to reduce the likelihood of the thread band unraveling while they have to go do something else. The Metallics seem especially prone to unraveling, due to THERMAL expansion / contraction and the very low coefficient of friction between the metallic sheath and the rod blank, which allows this slippage to occur.

CP does not have particularly good adhesive properties, so it does not especially enhance the adhesion of the thread to the rod blank per se. I guess for the Metallica thread heads, the CP sufficiently enhances this adhesion or locking effecting to serve their purposes. It works, so they use it for this limited purpose, because it is also compatible with their next step - applying TF.

IMO, the solids delivered by the CP (those acrylics) are fairly STIFF. The newly deposited & cured acrylics prevent the thread from changing shape, and THAT creates this "lock" effect. But the lock effect is probably due to both contributing factors: the encasing / stiffening of the thread; plus some more adhesion to the rod blank & the two adjacent threads.

Anyway, the purpose of the CP is to: Prevent light-colored regular nylon thread from absorbing any TF; and to thus prevent unwanted color changes of the thread; and the translucence that come from the infiltrating TF. Period.

In order for the CP to accomplish this "lock-out" or "sealing" effect, the CP itself must PENETRATE (be absorbed) into the thread before the TF can. If the CP is too "thick" (for whatever reason), then judicious THINNING is probably a good idea, if getting a new batch or brand of CP is impractical at that time.

If your thread material (Metallic or NCP thread) and / or or your color schemes do not need protection from transulcence, then DO NOT USE a COLOR PRESERVER. It is a WASTE of time and an added risk for a process failure. Even FlexCoat's website specifically recommends NOT using CP if possible. It also says just apply the FC-TF directly to the thread. Indeed, this will really encase the thread, preventing slippage, abrasion and (sea)water infiltration. ... Thread wraps encased without CP are about 10% stronger than wraps with CP. ... It is the thread TENSION that holds the line guide in place, NOT the TF and definitely not the CP.

That is our ultimate goal anyway, -encasing the threads- and if CP can be eliminated from the process, that is a plus. If CP is needed, it has to penetrate the regular nylon threads and deliver a sufficient quantity of sealant (acrylics or certain types of polyurethane) to exclude TF invasion and prevent translucence. .

End of story, ... I hope that unravels the confusion of CP, TF and thinning forever. Or at least until the next wave of neophytes reaches a sufficient critical mass to re-ignite another round of elaborate discussion, ... a time-consuming belaboration which I hope to avoid.

-Cliff Hall+++, Gainesville, FL-USA*****

Mike Barkley - Thanks for including your experience with Gudebrods CP-811. I meant to include a comment on how notorious it is for batch to batch variations in thickness. I didn't know that GB-CP-811 often works just fine, even when thick like that. ... I suspect as little as a 5% dilution of the CP with De-Natured Ethanol (Alcohol) or Acetone would do wonders to reduce viscosity without risking a collapse (granulation) of the acrylics or a disruption of the dispersion vehicle (solvent system). -Cliff Hall+++