Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

Question for those who have installed polymeric mastic

Discussion in 'Audio' started by BigJohnson, Nov 20, 2005.

  1. BigJohnson

    BigJohnson 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2001
    Posts:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AL
    Should I go ahead and lay down two layers on the floor or is one sufficient? I have enough to do the floor twice or use the rest on other panels. If two layers makes a big difference I will do that and buy some more later for the rest of the interior.
     
  2. BigJohnson

    BigJohnson 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2001
    Posts:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AL
    Well, found the answers I needed using the search function....funny how that works :D

    Greg72's posts are great!

    Thanks :bow:
     
  3. Greg72

    Greg72 "Might As Well..." Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    642 Days to BB2018

    There's no such thing as TOO MUCH....

    I think I've got 3 layers in my Burb on the floor, then a layer of ThermTec heat shield, then the carpet. That made a huge difference in comfort and sound deadening.

    Next up is a 3-layer treatment on all the interior panels (a combination of inner skins and outer skins) which should be another huge improvement.

    There is a "diminishing returns" effect with the mastic... 6 layers won't be twice as good as 3....but the stuff is SO much cheaper than Dynamat that I enjoy the luxury of being able to at least double it up where I can.


    :thumb:
     
  4. BigJohnson

    BigJohnson 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2001
    Posts:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AL
    Thanks for the reply! I am going to go ahead put down the two layers and consider this phase I of the project :D Side panels, doors, rear area, etc. will get some attention in a few weeks.

    Where do you find ThermTec heat shield? I wanted to put down some thermal insulation but haven't gotten any yet. Someone mentioned in my other post some aluminum backed insulation available at Lowes or Home Depot. Any thoughts using this http://www.lowes.com/lowes/lkn?action=productDetail&productId=28929-1410-FV516&lpage=none stuff?
     
  5. Greg72

    Greg72 "Might As Well..." Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    642 Days to BB2018
    ThermoTec is available from Summit.


    I got the woven fabric stuff with a foil layer on one side....it's not cheap, so you'll be glad that you saved $$$ on the polymeric mastic!! :D

    I think it was something like $50 for a 36" x 48" piece, and I used 2 of them in the Burb....

    The stuff WORKS! I did some impromptu testing by laying it over the tranny hump in my K5 (which was always notoriously hot) and almost NO heat was able to transfer through that material....pretty amazing really, since it's normally hot enough to melt your sneakers...
     
  6. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    Hey Greg72, I got a question for ya. The trunk lid on the dailly driver rattles something fearce. Any experence with the eDead v3 ??? I'd really like too kill the rattles. What do you think ???
     
  7. Greg72

    Greg72 "Might As Well..." Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    642 Days to BB2018
    I haven't used the spray-on/roll on deadeners, but they should work well.

    You really need to figure out WHAT about your trunk is rattling. Is it the trunklid vibrating against it's reinforcing structure underneath? Is it the trunk tub, inner wells that connect to the rear quarter panels?

    Making the panels heavier/denser (which is what the deadening products do) will keep them from vibrating so easily...and will keep them from resonating at certain frequencies. It's pretty easy to apply the fix, once you isolate the problem....try pressing on the panels as the stereo plays, and see if you can stop the vibration that way. Then apply your favorite dampeners to the panel that's being "jiggy"..... :thumb:


    lather, rinse, repeat....

    :D
     
  8. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    90% of it is comming from the trunk lid itself. I can place my hands on the trunk lid and the vast majority of the rattles stop.
     
  9. BigJohnson

    BigJohnson 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2001
    Posts:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AL
    Greg72,


    Well am going to have to wait on the ThermoTec. Found their site and they make some good looking stuff.

    Finished up the first layer of mastic tonight. Took a lot longer than I thought to cut, fit, heat and roll that stuff down. I am battling somewhat low ambient temperatures for this kinda thing. I think it would have been easier in the summer heat :D

    I hope to get the second layer in tommorow slap the carpet and seats in and go for a test run.

    Thanks for the help.
     
  10. chevyin

    chevyin 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pismo Bch CA
    For rattling trunk lids, I find expanding foam generally works best. Spray it in between the panels that are vibrating together (causing the rattles). Once that's complete, go back over it with mat or spray-on deadener as a mass loader and sound barrier.

    For sound daedening mat, there is no getting around the superiority of the newer butyl rubber based mats (over the older mastic/asphault type). Ive used the dynamat and mcmaster-carr mastic for years, but int he last year did a test between that and the newer butyl rubber based (SecondSkin Damplifier on one half of panel, asphaul deadener on other half) and the difference was very aparent. Tapping tests revealed the lighter and thinner butyl rubber based mat had deadened its half of the panel much better than the asphault stuff. I ripped what little asphault I had put in the truck out after that test and wont ever go back to asphault/mastic mat again.

    Butyl rubber mat is more expensive than the asphault mat, but tis also lighter, thinner, has zero smell problems (unlike some asphault based mats) and simply performs better. Its worth the extra 30-50% cost imo, easily. Especially if you are considering multiple layers of the cheaper stuff. The manufacturers claim one layer of the new butyl rubber mats is equivalent to approx 3 layers of asphault type mat, and I tend to believe it. Ive been there before with the 3-4 layers of asphault all over my truck, trust me it sucks... fiting panels back on, the smell (sometimes), the weight etc. The rubber stuff is better, and its worth the $. If you want the cheapest butyl rubber based mat currently on the market, check into Raamat (I believe the "BXT" series is the rubber based). If you want to spend a bit more to get the best, get SecondSkin Damplifier Pro (better than dynamat extreme for considerably less money) at www.secondskinaudio.com and if you call ask for Anthony. Either product works well, I personally use the SS Damp Pro.

    I would stay away from the eD deadening products, as there have been some real quality control issues from them (mats not meeting advertised thickness/mass requirements and spray-on deadener having other problems). eD in general seems to be going down hill fast after the past several fiasco's beginning with the 15" A series flat cones collapsing etc etc. Not to sound like a SecondSkin salesman, but they also happen to make some of the best spray-on/brush-on deadeners around in the Spectrumv2 (what I use.. spray-on) and the Sludge (a brush-on). You can also make your own spray-on or brush-on deadners with normal hardware store bought items. For example, I have my own concrete recipe for a trowel-on application to replace spots I use to spray. Get creative. *shrug*

    For anyone interested, here's a link to a fairly scientific test between the top deadening mat brands, and even a few well-known Home-Depot type materials popular with the DIY'ers: http://www.sounddeadenershowdown.com/

    That test has caused quite a stir in the deadener industry, as it was the first scientifically based test performed by a non-biased critic (a pontential customer not affiliated with any of the companies) of car audio deadening mats. It clearly shows the absolute superiority of the butyl rubber mats over the asphault mats within the tests he performed (mainly heat resistance and adhesion). This test become very well known quickly (mainly over the net) and set several companies scrambling to offer a rubber based product (notice this is 'version 2' of the test). eD, being the up-standing company it is, was caught with its pants down: advertising a "polymeric-rubber based mat" which implied butyl rubber, but was in fact the same old asphault based stuff with slightly more rubberizing compound added to the mixture. Version 1 of the test showed the extremely poor results of eD's products in comparison to its competitors and highlighted this discrepancy. eD has recently announced an 'upgraded' mat that truely is rubber based.

    Anyway, Im going on too much now, so I'll stop. But as you may notice, Ive done alot of research on and have quite a bit of hand-on experience sound deadening vehicles. I tend to ramble about it. :doah:
     
  11. 2Dogs

    2Dogs 1/2 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Posts:
    3,470
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Ca
    Hmmmm, some new stuff to try. But I just ordered 4 sheets of the old stuff.... :doah: Oh well, I'll use all of it.
     
  12. chevyin

    chevyin 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pismo Bch CA
    Unless you're a real fanatic like me (Im sick I tell ya), I think you'll be fine just using what you have. Depending on how big those sheets are, you may still find yourself buying more new mat in the future. If so, that's when Id consider upgrading.
     
  13. 2Dogs

    2Dogs 1/2 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Posts:
    3,470
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Ca
    And maybe I'll like the smell of tar/asphalt..... :p:
     
  14. chevyin

    chevyin 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pismo Bch CA
    That's true, its the smell of a quiet truck. lol :D
     
  15. Greg72

    Greg72 "Might As Well..." Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    642 Days to BB2018

    I'm all for innovation, and when I see that a "new" product is truly better (especially when based on some sort of independent testing NOT marketing hype) I will probably pony up the $$$ to buy some and try it for myself.

    The secondskin product certainly seems to hold up well in the heat and cold tests...but that's not really why people buy this stuff in the first place. Obviously, we expect it to stick (and STAY stuck) in the places we apply it...but what we really want is the dampening and deadening properties of the material to work.

    I read the review very quickly (as well as your post) and am not sure I follow the logic of why the manufacturers are scrambling to create new products because of these results??? It sounds like an adhesive problem, not a materials problem.....(unless, in fact the asphalt layer is what's melting! :D )

    My only concern at this point, is that the SecondSkin "company" is clearly a small-time operation with probably only ONE guy (Anthony) running the whole thing. (Not necessarily bad, just an observation). If the product works well, at a good price, and the company actually ships it out when I place an order....then I guess I don't care if the company has 1 employee or 1000. :thumb:


    Some interesting information there to consider...
     
  16. chevyin

    chevyin 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pismo Bch CA
    You are correct, heat resistance or adhesion are not the main reason people buy these products. But consider this, if the product tends to melt and/or fall off your vehicle's panels on hot summer days, how much deadedning do you think it will then accomplish? ;) The reason I say this (and the reason for this portion of his test) is that many of the cheaper deadening products on the market (and most of the hardware store bought products) have had some problems with heat resistance (either melting, degrading or simply falling off). Hence heat resistance becomes a pretty big issue with this type of product.

    Adhesion is also another huge factor in the performance of sound deadening mats. One of the main purposes of these mats is as a mass loader. By coupling these materials to thin sheet metal panels, we in effect increase the weight/mass of the panel, changing what frequency and amplitude it resonates at (lower freq and quieter). But, this mass loading only works well when the product sticks to the panel thoroughly. Simply put, the better it sticks, the better it works. So tests to show the differences in performance between the different brand's adhesion capability give a good view into how well it will perform as a mass loader.

    The final reasons to use deadening mats: as a noise barrier and sound absorber can be more easily identified in a laboratory. Butyl rubber has been shown to be more effective at absorbing sound waves (and dissipating them in the form of heat) than is the asphalt types. But, as I believe I said above, I also performed my own test. I split one panel in my truck down the middle. One side was asphalt based mat, the other was rubber based. Tapping tests revealed the thinner rubber based mat provided a duller, quieter thud. Other people I had here trying it also concurred (was pretty obvious). Also, in coating this truck (first gen S-10 Blazer) with one layer of SS Damp Pro (not even competely done yet) its already easily as quiet as my old S-10 Blazer (same model etc) that had 2-4 layers of asphalt mat throughout it. Seriously, Im not trying to blow sunshine up your skirt, Ive been down this road, researched it, read tests, done my own tests, used both product types extensively at this point, and there is a clear-cut winner. If I hadn't spent so much time over the past 10 years (or so) learning this stuff, or if the difference wasn't so obvious, I wouldn't be here (and a few other boards) typing all this out.

    Yes, it was in fact the actual asphalt layer of material that was melting on those products. Well, melting and/or degrading. I dont remember the extent to which the author of the test goes into detail about the heat tests in the second version on the test, but in version one he described placing the materials in the over, and how some literally burned up. It was not just the glue melting. But even if it had been, the test was to simulate extreme heat conditions that may occur under certain conditions inside a vehicle, and if it had been the glue that had melted, it would have rendered the material ineffective either way. Basically, alot of people have been complaining about their mat either melting (puddling at the base of the panel etc) or literally falling off due to heat (from a roof or trunk lid usually), so the tester decided to prove once and for all which brands and materials held up best.

    The reason this test sent some companies scrambling for a rubber based mat is two fold: 1) it clearly shows the superiority of rubber mats within the testing criteria (heat resistance and adhesion, two sore spots for many asphalt users), and 2) it showed eD's "rubber" based mat was in fact just another asphalt mat with basically the same properties (and shortcomings) as any other generic asphalt mat (basically it proved eD was lying.... or bending the truth). The author of the test has in fact since made such comments public and voiced his outrage at eD's tactics of bending the truth to mislead customers. Before I read this test (v.1) id found myself on eD's website trying to decipher if their mat was truely butyl rubber based or not, as the wording was ambiguous. I had suspected eD was implying an untruth, the test proved it. Hence eD has since been scrambling to provide a true rubber based mat to 'live up to their customers high expetations". :rolleyes:

    Basically, this test was the final nail in the coffin for asphalt deadener mats. No question rubber based mats perform better, now its been proven they are also more durable and last longer. The test showed consumers asphalt is on its way out, and butyl rubber is here to stay. Unfotunately, a few manufacturers needed to see this same handwriting on the wall before they got it too. Or, before they realized their smoke and mirrors trick was over (eD).

    I will provide you some highlights from the author, and Chris Schempp and Ben Milne's (of eD) conversation. "Rudeboy", as quoted in the following, is the author if the sounddeadener showdown test. Here is the conversation:

    (SecondSkin rep)

    - (uhm, this is an eD representative speaking on their quality-control testing methods :doah: ... anyone intending to buy an eD product should read this)


    etc etc etc...

    The thread goes on from there, but I think you guys are getting the picture (anyone still interested enough to still be reading this lol). I will post a link at the bottom of this post for anyone interested in reading the whole thing. But as you can see, eD clearly admits several things here: 1) their old mat was in fact not butyl rubber based in any way even though their wording implied otherwise, 2) their old mat which they previously sold as 'high heat resistance' was in fact very poor at heat resistance, 3) they have virtually no quality-control testing procedures in place for products they advertise with specific specs, and 4) they out and out lied about the mass/thickness/density of their original mat (unless we are to believe they are so stupid as to rely on a broken scale, while also weighing the backing material AND roll center core, to determine the material specified density). Ive been suspect of eD and their business practices after the issues over their flat cones 15A subwoofer problems. But after reading this and seeing what lying bozo's are at eD, I'll be sure to let anyone know who doesn't already. There are so many good quality companies out there without these... questions... flying around them, why t ake chances buying from a suspect company?

    Yes, SecondSkin is a small company originally with one guy (Anthony). But I believe he has expanded quite a bit in the past couple years, and now offers one of the most wide ranges of sound deaden/absorbing product lines of anyone in the inducstry. Look at his website, read all the stuff he sells. In doing so you'll learn alot about what's out there to use (materials) and the methods behind them. Also, Anthony is quite excited about now being the sole deadener company represented on "Pimp My Ride". The show is meh, but it has a large consumer base, and he's expecting big things. SS is not a fly by night company if that's your concern. They are new, but they are up and coming. Again though, not trying to sound like a SS salesman, just stating what I consider facts when I say they offer the best mat on the market currently (made of the thickest layer in the industry of the best material, with the thickest alum foil layer... hard to argue that :) ). I also highly recommend Raamat, as its not as thick as SS's damp pro, but its butyl rubber based and considerably cheaper (not much more than the average asphalt mat). If I were on a tight budget Id definitely be buying the Raamat.

    Hope I helped, and didn't bore anyone to death. :D Here's that link...
    http://www.caraudioforum.com/vbb3/showthread.php?t=229139&page=1&pp=15&highlight=showdown
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2005
  17. Greg72

    Greg72 "Might As Well..." Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    642 Days to BB2018

    Don't worry....this forum doesn't move too fast anyway, and there hasn't been much in here with significant "tech" here in a couple of years!!!


    I still haven't gone back and read everything carefully yet, but a couple final points that I'm pondering are these:

    1. Why does a thermal test need to be conducted at 350*F? I could see some value potentially for an underhood mat where those temps might happen (though I'd still hope not!)....but it sure seems like an excessive temperature to be testing at to prove that a product sticks/doesn't stick. What is a worst-case temperature in a sealed car in the direct sun??? 150*F?? Maybe?

    I guess my only comment is that testing products THAT far beyond the boundaries of their intended environment doesn't really prove much....I'm sure if I tested the SecondSkin at 1000*F and melted it, nobody would be suitably impressed with my findings... nor would they be inclined to believe that it was an unacceptable product based on those findings.... :thinking:

    Elevated temperatures will help to "accelerate" a failure and demonstrate design margin of the adhesives, etc.... my first impressions of the test performed are that the guy was a bit exhuberant with his oven test, and could have perhaps proven the same things at 200*... though it might have taken extra exposure time to show it.



    2. I have an interest in playing with the advanced forms of deadeners to see and hear the differences with my own eyes (ears!). Dynamat Extreme is the one everyone seems to know, but the SecondSkin may offer an equivalent/better product at a more attractive price. The pricing info I scanned through didn't seem to have compelling price differences between the two....so I'll have to go back and re-check my facts.

    3. Audio is fun.

    4. Audio played over a dramatically quieter noise floor is even MORE fun, and rewarding.


    :thumb:
     
  18. chevyin

    chevyin 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pismo Bch CA
    1) Good question. Ive read through his description of the heat test (v.2) and found the author said this: "This test is not meant to provide any sort of definitive ranking of products. It only provides one point of comparison, one little piece of information that will help us evaluate an important property of our test subjects." First off, in v.1 of the test he increased the temperature every ten minutes. Basically he was searching for the point at which they failed. Aparently he did it a little differently the second time around, using a constant temp and measured times. I tend to agree the chances of the sheetmetal in your car/truck reaching that temp is unlikely (even a black car in Arizona), but Im quite positive sheetmetal can reach over 150 degrees.. But, that was a stress test to compare. Even if the temp is higher than would normally be found in the real world, it still gives a clear perspective of how the products rank against each other. If he'd placed them in a situatio/temp that did not create a failure scenario for every product used, it would be harder to compare. In other words, I believe that test was more for a comparison between the product types, not necessarily to simulate a real-life and common situation.

    Also, don't forget time plays a role in this. The author was not able to test the products over a long period of time that would involve heating and cooling of the product as it would in a real-life install, again over a long period of time. So, when you can't leave the test samples stuck in the over for weeks or months, your next option is to push the envelope by increasing the heat (speed up the degredation process). I believe this is why the author chose such a high temp. Either way, I agree 350 degrees is not realistic, and that test should not be taken literally. I don't believe the author was implying your asphalt mat would literally pool on your floor within an hour in a real-world scenario. He did feel this test would/could show what could happen with less heat, but over a longer period of time. If you live in a hot climate like Arizona or south Florida, that test should be of interest to you. But yeah, if you don't live in an exceptionallt hot area, I wouldn't put as much emphasis on those results. But, do not forget, that test merely compares reliability given extreme conditions. It is not comparing sound deadening performance.

    2) I assume the prices you are looking at are the prices listed on SS's website. Ive never paid anywhere near those prices. If you watch, Anthony many times has sales (enter promotion code to get discount prices). Also, being a member of caraudioforum.com and caraudio.com gives an automatic discount. Basically, if you are serious about ordering some SS products, Id sign up for a user name on one or both of those boards, them simply call Anthony and ask prices (confirming you get the discount). I think you will then find his prices much more competitive (and certainly less than Dynamat Extreme). But, like I said all along, I do not consider Second Skin's top of the line deadener mat as the cheap alternative, except when compared to Dynamat. Its the best, you will pay for it. But, if money is more of a concern, Raamat is the cheaper alternative. Its not as thick as the SS Damp Pro nor does it have as thick of a foil layer, but it is butyl rubber, and (last I checked) is the cheapest of that mat type available currently. If you want the best, buy SS Damp Pro. If you want a cheaper alternative that still gives excellent results, buy Raamat.

    3) I agree

    4) I doubly agree. :D

    Lastly, do not forget, the sounddeadener showdown merely tests the ability of these products to do what they were intended (stick and stay stuck). They do not compare the actual deadening performance between the materials/brands what so ever. Even if you live some place cool and find the test results less than applicable to you, there's still the issue of the rubber type material simply deadening better as well. ;) Again, not performance tests here, merely stress tests.

    Not claiming to be an expert by any means, but Ive been in the car audio scene for a long time now and have learned alot. I'll keep my eye on this forum from now on and try to post when/where I can. Cheers.
     

Share This Page