Jump to content

Recommended Posts

You only prove you have no idea what you're talking about. And the ignorance doesn't warrant me taking the time to educate you. Read and research.

explain to me what the difference between the 2 are both are made out of butyl and aluminum

- 1998 Ford Mustang -

Time to rebuild.

4 15s and alot of power

TEAM DTF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You only prove you have no idea what you're talking about. And the ignorance doesn't warrant me taking the time to educate you. Read and research.

explain to me what the difference between the 2 are both are made out of butyl and aluminum

mass loading vs acoustical dampening.

THERE IS NO BUILD LOG!

1998 Chevy Silverado ext cab

Alpine CDA-9887

4 Team Fi 15s

2 Ampere Audio TFE 8.0

2 Ampere Audio 150.4

3 Digital Designs CS6.5 component sets

Dual Mechman 370XP Elite alternators inbound!

8 XS Power d3400

6 XS power d680

Second Skin

Stinger

Tsunami Wiring

Sky High

A Real Voltmeter not a piece of shit stinger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You only prove you have no idea what you're talking about. And the ignorance doesn't warrant me taking the time to educate you. Read and research.

explain to me what the difference between the 2 are both are made out of butyl and aluminum

mass loading vs acoustical dampening.

n8 why don't you just lock this? lol this question has been asked sooooo many times :x

2006 Nissan Z Track.

My Feedback Thread

2nqd37b.png

DCSig.jpg

i used to think a band pass was something you were around your neck or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You only prove you have no idea what you're talking about. And the ignorance doesn't warrant me taking the time to educate you. Read and research.

explain to me what the difference between the 2 are both are made out of butyl and aluminum

mass loading vs acoustical dampening.

alright that makes sense and i cant disagree. But has anyone proven that it only adds mass and doesnt make a acoustical difference.

I completely understand what you guys are saying it aint the same but has anyone truly proven it. Adding sound deadener goes both ways so whats not to say it might be the mass of applying it to a certain area that isnt damping the sound.

BTW you guys are arguing who has never used sound deadener in his life so thats why i might be asking some dumb questions and what not

- 1998 Ford Mustang -

Time to rebuild.

4 15s and alot of power

TEAM DTF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You only prove you have no idea what you're talking about. And the ignorance doesn't warrant me taking the time to educate you. Read and research.

explain to me what the difference between the 2 are both are made out of butyl and aluminum

Read this <-- Useful info

Need Test Tones/Sine Waves? Click Here!

My Saab 9000 build
1993 Saab 9000 Aero 5spd
Pioneer - Zapco - Hifonics - Sundown Audio - O2 Audio - RE Audio

Just Say No To Rear Speakers
Just Say No To CCA Wire
Real Men Drive Stick

Hit me up on Facebook, if you want

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG...I opened this thread just to see what N8 had to say. I love reading his comments on "Peal and Seal" threads.

lol me too cause i know n8 hates it. I googled "peel and seel smd" and google, and like 5 threads came up.. >.>

2006 Nissan Z Track.

My Feedback Thread

2nqd37b.png

DCSig.jpg

i used to think a band pass was something you were around your neck or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the other thread, stated perfectly:

I can't stress this enough. DO NOT USE PEEL AND SEAL!

There are a ton of companies out there that make better quality products than peel and seal. Dynamat, eDead, Second Skin, Audiotechnix, Raammat, FATMat, etc.

And there is a huge importance between the thickness of the butyl core and the thickness of the aluminum constrained layer, both of which the peel and seal lack (as well as some of the cheaper sound deadening materials). Without this correct ratio you are more or less just adding weight to the panel (mass loading) and not actually controlling the vibrations.

In my opinion, avoid doing it on the cheap and buy a product that was specifically designed for sound deadening.

Later,

Adding mass isnt solving the problem. Its like putting a bandaid on a broken leg. Sure it looks like your trying to help, until someone realizes its broken and wonders who the fucking retard is who didnt address the real problem.

Or another anology:

Its like using peel & seal instead of a real deadener... :No:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time to blow some minds and explain why mass loaders and roofing products (i.e. P&S) are inefficient for controlling vibrations.

When it comes to sound deadening there are typically three types of products used, mass loaders, FLDs, and CLDs.

Mass loaders are exactly what they sound like, they add mass to lower the resonance frequency of the panel. Asphalt based products typically fall into this category because they lack the viscoelastic properties that the butyl products do.

Mass loading was a popular technique in years past, but mass loading is EXTREMELY ineffective. Why? You need to apply approximately four times the weight of the panel to drop the panels resonance just one octave. I don't know about you, but I don't want 100 pound doors just to listen to my music clearly.

The other two types of products are CLDs (constrained layer dampers) and FLDs (free-layer dampers).

CLDs include Dynamat, Damplifier, Audio Wrap, SDS Tiles, etc.

Simply put, CLDs convert the vibrational energy into low level negligible heat. The reason P&S ISN'T an effective or efficient CLD is the fact it doesn't have a thick enough constraining layer (foil) to do any good.

FLDs include products like Spectrum, LizardSkin, Cascade VB-1X, etc. There are FLDs that are not liquid, but these are the most common ones in our field.

The way FLDs work is that vibrational energy is dissipated as a result of extension and compression of the damping material, vs. a cld where the energy is lost through shear deformation of the material.

Typically speaking CLDs have the upper hand over FLDs because of their ability to maintain a higher loss factor across a wider range of frequencies, temperatures, and thicknesses of the substrate. Basically they are more efficient at controlling vibrations. This is especially true when applications require a light weight solution. For instance on a substrate of say 1/8", a cld mat of only 1/16" may be required to control the vibrations. The FLD on the other hand may require three or four times the thickness, so 3/16 to 1/4", to achieve the same loss factor.

P&S simply lacks the properties that would make in an effective vibration control product.

It's not heavy enough to make a difference (unless you slap on 50+ pounds of the stuff).

It doesn't have a thick enough constraining layer to withstand the shear strain of panel flex.

It has a poor adhesive (typically consisting of asphalt, bitumen, petroleum distillates, and/or low grade rubber).

I've said it once and I'll say it again, DO NOT USE PEEL AND SEAL!

Mind exploded? :yahoo:

Have a question about Second Skin? E-Mail me!

usa_render4.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 1 Anonymous, 865 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...