Another Peel & Seal thread... but not what you think

[ALPINE408]

i dont hug

i like the squeeze pull and twist method

[mlstrass]

You missed the entire mark on this one.

Your saying that means you missed the point of my post, and so did jon as it seems.

oh well, ill carry on misunderstood and y'all carry on selling stuff that doesn't do a bit of good for half the target audience of this forum. Note the gfaphs had huge spikes down low, where most of us want deadening to begin with.

you also dont have any 2'x1' panels in your car where the narrow end is attached to something and the rest just dangles. the metal in this test is obviously going to act differently than the metal in your car. this test simply shows the difference between the two products. and it obviously shows cld is MUCH better.

With that said then how valid is his testing for showing what each deadener will do in a car environment???? Otherwise we're just assuming that the tiles will do better since the did better on his piece of sheet metal.

Maybe in a car environment you won't notice as much of a difference since the panels are more rigid to begin with.

Is there a way to secure the panel and test again???

And to me his tests showed that P&S could come very close to the other deadeners when double layered. Just that cost and installation times would go up.

I used to get a 9" x 33' roll for $10, so it was nothing to do multiple layers throughout the car. I think I had around 12 rolls in my car, so $120 total.

As I've mentioned in another thread my Altima had 3-5 layers of P&S and did over 160 on tones and 58+ on music and had ZERO rattles. His testing would seem to validate what I said as many seemed to doubt it.

[TeamHT]

The bottom line is P&S will never provide proper damplifying, it is scientifically impossible. And I highly doubt in a car environment, the tests would show drastically different results than the ones yielded here.

I am not familiar with your Altima, was the vehicle walled? Assuming the craftsmanship of the wall was excellent, the wall may have provided bracing for the vehicle which would have made even an obsolete method viable.

[Second Skin Rep Jon]

With that said then how valid is his testing for showing what each deadener will do in a car environment???? Otherwise we're just assuming that the tiles will do better since the did better on his piece of sheet metal.

This test represents a "best case scenario" by having the sheet metal perfect flat. The results would be pretty similar to that in a car environment.

If someone would be willing to pay for a car door or a test vehicle for me to do these tests, then I'd be more than happy to do yet another run.

Also this testing method is similar to the standard Oberst Bar (SAE J1637, ASTM E-756) test which is used to test these products, just a poor man's version.

And to me his tests showed that P&S could come very close to the other deadeners when double layered. Just that cost and installation times would go up.

Yes that is correct, P&S could come close to the results of a CLD, but isn't the point of using P&S over a properly designed CLD to save money?

With the prices you provided, you were able to buy the P&S at 40¢-41¢ a sq. ft.. With two layers (to achieve similar results of that of just 25% coverage with a CLD), you paid 8 0¢-.82¢ per square foot of coverage.

With the CLD I used, which on the high side is around $3.50 a sq. ft., since only a quarter of that needs to be used, that is 87¢-88¢ to treat the same area.

So at BEST you are saving 6¢ a sq. ft. by using P&S over the CLD.

If you have 100 sq. ft. of surface area to treat, by using P&S you can save a total of $6 over using a CLD. Personally, my time is worth more than $6.

I'm not flat out saying that P&S won't work... hell using multiple layers of duct tape would do something.

What I'm saying that it's not worth the time, effort, or even the money to use P&S as sound deadener.

It's not cheaper to achieve similar results.

It can smell (not all do).

Can be unhealthy (again not all) if installed in a closed/sealed environment such as a car.

It weighs more.

Takes more time to install.

A pain in the ass to cleanup.

Has a high failure rate vs. CLDs.

Etc., etc.

[Mr. Darkjustice]

this needs to be pinned and i think in the genral audio section also

[Second Skin Rep Jon]

this needs to be pinned and i think in the genral audio section also

I second this motion.

[Jd1102]

this needs to be pinned and i think in the genral audio section also

I second this motion.

x3

[Colton Holaway]

Would you be willing to add lizard skin to the test? Very interested to see how the spray on deadner and thermal barrier would do compared to said cld

[Second Skin Rep Jon]

I have thought about taking a look at the few liquid deadeners that are out there.

One of the largest issues would be achieving the exact same thickness across the board to insure the best possible comparison between the products.

Based on 'science', I can tell you that almost every single extensional damper (i.e. the liquid products) would fall short of the performance of the true CLDs even if the liquid product were to be applied twice as thick as the CLD.

If i were to do some tests, I will post an update in this through.

[wellington]

is u-seal the same as peel and seal?

it seems that 100% coverage is still cheaper than 25% coverage of CLD tiles?

12 square feet of peel and seal is about $10-$20 at lowes. I picked up a slightly used one for $12 the first time I tried it out.

How much would 12 square feet of CLD tiles or other sound deadener cost?