#882568 - 29/08/05 08:21 AM
SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
Rudeboy
Member
Registered: 11/05/05
Posts: 159
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
Offline
|
|
The 2nd version is ready to go:
http://www.sounddeadenershowdown.com/
Basic summary - Second Skin, Dynamat Xtreme and RAAMmat BXT are very good products, each with different strengths. The rest I will leave for you to explore.
Enjoy - I hope this starts to address the confusion, unreasonable marketing claims and flame wars that surround this topic.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882575 - 30/08/05 10:56 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
Rudeboy
Member
Registered: 11/05/05
Posts: 159
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Wow, I really appreciate the responses. I've just made some corrections and minor additions. I'm going to try to expand this over time to include more products, more tests, more information and fewer words 
Thanks again for the encouragement. Drop me an e-mail on the site if you want to be notified when something new and interesting happens.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882578 - 30/08/05 02:18 PM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
pervo
Member
Registered: 09/02/05
Posts: 6086
Loc: Mn/Wi
|
|
Offline
|
|
im very very surprised w/ the edead results of adheason
i supposedly have the se and it does not stick to anything
dynamat was super glue in comparison
also se looks very thin relative to dynamat and feels flimsy where as dynamat is stiff and cuts you
im vers suspiciouse that the se i purchased is infact v1, but aparently it is not
stayaway from it guys thats all i can say-lol
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882579 - 30/08/05 03:18 PM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
Rudeboy
Member
Registered: 11/05/05
Posts: 159
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by pervo:
im very very surprised w/ the edead results of adheason
i supposedly have the se and it does not stick to anything
dynamat was super glue in comparison
also se looks very thin relative to dynamat and feels flimsy where as dynamat is stiff and cuts you
im vers suspiciouse that the se i purchased is infact v1, but aparently it is not
stayaway from it guys thats all i can say-lol
The fact that the eDead had the longest adhesion time doesn't mean very much. I was surprised too, since it wasn't even sticking to the release paper when I got it. It was at room temperature on a perfectly clean and smooth surface, rolled on hard and tested immediately.
The eDead and FatMat depend on a thin layer of adhesive applied to the asphalt layer. A great many things could cause this system to fail. Temperature changes - if the asphalt and the adhesive expand and contract at different rates, the adhesive could fail. It is entirely possible that the adhesive might begin to losen as soon as you install it. If I had just waited 24 hours there could have been a different result.
Just the fact that the adhesive layer is so thin makes it vulnerable to all sorts of things. Any kind of damage could cause it to start coming loose. You could scrape away half of the Dynamat Xtreme, Damplifier or RAAMmat and they would still stick just as well.
You are definitely not the only person to have a problem with one of the asphalt products - that's why butyl mats were developed.
Next time I run tests, I might try to figure out a way to mount the samples, heat them, freeze them and set up a rig to vibrate them for a few hours, then see how well they do. This was a lot to take on at one time. Hopefully I'll find better ways to do things as I go.
As far as I can tell, any claims that the asphalt mats are as good or better than the butyl mats are just not true. If you live somewhere with a constantly moderate temperature, you might be able to get away with an asphalt mat, but that doesn't mean it is as good as butyl. I wouldn't want to take the chance.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882581 - 31/08/05 04:54 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
Rudeboy
Member
Registered: 11/05/05
Posts: 159
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks ANT, 300 sq. ft. of every product you have should cover the next round of tests 
Just kidding people. In all seriousness, let me state for the record that ANT and Rick from RAAMaudio were both kind enough to provide samples for this test. I think it speaks highly of both that they essentially said: "Here's out stuff, let the chips fall where they will".
The fact that both their products did well means that their confidence was well founded. If the results had been poor for one or both, I would have publshed that outcome.
I have been surprised and a little overwhelmed by the massive response to this. I will be making some adjustments to the presentation over the next few days to try to make things a little clearer to the thousands of people who are taking the time to look at this rather than the 20 diehards I was expecting to cruise by and take potshots.
The one thing that needs to be made absolutely clear is that no single test is in any way definitive or even useful by itself. Each test is an attempt to get at part of the truth using extreme means. To use RAAMmat and Damplifier to illustrate. Damplifier beat the pants off RAAMmat in heat resistance. RAAMmat beat the pants off Damplifier in the adhesion tests. To take either one of these tests and conclude that it proves one product is absolutely superior to the other is not correct.
The real world exists toward the middle of both ranges. For most applications, both products performed on both tests within a range that will not be a problem in actual use. In some extreme situations, the relative strengths might come into play.
Baking sound deadeners in an oven at 450 degrees or hanging a weight from them at 80 degrees is not meant to reproduce the conditions these, or any of the products will experience in your car. They are meant to get enough information to say Hmmm, this one is formulated more for heat resistance, this one towards flexibility and adhesion.
Part of the confusion comes from my presentation, which I will fix. The heat test did raise some concerns with some of the products that failed at temperatures close to what could occur in the real world and more alarming to me, actually melted at those temperatures. In that regard, the adhesion test is further from real world conditions.
I don't think any of the product's performance in the 80 degree adhesion test demonstrate a likelihood of real world failure. There are obviously other factors involved. Some of the products that did best in the adhesion tests are the same ones that seem to have the highest rate of real world failure. I will attempt to improve the methodology to better reflect real world performance.
Thanks for all of the interest.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882585 - 02/09/05 07:12 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
Rudeboy
Member
Registered: 11/05/05
Posts: 159
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks again for the great responses. I've already got some new tests in mind and want to include as many additional products as possible. Anybody who has any scraps in good condition, send them on over - all I need for each product is enough to cut 3 6 inch squares from.
I'd love to get some of the roofing products people have used and I am going to contact some more manufacturers to see if they want to give me any to work with. A few thousand people have already read this, so I'd hope they would want to participate.
As far as installation, I'll probably put together some guidelines, but if you look at Grand Masta's profile and go to his Camry on SoundDomain, he has extensive documentation of what he did.
There are two basic principles to follow. Apply the mat to a clean surface. Real dirty - start with some kind of water based cleaner/degreaser. Once you think its clean, or if it is new, wipe the surface with acetone or denatured alcohol. I like the denatured alcohol because it is less destructive to any paint that may be present and evaporates very cleanly.
Second. Once you have the surface ready to go, start tapping on it with your knuckles - you will be able to hear the resonance. Put down a layer of mat. Start tapping again, you will be able to tell if any areas need extra layers. You only need to add layers to the areas that are still resonant, any more is wasted.
To reduce road/wind/traffice noise, pay particular attention to the areas where noise enters the car - wheel wells, trunk and doors, firewall, headliner. The best thing is to drive around and listen.
To reduce vibrations and resonances caused by your sound system, really seal those doors up and do the backs of trim pieces.
To get the best results, you'll need some sort of sound absorbing material - I don't want to start another flame war by suggesting any particular products , but make sure you use something that will not be a problem if it gets wet - some sort of closed cell foam works well - at least in those areas that are exposed to moisture, like your doors. If you have ever had your doors apart while it is raining, you'll see water just flowing through and you don't want to put anything in there that will hold it.
You don't have to apply much deadening material into corners, like where the floor meet the door sill. These are pretty well braced by the bends and welds. The good thing is that these spots are often where your trim pieces fit. Make sure you don't build up the places that will be covered with trim so much that you can't get the trim back on. You get a nasty feeling when you do that, trust me.
You really want to use your ears while you do this. A really intereting example is doing your doors. Drive around and listen to where the noise is coming from. Do your front doors and go for another drive - all of a sudden the noise is coming from hehind. I'm not sure if it is fun or a sign that you are going crazy, the way you end up chasing noise.
Last idea. When you do your doors or trunk lid, or any place that has stuff inside that can rattle, try not to seal your rattles in. If there are loose wires, tie them down. Put foam tape on wires or anything else that is touching sheet metal. Tighten bolts that might be lose. Matting will help some rattles, but the last thing you want to do is have to pull this stuff off to get to something you should have dealt with beforehand.
Almost forgot. You want to start with an easy area to get a feel for this - any big area of sheet metal is good. You want to apply the mat in as big a pice as you can comfortably control. This stuff is sticky and hard to remove if you put it in the wrong place.
Cut a piece to size - some people like to use a utility knife, I like to use a heavy duty pair of scissors. Peal back an inch of the release paper and fold it under. press the area with the exposed adhesive into place. Work your way along, peel a bit, stick a bit. Press it down into every crevice, contour and corner. You need complete contact to get good results. Try to avoid trapping any air hehind the mat. If you get a bubble, make a slice in it with a utility or x-acto knife and press it down. Then stick another piece over the gap you just made.
You will quickly figure out what sizes work best for each situation. Everybody comes up with their own tricks to make this work.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882607 - 30/01/06 12:04 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
lilredwagn
Member
Registered: 17/11/05
Posts: 30
Loc: SC
|
|
Offline
|
|
Well I'm having the opposite problem with peel'n'seal from Lowes.
I laid down about 40 sq ft. literally days before I found the SDS. here
I got hooked up with secondskin, but now I wanted to remove the peel'n'seal. My initial concern was that it would come loose by itself and ruin anything I put on top of it (by delamination, not because of tar seepage), but that has given way to the desire to remove it because it is an inferior damping product, and I want to do this right.
Based on the SDS and the complaints about the edead coming up, I thought this wouldn't be too much of a problem
Unfortunately, this stuff will just not come up. I used dry ice to freeze it, and that would allow it to be chipped up in little inch square pieces. Took about an hour to chip up a square foot of material, and the little pieces go flying everywhere. Have to keep track of them though, because when they thaw, they stick where they land. Also leaves behind a lot of little nubbies of tar that couldn't be chipped away.
I tried peeling it back and using a scraper tool to release the bond, literally 2 or 3 mm at a time. Several blisters and 2 hours later, I'd worked less than 2 sq ft free.
My only option left is heat, and I strongly suspect that all it will do is melt the tar enough to delaminate the foil and leave a huge goopy mess behind.
After the heat doesn't work, I am just going to cover it with more (SS) dampener and hope for the best.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882608 - 30/01/06 07:47 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
Rudeboy
Member
Registered: 11/05/05
Posts: 159
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Heat should work. Just be gentle. Get an edge up and and peel as you go. I've had good luck this way. You want to warm the mat, but not enough to melt it.
Turpentine will easily remove any residue, but it leaves an oily residue, so you need some denatured alcohol to remove the residue.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882611 - 05/02/06 12:23 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
lilredwagn
Member
Registered: 17/11/05
Posts: 30
Loc: SC
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Rudeboy:
Heat should work. Just be gentle. Get an edge up and and peel as you go. I've had good luck this way. You want to warm the mat, but not enough to melt it.
Turpentine will easily remove any residue, but it leaves an oily residue, so you need some denatured alcohol to remove the residue.
Once it's up, I'll clean up the residue with toluene, which ought to clean the tar without leaving a residue of its own.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882614 - 14/02/06 08:29 PM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
infamousmob
Member
Registered: 28/02/04
Posts: 714
Loc: EL Paso, Texas
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Rudeboy: Originally posted by alkemyst:
most excellent write up. I debated RAAM and SecondSkin...both guys are great. I went with SS due to the over engineering I do myself, but feel I could have saved a bit with RAAM and had the same results.
Don, how about the second (foam over the dampener) and third levels (underlayment mat over the first two) being researched? I bought closed cell foam (from foambymail) and saved a tons going outside the car audio vendors.
I will add some value calculations for different foam sources. Thanks, great idea.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#882616 - 04/05/06 07:56 PM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
|
Rudeboy
Member
Registered: 11/05/05
Posts: 159
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Just a quick update on the Sound Level readings I did. Still at least a week until I get the new version of SDS online.
I have heard from a few people that tried this and couldn't measure a change in noise levels. One guy even used a recording meter and graphed before and after readings. Didn't show much change. I wondered why and figured I would do it myself.
A few weeks ago my girlfriend went to visit family in Ireland. She was gone for 10 days, so I had a perfect chance to work with a very noisy Saturn.
I defined my test course and took a baseline set of readings. Then I went to town on deadening and did an after set.
I couldn't see much difference. Part of the problem is that the readings fluctuate a lot even when it seems like you are hearing a steady level. I guess I could have tried to capture just peak levels, but it looks to me that it just isn't feasible to do this in a car.
There is more to the story. Girlfriend comes home. I anxiously await her return from her first drive. "I think something might be wrong with my car. I can't hear the motor or the wheels and the radio gets much louder than it used to".
I told her what I had done and she agreed that it was much nicer this way, once she understood what had caused the change.
I was certain there had been a substantial change despite the lack of what I expected to be easier to interpret and defintive meter readings. I did the doors first and the reduction in audible traffic noise was impressive. With that controlled, the engine noise was much more noticeable. After I dealt with that, the result was very dramatic to my ears. The blind test confirms that to my satisfaction.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1108855 - 20/07/07 09:16 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
[Re: Rudeboy]
|
x-pogo
SD Newbie
Registered: 25/06/07
Posts: 8
|
|
Offline
|
|
I wonder if it might be possible to do some basic acoustical
performance tests.
Maybe a two chamber box sort of like a bandpass in configuration.
One chamber would be a sealed enclosure with speaker installed.
The second chamber would have an removable panel or frame. A hunk
of metal would be placed over the removable frame and attached to
the box. Then two baseline tests: first an impedance curve vs
frequency to establish the loading characteristics of the metal
panel, and then with a sound level meter placed in front of the
panel to measure transmission levels.
After establishing a baseline, damping material would be applied
to the metal panel, reinstalled on the test box and a second run
of tests performed.
Maybe some acoustical gurus can interpret this data so
comparisons in damping effectiveness can be made?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1325172 - 21/02/08 10:57 AM
Re: SoundDeadenerShowdown v2
[Re: Rudeboy]
|
Thumper26
Representing the
SD New School
Registered: 12/09/04
Posts: 45083
Loc: Chattanooga, TN
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thread cleaned up and locked. I kept any relative questions/comments about further testing.
Thanks to all for your comments. Rudeboy, thanks again for taking the time to do the tests and post the results. This is a great asset to the car audio community.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: keep_hope_alive, IamMurph, Thumper26
|
82715 Members
29 Forums
174888 Topics
1063849 Posts
Max Online: 754 @ 10/03/08 07:00 PM
|
|
|
