suntek patterns vs llumar patterns

[pottsnpanz]

I know llumar bought suntek for their ppf film but  who has better patterns suntek or llumar because they still rep as two different companys? I use suntek ppf but their patterns are not good is llumar patterns better because I will switch company knowing its suntek film still llumar is  just  reboxing  so I can have better pattern to work with if llumar software is better.

[DynamicATL]

Llumar PCS sucks for patterns.

[Tintguy1980]

Edited April 12, 2019 by Tintguy1980

[Tintguy1980]

Edited April 12, 2019 by Tintguy1980
Misspelling and punctuation.

[Jake]

3 hours ago, smartie2shoes said:

Secondary Edit: My apologies for speaking in terms of window film patterns instead of PPF. What I did learn about PPF patterns is that no one applies, pulls and strokes a PPF pattern the same as all other users so just that one variable can lead to a poor 'fit' review. That said, I was privy to PPF complaints during the first few years LLumar was providing them up until late 2015 ... the consensus from the field was seemingly more so described as DynamicATL put it. I am no fan of PPF and didn't even want any part of gathering patterns for PCS at the time.

 

Also, always remember the old adage; one man's trash is another man's treasure. This holds true for patterns from any precut software.

 

WF

I was once the main provider of patterns for PCS (approx. from 2003-2012 model years). There were other sources during that period but, by and large there were far fewer complaints on patterns I provided. I was pulled from the team after speaking directly with a couple of PCS users who were not happy with pattern fit. I simply said to each that quite possibly their standards for pattern fit was higher than what PCS could provide.

 

During the height of my time with the PCS team we came to understand that there existed many variables in glass top edges, how the knife was held while cutting top edges, one person's desire for added amount side to side compared to another's wish to just barely cut out light intrusion, user expectation toward fit, and the fact that black border material was never consistent from car to car. All these listed here were endlessly verified yet, complaints continued even after passing this info on to users.

 

He!!, I even took a front door pattern from a Mustang that a complaint was submitted on and ran to the local Ford dealer to test fit. The pattern fit nicely on 3 out 7 front doors. Until users of these precut systems come to understand and accept these variables exist, 'fit' complaints will always flow to providers and negative reviews will always be stated.  Variables are the sole reason software was updated to allow users to make subtle adjustments to patterns. If you are expecting the top micro-edge to fit precisely along the glass edge leaving no gap every single time, the Mustang front door example previously mentioned shows just how futile that expectation is.

Although I do agree with all your points above, when it comes to PPF it is pretty much agreed upon that the DAP patterns fitment is much better then all other software. So until the other software company's have patterns consistent with DAP then something is wrong that can be addressed to improve on the fitment of those patterns.