• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Tintguy1980

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Country
    Nothing Selected

Recent Profile Visitors

4,875 profile views
  1. Your general slip solution, increased in surfactant concentration, does the same thing. Note: same as the warning label on the bottle above, wet spray will cause slippery floor. And either way you go, both will continually leave build up that becomes slippery when wet.
  2. Low-tack adhesives (those that remove with no residue left behind) are mostly used on materials from Asia mfg for their markets where it is preferred. If found in the US market just know they have a shorter 'sun exposed' life expectancy in terms of clarity and bond strength compared to the true professional grade films that leave adhesive behind when removed.
  3. Architectural films rely on wind speed produced by nature to achieve higher TSER performance than the 7mph rate used to calculate published performance. Automotive films rely on vehicle speed to achieve higher TSER performance than the 7mph rate used to calculate published performance. Can't run a building down the road so architectural films tend to have higher TSER's with respectable visible light transmission.
  4. Window tint for dummies. Being in the industry isn't all about how good one can install film; it's about installing. knowing the product(s) you sell and knowing how those products work. Simple scenario would be to compare performance between clear film and a straight-dyed film with only VLT (visible light transmission, for the dummies) making a difference. Clear film has a TSER of 22% while the charcoal 15's TSER is 44%. How is that? There's no metal, no carbon, no ceramic, no other IR (near infrared, for the dummies); only absorption of visible light because of the dye(color). The reason the 15% has the greater TSER is because it absorbs more visible light. Neither of these examples repel NIR in any way. Soooo, visible light is what converts to heat. All the sun's energy will transform into heat after striking and being absorbed by a surface; visible light energy (VLT) turns into heat, near infrared energy (NIR or IR) turns into heat and ultraviolet (UV) turns into heat. The best performing film must screen out maximum VLT, maximum NIR and maximum UV. Presently, you may find a reflective (or metalized) silver film with a VLT of 7-10% having the highest TSER. There may be a combination structure such as Huper Drei that can achieve this or be equal to. I believe gold and copper are the best or most efficient at filtering solar energy. TSER is calculated (using sophisticated software developed by DOE and LBL) by knowing what is reflected, what is transmitted and what gets absorbed and how much of the absorbed energy radiates back out from the glass surface and how much radiates inward; whichever side of the glass is cooler or has the greater amount of air movement across its surface. NIR IS NOT HEAT until it is absorbed and converts to radiant far infrared. The reason IR film seem to work well is because the human body feels far infrared radiating from the tissue moisture near nerve receptors. In other words, near infrared energy penetrates deeper under the skin and is absorbed into the tissue moisture, converts to far-infrared and is radiating from the tissue moisture to nerve receptors (sensing it). Good luck.
  5. Infrared bulbs emit 95% infrared energy whereby the sun only emits 48.xx %. Same bulb, visible light 5% and the sun 48.xx% Both visible and infrared energy will convert to heat once absorbed by any surface, infrared is simply 'felt' sooner because it penetrates deeper into the skin causing tissue moisture near nerve receptors to heat up. Water is the best absorber of infrared. The display you speak of is not misleading since both films mentioned work best in the infrared. Misleading would be to compare one of the two films mentioned to a dye-metal or straight dyed film. Edit: If you want to compare differing film structure performance, a Halogen bulb is the closest to resembling the sun's energy; publicly available.
  6. Not the most hated but I did not enjoy this job back in the 80's, despite its notoriety. No wheels.
  7. CDF, CDA, DA. WA are all acronyms for dry, water activated chemical adhesive. These type adhesives bond during curing time through chemical reaction to the silica in glass and the presence of water. Curing comes about through exposure to heat. The adhesive migrates into the pores of glass and crystalizes, holding the film in place. The only known removal is through razor blade use. Some acids will do the tricks however, there are seriously extreme risks in their use by comaprison to the standard of scraping it up with a blade. Press harder when scraping with a blade; the theory behind this is to plink up (and off the blade edge) any rough surface pimples rather than nicking them and dragging them in front of the blade during the process. Future recommendation would be to have in your arsenal of film options a close resemblance pressure sensitive adhesive film product just for toughened glass use.
  8. I would tend to believe drying out would be the answer on a brand new vehicle however, as the vehicles ages the moisture may get contaminated from road dust entry. One solution would be minimize moisture use (e.g. a wipe clean and wetting film only) and use an absorbing towel over a hard card or squeegee to evacuate the solution. Ditto with final finish hardcarding.
  9. When I used it back in the 80's it didn't cause any breathing proplems. However, it did lead to saving on the amount of beer I drank because it caused alcohol poisioning in my bloodstream. The ratio used was about one cup per 2 quart sprayer. Since those times I've learned, adding alcohol to slip solution does nothing for the film's drying time. It simply displaces the amount of water used, which still dries at its usual rate. Use at your own risk.
  10. Safety and security films perform better on annealed glass. You can always go to Youtube and look up blast mitigation videos of safety and security films on both annealed and tempered glass. They show performance or the lack thereof with an attachment and without. These viewings will give insight into the force needed to get through. HOWEVER, these viewings do not necessarily apply to home invasion use of this film product. The bare minimum for home invasion is and 8 mil product. Attachment is most necessary on tempered glass since it breaks into small beads when impacted and can then be worked at its edge to the point of penetration and access. Annealed glass, however, breaks into large shards that will retain a greater edge-bite strength than tempered panes well into the frame (dependent upon edge-bite or how deep into the frame the glass seats). Annealed glass breaking in large shards allows the film's adhesive to have larger surface areas to maintain bond integrity. Annealed glass is also more likely to cut the perpetrator attempting to penetrate the film/glass, leaving DNA samples for forensic use. It is a statistical fact that thieves need penetrate a barrier in less than 10 seconds or they will give up and move onto a softer target. No installation firm would guarantee theft-free scenario due to variables beyond their control (e.g. backing their truck through the sliding doors or being equipped with a slug hammer (that didn't bounce back and knock the idiot out on the first blow ... two extremes here). Building a new home? Have the windows placed higher, requiring ladder or step stools to access them and have SS film applied. This makes it even more difficult to get through. Also, keep in mind that the film will create a similar, but weaker, barrier in terms of needing to get out of the dwelling when there's a fire inside. Good luck.
  11. Yes ... especially when installing the anchor system too soon. Minimum 7-14 days dry time should be sufficient before installing the anchor system (dependent upon film thickness) .
  12. Yeah, I can see the loss point of bragging rights when one only has 1/8th inch compared to an inch.
  13. Tom explained it in a simple fashion. However, it is more complex than what is seen through simple experimentation. In other words, as long as the car is in motion you will benefit from a film's heat control aspect. When tested, all mannies utilize the same means of extracting the TSER of their film product. The published performance of film products are calculated using a wind speed across the glass of 7mph. Obviously, the faster the vehicle moves, the high the TSER because more absorbed energy is carried away and less will radiate inward to the cabin. As stated before, 'ceramic' technology in window film relies mostly on absorption, which requires the glass be cooled by wind across its surface. This absorption will allow you to feel what might be radiating off film and glass while driving the car with the AC running. The one film out there that 'reflects' near infrared (NIR) energy is 3M's Crystalline. Near infrared is the part of the sun's energy that we 'feel' in the immediate when sitting on the protected side of a glass/film barrier. This is because it (NIR) penetrates deeper into the skin, warming moisture surrounding nerve endings and leading the brain to say, warm/hot. Crystalline reflects a very large percentage of NIR (88-97%) in the most intense region of NIR (780- roughly 1200 nanometers). The entire NIR region of the solar spectrum encompasses 780-2500 nanometers. NIR accounts for approximately 48+% of the sun's energy and visible light (VL) accounts for 49+%, leaving the remaining to ultraviolet (UV). Visible light and UV will create heat once it strikes a surface (such as skin) and is 'felt' at a much slower rate compared with NIR. So, it's down to absorption versus reflection and it should be seen a slightly higher TSER values.
  14. All LLumar Automotive products have >99% UV rejection up to 380nm. Glass itself screens virtually all of the UVB. Adding window film screens UVA and the remainder of UVB. UV rejection % drops somewhere around 21 points by the time you get to 399nm. A car's windscreen and SUV privacy glass reduces UV up to 95% and again, adding film boosts UV screening performance values. What many don't know or pass on when buying for the purpose you have stated, is that for those who do have serious UV sensitivity need replace the product every 3-5 years to maintain maximum protective performance from the applied film. Every 3 years in sunny climates and 5 years in moderately sunny climates. As to verifying the product is the brand you requested, other's here have given good insight. You can also look for a window tint dealership in your area that owns a EDTM SS2450 meter. This meter can verify the product and glass are in fact reducing the UV to 0-!%. Although, it will require a more sensitive meter to break down nanometer %'s; meters usually specifically designed for and available for sale to UV sufferers.