nope, I didn't get another hat... I got something better. Free advice! even more valuable then a hat. after 10 years of sticking vinyl, ther's not many people I will listen to vinyl application advice from... & even less that I would ask for advice... but when Roger stopped by for a visit, we sat down with a beer & chatted about signs etc, for a brief but enjoyable visit. Before leaving I asked his opinion on my applying a 24x36 piece of background color vinyl to a sheet of aluminum. I've been an exclusive tape hinge guy for ten years & often when the vinyl is as big as the substrate, I tape down the substrate to the table, so it won't move after I put my tape hinge on the table.
Rogers advice was a very common technique I was well aware of, but never bothered with... use LOTS & LOTS of R.T. & just slap down that puppy close enough to the mark, & slide it into place (slap & slide suicide)
well after never doing that for 10 years, I did it on the sign with great results & have taught my fairly new trainee (& somewhat less new step daughter) & she is putting down excellent quality bubble-free large vinyl pieces with ease! (With ease AND lots & lots of R.T.) Today, she took the spray nozzle off to pour it on & I said "Roger would love to see that"
I love to see the results she is getting... and faster then struggling to perfectly line up 2 color registration on a tape hinge method, so Thank you Roger for teaching this old dog & even older technique I was just too much a creature of habit to have tried sooner.
[ June 17, 2004, 04:49 PM: Message edited by: Doug Allan ]
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
My pleasure Doug, I only wish I could have completed the video that I have started on several times. There are so many steps saved by using a wet application with Rapid Tac, but I hear so many people say "wet takes too long", oh well!
Enjoyed meeting with you for our brief moments!
Roger Posted by Diane Crowther (Member # 120) on :
It's a flawless method. You absolutely can't go wrong, and it looks like the substrate was factory coated. The key, of course, is "sopping" - no dry areas where contact can be made.
We also like it for tight registration of small pieces. Rather than use transfer tape, we just peel off the vinyl, soak both the substrate and the graphic and slide it around until we like the position. The graphic will take a lot of handling and still stick tight as a drum once it dries.
Thanks, Roger.
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
Glad you like it! Now see, aint that easy?
Roger
Posted by Dave Grundy (Member # 103) on :
Doug..I have to agree with you. The last backlit 4x9 that I did required a full sheet of translucent to be applied as a background. I used the hinge method but as I peeled off the backing I SOAKED the surface and the adhesive side of the vinyl. Used a 12" plastic squeegee that I believe is used for wallpapering. The job went down beautifully.
The only place I had a slight problem was along the middle where I had to overlap the premask, since I don't stock 48" premask. A few pin pricks removed the few bubbles that occured at that point.
Posted by Diane Crowther (Member # 120) on :
Dave, those wallpaper squeegees are great. We keep one with a strip of velcro (the soft side) wrapped along the blade edge for times when we want a softer edge - like when you aren't using transfer tape.
Posted by Jay Nichols (Member # 2842) on :
I've been using this method since the 80's- it is so much faster than painting the substrate- especially, as was noted above, on aluminum and acrylic faces. It also works on other metal sign objects such as raceways and pole covers.
Try doing it without transfer tape (saves a lot of time and tape), and consider using teflon or rubber squeegees available from window tinting suppliers (wont scratch the vinyl). I've done pieces as large as 3ft x 26ft with no probs.
I also prefer soap and water because of the cost diff, but that's just me. Posted by Dave Grundy (Member # 103) on :
Jay..Thanks for the tip on getting squegees from window tint suppliers..never even thought of that!!!!
As to the soap and water vs. Rapid tac??? Get Roger to send you a sample pack..you'll love it!!!
Soaking a 4x8 panel with it might cost a dollar or two but the cost is miniscule compared to the overall cost of the project and the adhesive WILL work better.
I consume about 2 gallons a year..about $70 worth...but I use it to clean substrates more that to apply. BUT, since I never leave home without it, I always have it available for tricky/windy/cumbersome applications.
$70 a year is a VERY TINY expense overall..AND it IS tax deductible!!!!!!!!!!
*edited to say*...Damn..Now I sound like Roger!!!!!!!
[ June 12, 2004, 12:33 AM: Message edited by: Dave Grundy ]
Posted by Jay Nichols (Member # 2842) on :
Dave- nobody sounds like Roger but Roger. But you do kinda sound like you are workin for him. Is he payin you commission?
I'm quite familiar with his juice- I've used his products for years- they all do the job they are made for, and rt is good for those who prefer the convenience of pre-mix. I have been dealing with vinyl long enough that I've got my mixture down pat. I do a lot of large pieces, I prefer to flood them and I go thru more than a couple of gallons a year. In the overall picture, it may work out to be a small percentage of the cost, but 35 bucks compared to 5 cents is a fairly large difference in my book to get the same result, even at the current exchange rate.
I dont want to start an argument and I mean no disrespect here, but you say the adhesive will work better with his stuff? huh??? It may activate more quickly than with whatever else you have used, but unless the stuff magically changes the chemical makeup of the adhesive, I gotta wonder about that statement...
I'm goin to bed, let's talk more tomorrow!
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
speaking of disrespect... maybe I should wait till someone starts a "lets give a moments praise to Jay" topic before I reply... but since that ain't gonna happen, I'll just chime in now with my opinion that soap may not "magically change the chemical makeup of the adhesive" but it sure does add a contaminant that isn't helping adhesion. Plenty times I apply dry, & quite often I'll just use water... but I'll never use soap. Why intentionally apply a slippery filmy coating to something you want stuff to stick to? kinda like oiling my sneakers
Oh.. & $35 vs. a nickel? I don't know about the value of your time, but it takes over a nickle of mine to mix a glass of ice water.
Posted by Robert Lambie (Member # 4258) on :
Saw this post and thought I would jump on…
I amvery much a dry app man... have been for many years now, won’t and don’t ever see me returning to wet, BUT… after a post I made many moons ago here, roger replied and asked me to check out R2 so.. I did… I set up a very quick test last “winter” freezing cold temps… Factory painted aluminium, one piece of vinyl applied dry, one wet & one with R2 Of course... the dry app worked best. BUT... R2 did work very well... only after a couple of mins it definitely had a good tack. While regular water had NO effect. This was an eye opener for me. NOT that WET app is better, but that if you must do it wet use R2... since this test I have always advised my site users to do the same if wet app is in their favour. Thank you for a “best of the bunch” product roger. Posted by Jay Nichols (Member # 2842) on :
Doug- this subject has been beat to death and back here, but I dont mind another replay... since we are only stating our opinions anyway, right?
are you sucking the water through a tube from the mainland? how much of your high dollar time does it take to stick a bottle under a faucet and fill it? and if you want to talk about oil and rubber, fine- the basketball forum is down the hall, but I am talking about soap and vinyl adhesive, and the two are NOT 'kinda like'. The soap molecules ('contaminant') are suspended in water and most are squeegeed out, NOT left between the vinyl and substrate. In 24 years of this, I've NEVER had vinyl delaminate because I used a soap and water app. Here's the secret- figure out how much is necessary in the mixture and DONT PUT TOO MUCH SOAP IN THE BOTTLE. One can learn this with a simple test- hold the bottle in one hand and spray it on your other hand and rub your fingers together. Add a drop or two of dishwashing liquid/baby shampoo until you get the degree of slippery necessary. Too much is not good. If you get too much, pour some of the mixture out and add more water. Add a shot of alcohol if you like and get on with it. For people in the vinyl business who prefer wet app, I have never understood why more dont take the time to experiment with their mixture to get it right, since it is such an integral tool of the work. Human nature being what it is, though, it is easy to understand why many prefer the premix.
That being said, my reply to Dave referred to his comment about the adhesive working better with rt. He probably meant quicker, which could translate to better, I guess, and maybe I took it too literally due to my past experiences with statements of this type regarding this specific product. It is probably a factor given his cooler northern climate and the effect of temperature on setup time. Personally, I see no diff comparing adhesion setup time of MY mix to the other stuff. Again, that's just me, I generally work south of the Mason-Dixon line, and I base that comment solely on my own experience.
As far as disrespect, I have stated before that I have no problems with rt products and I dont begrudge any businessman from trying to promote his enterprise. On other issues, well... I guess my attitude could be summed up with the phrase: "you get what you give".
Glad to hear you are coming over to the 'wet' side. Get yerself some teflon squeegees, stop using transfer tape, and maybe you will change your mind about that other thread. Posted by Dave Grundy (Member # 103) on :
Jay..I meant no disrespect to you either. and NO Roger don't pay me a penny (well except fer the hat he sent me and a whole lot of others) wish there was a "pouty face" icon!!! LOL
In fact he and I have differed on dry vs. wet many times. I prefer dry all the time. But sometimes wet is prudent. In those cases I use Rapid Tac. The reason I use it is because I, like Doug, don't think soap is the ideal product to promote adhesion. Roger's product is advertised as an adhesion promoting product, and I believe it because it works well and hasn't cause a problem for me.
Best thing is for each of us to use what we want and get on with the more important things in life...like earning a decent living doing sign work!!! Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
Jay, I won't return the favor and "give you a little kick", however, I will tell you that R.T. products have been in the labs of the largest vinyl manufacturers and found to be superior "long term as well as initial bond". Reason being (like Doug and Dave said) the fact that they were designed to clean and apply without leaving contaminants between the substrate and the film(adhesive).
I get accused of "giving bad advise" all the time (naturally people think I will say anything to sell R.T. products). But thats not true, I will put my money on my advise anytime. And when you tell people that they get the same results or benefits from soap and water, well I wonder if you would pay for a "failed job" from your advise? I will !
I say "if what you do works for you , great" But I have heard that tune before, then when I meet the person and see the quality of the work I understand they're statements better.
Roger Posted by Jean-Claude Theriault (Member # 966) on :
Roger is sending out hats?? Hey Roger can I get one to wear, it'll probably look better than the worn out Rapid Tac T-shirts I'm still wearing after 4 or 5 years
Thanks!
Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
I too, think RT works fine...but am also in Jay's camp.
This subtle allusion to long term failure is a hoax in my opinion. I, like Jay, have used soapy water for MANY years and have never had a failure....never, ever.
Depending on the size of your operation...I believe that $30 a gallon can be a significant cost verses the "home brew" mixture.
"Long term" is a relative term. Vinyl manufacturers themselves only rate their cast vinyl for up to 8 years. I'd like to see you try and collect from Avery IF, and I say IF some vinyl fell off a job at 7 1/2 years. Good luck!
The only way vinyl MIGHT not adhere using the soapy water solution is if some bozo squirted a gob of soap in his spray bottle OR IF HE USED a soap with hand lotion added. The bottle will always tell you if this is so.
I personally take a 32 oz spray bottle and add 15 drops (as in drip-drops) of Dawn dishwashing (in-the-sink style) soap (again, the ol stuff w/no hand lotion added) to the water. I shake vigorously before spraying. This has worked for me.
Some people have added a small squirt of denatured alcohol....but I never have.
In colder temps...vinyl naturally has less ability to "tack" to a surface anyway, and the dry method is a cinch.
I don't see any more liability or chance of failure rate with this aspect of vinyl application than I do by the act of applying vinyl as a whole in any event.
If someone tries to remove the vinyl themselves...there is a chance, although ever so slight, that the paint may come off with it. I'd be much more concerned about THAT long term issue than the scare tactics and innuendos about vinyl falling off.
Personally, I'd rather put the $35 towards plotter blades or vinyl or transfer tape. It's personal preference I guess. If soap and water worries you...then buy RT, if not....then use it with confidence.
This is one man's opinion based on my personal experience. Where there is a perceived or created need for a product, a product will be introduced. This is the american way and I don't begrudge Rog or anyone filling that need. I've just found it unnecessary for me.
Now on the other side of the coin, I DO find Roger's Rapid Remover a product that fills a different need for me. I personally think this stuff is awesome and would and DO recommend it to everyone.
And to Roger's credit...he HAS done the testing with RT products and can CONFIDENTLY recommend his product...and that certainly can add a measure of confidence....expecially to the beginner. That is something I wouldn't do with home brew....I would never sell home brew with any kind of warranty, because it has not been scientifically tested. And for liability reasons, I wouldn't push home-brew as a bullet proof application solution. Some guy might put too much soap into the bottle, and that's something you can't control ...and this is where Roger's product may be a benefit...it's like going to McDonald's. You know that your cheeseburger will always taste the same, whether you visit a restaurant in California or in New Jersey. You will get consistency, every time. And that can be comforting, especially to the novice.
Roger has done the testing of his product for more than performance data....I'm sure he has done it for liability reasons too.
Warranties don't mean a whole lot though, because the burden of proof is always on the user.
It comes down to using what you feel works for you, saves you time and money in the course of your business. I feel the soap and water method (if not using the dry method) saves me time and money, works flawlessly, stands up to the test of time, and hasn't resulted in any warranty issues.
I wouldn't recommend or not recommend any product based soley on a good 'ol boy network or simply because I felt some sort of compulsion to support a merchant here. I would recommend products that I felt worked for me regardless of where they are offered.
Rapid products DO work well and as advertised....and I urge anyone who likes them to continue using them. And you can't beat the free trial offer Roger gives you. Get the free trial products...try them...see if you feel the cost is worth any performance gain you may see, and if so...purchase them.
But NOT using them DOESN'T make you any less "professional" as many here might imply either directly or indirectly.
Have a successful day all!
[ June 14, 2004, 07:23 AM: Message edited by: Todd Gill ]
Posted by Jeff Poitevint (Member # 4740) on :
Man, I got a bunch of advice here and I'm glad I did. Each and every one of you are passionate in your beliefs and that is commended. As a beginner to the business, I will try everyone's advice - AND HAVE! Some have better advice than others, I think. However, I could be mis-interpreting what is written. I appreciate everyone's time to write these responses because I depend on them to make my business better. You guys and girls have helped me tremendously.
Thanks......
Posted by Rovelle W. Gratz (Member # 4404) on :
What everybody calls "soap", I hope is detergent and not soap.
Soap would probably leave an unwanted film.
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
Hey Rove, just saw your name on our "waiting for hat" list !
Anyway, SOAP comes in many forms, or should I say thousands of formulas, which one will leave the least residue, and the most compatible (or least contaminating), that is the big question?
Rapid Tac uses a surfactant that was tested, tested, and tested again. I have had chemical supply salesman try to sell me cheaper formulas but, we won't jeapordise or program, and don't wish to go back to test,test,test mode again !!
Of course ,then theres the obvious problem with soap and water, BUBBLES, what happens when you add soap to water and shake? BUBBLES, well, the soap "traps" air in the water, its simple math to understand why there are air bubbles under the film after using a soap&water solution (note, I did not call it a application fluid) thats cause its not, its only a slip agent or positioning fluid.
Application fluids do more;
1- they are built to clean, and not leave harmfull residues.
2-they slip for you, so, positioning fluid.
3-after you squeegee, they stimulate the adhesive to bond.
4-now they will soak into the trans tape and help release it.
I know, some of you will be PO'd, cause here I go again.
OK !!!
Roger Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
you tell em Roger... No reason you shouldn't take the time to educate your clients, especially since you are paying to keep this site up & running so our soap slinging visitors have a free place to promote their home remedy approach.
I especially like to take advantage of the feature of spraying down the transfer tape to help it release if I have to do a wet installation on glass. I will apply dry on glass when I can, but have done some very large tight registration work & would have hung around quite awhile waiting to get the application tape off, if it had not been for remembering that characteristic of RT.
Posted by Neil D. Butler (Member # 661) on :
My Head is still cold! hehe
Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
Yeah, us soap slingin visitors are a bunch of toothless hacks tryin' to earn beer money....we jest don't git it do we?!
That's the condescending innuendo I'm getting from you Doug.
RT makes a good product. I would not dispute that. And if you want to buy it...please do so. Roger is a good supplier, makes a good product and I applaud his success.
"Soap" and water (I believe I specified the exact brand) works very, very well.
I have supported merchants here (including Roger)even though I'm a mere "visitor". I feel confident that the merchants I have done business with here, appreciate my money regardless of my "club" status.
I just don't fall for the suggested liberal use of RT on everything...including spraying the transfer tape with it. Spraying transfer tape with RT is foolish. When you spray transfer tape with anything other than straight water, you're simply spraying your money down the crapper much to Roger's delight. Water absorbs into the transfer tape, making it release and pull off with ease....it doesn't require a special formula.
The founder of Heinze Ketchup used to say he made more money by the ketchup people left on the plate than what they actually consumed.
Roger, it's one thing to promote a product that is truly good, as yours is.....but totally another thing to infer a failure will be attributed to another method. Air bubles trapped in the soapy water??? Where do these bubbles go? Ooooooh, Aaaaaaah. Hocus pocus.
It's called a squeegee my man. Just like bubbles will occur in the RT if it gets bounced around on the job....you simply squeegee liquid and air out from the graphic application as you would with RT or any other commercially (or non comercially) available app solution.
I often see suggestions such as "liberally apply" and "use lots and lots". Well, there is a point where too much is just too much. Goodyear would probably love it if you purchased a new set of tires every year. Proctor & Gamble suggests washing your hair, rinse and "repeat".
The key maximize profits when selling a product that eventually "runs out" is getting the customer to make it run out quicker. That's marketing 101. Can't blame a person from trying can you?
The obstacle that Roger can never overcome is that there will always be a significant number of signmakers who he can never [fully] convert....because there is a valid alternative that has been time tested and costs a mere nickel a gallon. And this is an obvious frustration to him.
Again, RT does work. Very well in fact. I could, would, and have recommended it to various people depending upon their personal experience and comfort level.
I use RRemover and have sung it's praises. I haven't yet found anything that works as quickly, as well, at a less expensive price. If I do, then my options will change.
Bottom line...use what you want and feel confident in...
Have a great day...be motivated and successful!
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
Todd, I guess you get the "condescending innuendo" you look for.
I started this thread to show appreciation for someone I just met last month who made a contribution to my business by sharing a very minute bit of sign related information. Now we have Roger apologizing for his sales pitch in a thread directed to him. In defense of that, I merely pointed out that he is a current financial supporter of this site... & you are not.
I elected not to debate the merits of R.R.'s presidency on a thread dedicated to him, although where others showed less restraint they were told that they had Ronnie to thank for living in a country where they were free to speak with disrespect. Well, if I'm guilty of intentional innuendo, it was to imply that now you have Roger to thank, in part, for this venue in which to challenge his sales pitch. Any other innuendo is in your mind.
As for visitor status question, I brought it up solely to make the above point. I have not been in visitor since the month I've found this place... but everytime anyone criticizes a visitor for not paying dues, I have defended the fact that visitors are providing a good percentage of the valuable information that makes people come here, stay here, & learn about our merchants products here. Add to that, of course the fact Steve & Barb work their tails off to offer this place free. So I do not begrudge a visitor their equal right to be in this "club". Again, I merely pointed out that Roger is a current financial supporter of this site... & you are not. You are free to start as many topics as you want to undermine Rogers advertizing efforts, so why do it here?
for the record... I've used 5 qt's of RT in 10 years... so if a little went down the crapper... I'll survive. I just use it when I need it, & for that, it does the job.
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
I don't wish to see this disagreement go any further so, Let me just clarify; At no time have I ever promoted "liberal" use of any of my products for the purpose of selling more of them, period.
I have advised people to use them liberaly to enhance their ability to perform better or faster, period.
Thanks, Roger Posted by BrianTheBrush (Member # 1298) on :
Well,
I was going to stay out of this one, as Roger and I have had our conflicts before, and I felt my response would be misconstrued as sour grapes. I just want to share my experience as well.
Just because we've butted heads, doesn't mean I don't respect the man, and his products.I admire Roger, if for no other reason, for his commitment to his convictions, and his commitment to helping people on this bull board. He did however jump in on a SignGold post a while back, and did indeed offer some ill advice. I really think it was just because he was trying to help, but none-the-less, it was bad advice.
For the past 16 or 17 years, we've made our own application fluid, or call it what you will, in-house.
I have a 5 gallon, drum shaped cooler, with a spighot on the bottom. I fill it with roughly 5 gallons of water, add one 16 oz. bottle of isopropyl alcohol, and 3 tablespoons of Ivory liquid. The water acts as a vehicle, the Ivory (which contains no lanolins, or other additional ingredients) allows for repositioning, and the alcohol expediates the evaporation process.
I still, when working with other sign shops on joint projects, find myself using Rapid Tack at times, and it works spendidly. I have not however, found our home made concoction to be inferior in any way, including the release time.
The way I came about this formula so many years ago, for what it's worth, was I had a commercially available application fluid, not Rapid Tack, analyzed by a friend who worked in the chemistry department of a local company, Eastman Kodak. He told me it was essentially water, soap and alcohol, and that the fragrance in this perticular brand, came from something similar to almond extract, which contained the alcohol.
My fluid has never failed me. My jobs last. and I like spending less than twenty cents a gallon on application fluid. When a bottle in the shop is running low, you just hold it under the spighot.
That's my 2 cents worth...actually, about 18.5 cents worth.
Keep on keepin' on.
Posted by Bill Diaz (Member # 2549) on :
Actually the use of detergent and water or RT should have a similar effect on applying vinyl, because both have surfactants in them. Surfactants are used to make water wetter. Farmers use surfactants when spraying herbicides to make the chemicals stick to the crops. They are used in detergents to help them clean and they are also used in adhesives. Correct me if I'm wrong so far, Rodger.
Ethanol (denatured alcohol)is water soluable and also a good cleaner and I'm sure RT has that ingredient in it as well as surfactants. So everybody is right here and nobody is wrong. Dishwashing detergents and water have been used to apply adhesive backed pressure sensitive films for as long as I've been around and longer.
Rodger has an advantange in that with lab work they have determined the right proportions for the product -- batch after batch thus eliminating any guess work. The fact remains, though, you can still get good results using diswashing detergent and water to apply vinyl. I use RT, because I think they've got the proportions down right, but Rodger would be glad to know, I use a hell of a lot more than 2 gallons a year. I'm a least using 2 gallons a month, maybe more.
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
No Brian, not "bad advise", just different advise.
Like I said before, I will put my money where my mouth is, if someone wants to insure a clean,nearly 100%bond (better then dry) of Sign Gold they can apply wet with Rapid Tac II (as long as they don't pre-clean with window cleaner,wax&grease remover,409 or whatever) I will pay for the product and labor if it fails due to not edge sealing.
Most all failures are because of ill prepared substrates, (using something to clean with that was not designed for this purpose)contamination is not only a chemical between the adhesive and the substrate preventing 100%bond but, its a chemical that can deteriorate the adhesive as well as the film itself. I have a fair amount of experience within that area, yes that includes Sign Gold material.
Roger Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
My apologies Doug, if I have over-reacted....and thank you, Roger, for allowing me to disagree.
I'd never trash anyone's sales pitch...but I have difficulty in passing over information that just isn't accurate: the suggestion that soap and water is going to cause failure or is somehow not a viable method for wet apps.
I can understand the sensitivities of not stomping all over the sponsors of this sight. But since this site seems to be about finding solutions for sign related tasks, it seems prudent to lay out all viable options on the table. I think it's counterproductive not to mention "that other method" because it might be in conflict with the interests of a particular merchant.
And I'm not out to get Roger. Please re-read my posts and you'll see me say nothing but good things about his products. I truly believe they ARE good, and perform as advertised.
And I understand that this is his livelihood and he will (and probably should) defend his product till the end of time. But misinformation on the soap and water method is a diservice to newbies by causing them to miss out on other avenues of applying graphics wet....especially when startups are more inclined to be cash sensitive than well established shops.
The free flow of ideas and problem solving solutions shouldn't be sequestered should they?
There is usually more than one way to successfully solve a problem.
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
quote:Originally posted by Todd Gill: The free flow of ideas and problem solving solutions shouldn't be sequestered should they?
I agree Todd, problem solving solutions, (or alternative application solutions) should not be sequestered. I have went on record here a number of times in favor of the exchange of ALL information of value to the sign community without regard to who is or is not a merchant.
quote:Originally posted by Todd Gill: It comes down to using what you feel works for you, saves you time and money in the course of your business. I feel the soap and water method (if not using the dry method) saves me time and money, works flawlessly, stands up to the test of time, and hasn't resulted in any warranty issues.
To me, that one paragraph says it all in regards to the free flow of problem solving ideas & protecting newbies from missing out on other avenues of applying graphics wet.
quote:Originally posted by Todd Gill: I'd never trash anyone's sales pitch.
Todd, I've always enjoyed exchanging views with you over the potentially volatile issues of both politics & religion because you are articulate & you don't let things get personal. Once again however, I will agree to disagree. To me, a few statements you made seemed less about the free flow of ideas and problem solving solutions & more about trashing Roger's sales pitch.
quote:Originally posted by Todd Gill: "This subtle allusion to long term failure is a hoax in my opinion"
"it's one thing to promote a product that is truly good, as yours is.....but totally another thing to infer a failure will be attributed to another method."
I know I'm splitting hairs & that this is of no interest to anyone at this point, so I promise I will let it rest. My apologies for not doing so earlier, but I like to back up my statements if I think they are being misunderstood or challenged. And of course I welcome the challenge as I am not at all unwilling to retract a statement, when I am wrong. My beliefs & opinions are always being developed & improved by educating myself through discussion.
Posted by BrianTheBrush (Member # 1298) on :
Roger.
Please don't make such offers here, as you have regarding SignGold products. We warranty our product, not you. We too have spent years and thousands of dollars testing our products in conjunction with DuPont, and several other entities, in QUV weatherometer chambers, fadeometers and in the field. We are confident in our products, proceedures and warranty service. That's why we're the only vinyl manufacturer that I'm aware of that offers an iron-clad 12 year exterior warranty.
I would ask that SignGold users please continue to edge-seal their applications, using 1Shot 4005 clear, or an equivelant, as outlined in the instructions.
I'm not going to get into a ****ing contest with you here Roger, but I would ask this of you;
If a call comes in regarding a SignGold failure, that was applied using Rapid Tack, and no edge sealer...and it's been on the vehicle for, let's say, 6 years. Do you have a method to determine whether or not that was a proper installation? Can you tell at that point whether Rapid Tack was used for that installation?
SignGold users should NOT "just apply using Rapid Tack products, and walk away" as Roger once suggested. Rapid Tack is a fine application fluid. Probably as good as it gets. But SignGold should be edge-sealed.
Posted by Rick Sacks (Member # 379) on :
Yesterday morning I received a call from our local UPS distribution station asking what it is in a box that is leaking. I discovered it was a gallon of Rapid Remover. They had to stop unloading the truck with the parcels awaited by folks up and down the coast and await the haz-mat crew to inspect. I explained it to be a citrus based adhesive remover and they wanted to know if it could harm anyone. At that point I said "It depends on how you're glued together!" They released the package to me and I went back to work.
Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
Doug,
Thanks for the reply....I really don't mean to trash Roger's good natured support of his products. He has a fine line of products and should be very proud and excited about them.
And maybe I should not have even broached the issue, but I had a hard time keeping myself from responding to following statement:
QUOTE: Of course ,then theres the obvious problem with soap and water, BUBBLES, what happens when you add soap to water and shake? BUBBLES, well, the soap "traps" air in the water, its simple math to understand why there are air bubbles under the film after using a soap&water solution (note, I did not call it a application fluid) thats cause its not, its only a slip agent or positioning fluid.
That just doesn't make sense to me. Roger and I will always disagree over whether soap and water solution can be called an "application" fluid. It obviously is in that you spray it on just as you would RT to position AND apply the graphic. The same methods are used and it aids the application process in the same manner by allowing you successfuly install a graphic without bubbles....but like you say, we're down to semantics and hair splitting.
Sorry we've deviated so far from your original post....I'm glad Roger was able to give you a pointer that worked well for you. He does doggedly support people using his product and that's a good thing.
Thanks to Brian and everyone else you opined too.
Have a good day everyone!
Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
P.S. Have you ever noticed after posting that some words you entered disappear and other one's change to a completely different word making it hard to read some sentences? Wonder what's up with that?
Posted by John Deaton III (Member # 925) on :
Ive used both my own mixture and rapid tac, and although mine worked okay, I still prefer the rapid tac. Its ready to use when I buy it, and it has a guarantee of testing to show that it works. I rely on that for my other products, like vinyl, tape, mdo, paint etc. Im not gonna go out and try and make those, so why should I make my own application fluid. Id rather rely on a proven product that has been tested and formulized to do its job. That said, its my opinion. Some good points were made in this thread, but I intend to keep on using Rapid Tac. And thanks for the hat Roger. Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
Good points John.
Posted by Barb. Shortreed (Member # 1730) on :
Let's be careful that the right info is being given out here. Sometimes a single word or phrase can lead to unecessary misunderstandings.
Rapid Tac has been around for ages. Thousands of users swear by it. By the same token, some feel their homemade recipies are just as effective. You can't win them all.
Our concern is the statement that using Rapid Tac with SignGold makes edge sealing unnecessary. This goes against all the testing and information the manufacturer clearly advises.
Brian asks a valid question a couple posts above. I know Roger as a man of integerty that believes and stands behind his products. Why warranty another's product that clearly recommends edge sealing for maximum life? Seems to me that the application and edge sealing are two separate and different issues.
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
Good point Barb.
I wonder if anyone remembers Larry Mitchell, he was associated with Mr. Crowely and I believe had some to do with Sign Gold tech. and video production for product demo. Anyway, Larry called me up years ago, telling me how "they" couldn't get the S.Gold to apply correctly to the inside of some special Mustang alloy wheels, I sent him samples, he loved em, called me back to say that not only did it apply better with R.T. but it STAYED applied, even thru carwash preasure washes.
I'm sure they were not edge sealed, I think if it is applied correctly and acheives 95/100% bond, then the edges won't be lifting/opening up anyway. Just my opinion, based on inhouse tests, and many conversations with people around the country that use S.G/R.T in conjunction during the last 17 years.
Roger Posted by Harris Kohen (Member # 2139) on :
Roger I love your products, but I wonder if you might give me an extended warranty on my Nissan truck if I use Rapid Tac products to clean it?
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
The signgold I used on my truck was stuck so good when I sold it you probably could have pressure washed it with rapid remover & not got it off... but, I didn't actually test that theory, I just wanted to toss it in the ring anyway Posted by BrianTheBrush (Member # 1298) on :
Roger.
Answer the question.
How will you determine that a job that goes south after 6 years was applied with RapidTac?
I can tell if it was edge sealed.
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
Loaded question but; 1-info. from end user is always considered
2-It would require a sample of both the substrate and film
3- I think if the film stayed adhered for 6 years, then de-laminated, well, it probably wasn't a "application problem". 4- how often HAS this situation come up for you Brian?
Roger Posted by BrianTheBrush (Member # 1298) on :
It does come up Roger.
Our product has a 12 year outdoor gaurantee.
I can usually tell from a photograph whether a job was edge sealed or not.
And for what it's worth:
75% of all SignGold applications are on vehicles..how does someone send you a sample of the substrate?
The edge-sealing process has not a darned thing to do with the bond to the surface. It prevents our very aggressive adhesive from attracting contaminants and dirt. It additionally prevents the gold, which is very malible and pourous, from allowing the migration of oxygen and moisture, which will also contain contamination.
And how do you handle the application of our genuine silver products, which absolutly must be applied dry?
I'm anxiously awaiting your responses.
Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
I think I did answer your question Brian, and obviously its near impossible to determine after 6 years (other then reading customers comments and some common sence)without a substrate sample.
Now kindly answer mine; How often does this situation happen for SignGold?
Roger Posted by roger bailey (Member # 556) on :
Well, I assume Steve just changed this topic discription (rightfully so)and now I see how pointless this all has become.
At the point that no one GAINS any knoweledge or help from a thread is when it should end. Brian and I are not contributing to that process. With that realization, I will close any further discussion .
Roger Posted by BrianTheBrush (Member # 1298) on :
Roger,
I get maybe, one of those calls a month.
And you're right, at that point it would almost be impossible to determine what application fluid was used.
The moral of this story? I'll handle warrantying and making recommendations on our product, and you handle yours.
Fair enough?
Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
Attention everyone....Elvis has left the building. It's suddenly very silent here. Hehehee
Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
P.S. Is it really meaningless banter if we discover more than one solution to a problem through the diverse experiences of others? And in the process we learn that bias can sometimes interfere with truth?
I kinda like hearing a variety of suggestions to solve a single problem. It helps you reason your way to a conclusion you feel will best meet your needs.
And sometimes, it's good to correct...or at least point out illogical "banter" which might cause someone [who doesn't know any better] to miss out on experience based solid advice. That's a real disservice.
Have a great day...and remember: You can breathe through your mouth, through your nose, or both at the same time. See? Many ways of gettin the job done. Hehehe
Posted by Dave Grundy (Member # 103) on :
Todd..I LIKE THAT LINE!!! "You can breathe though yer mouth or yer nose"!!!!
GOOD POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just struck me as being great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Todd Gill (Member # 2569) on :
Why thank you Dave...it must have been the surge of insulin from the slice of Hungry Howies pizza I just ate. Hehehe.
Have a great evening. Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
for the record, since it was assumed otherwise, I will claim responsibility for changing the heading to this post. I will also not that my choice of words were the result of numerous seconds of un-focused thought. (like 2 maybe) Posted by Joey Madden (Member # 1192) on :
You're a trouble maker Doug, I think I'll contact a couple of my friends there in Maui to pay you a visit and show ya how its done Samoan style
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Applause]](graemlins/clap.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Dunno]](graemlins/dunno.gif)
kinda like oiling my sneakers![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)