# dynamat alternative at $2/sq foot?



## blamus (Mar 9, 2009)

can I go wrong with this?

100+ Sq Feet of Dynamat!!! (Priced per Square Foot)

how much will I need for a Nissan Xterra? And where shall i put it? Just the doors?


----------



## AndyInOC (Jul 22, 2008)

did you ever ask him what the actual brand is? looks like e-dud


----------



## TREETOP (Feb 11, 2009)

That's not dynamat, it's peel-n-seal. They sell it at Lowe's and Home Depot by the roll like that.
It works OK as a sound deadener, but it's asphalt based rather than butyl and some people say it will make your car smell bad in a hot day...


----------



## falkenbd (Aug 16, 2008)

tons of threads on deadening and dampening here.... start reading

i'd ask that guy where he got the stuff before buying it. if its asphalt you should steer clear.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

TREETOP said:


> That's not dynamat, it's peel-n-seal. They sell it at Lowe's and Home Depot by the roll like that.
> *It works OK as a sound deadener*, but it's asphalt based rather than butyl and some people say it will make your car smell bad in a hot day...


No, it doesn't.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Looks exactly like eDead v1


----------



## shadowfactory (Oct 20, 2008)

TREETOP said:


> That's not dynamat, it's peel-n-seal. They sell it at Lowe's and Home Depot by the roll like that.
> It works OK as a sound deadener, but it's asphalt based rather than butyl and some people say it will make your car smell bad in a hot day...


It has almost no deadening properties and will melt in any hot weather. Pretty much the worst product you can imagine. I wouldn't call that okay. If you want to be cheap just buy some raammat and call it a day. It still works great and btw, there is no magical secret ultra cheap awesome working deadner out there waiting to be uncovered.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

It's definitely not Dynamat Xtreme and it's not Peel & Seal (uses a paper release liner). It does look like the Mylar faced eDead,in which case he paid $1/ft². It could also be R-Blox which is Mylar faced asphalt which costs even less than eDead.

It could be asphalt - virtually worthless as a vibration damper. It looks to have a Mylar facing which seriously compromises performance even if the adhesive is butyl - to the point of being almost as ineffective as asphalt.

Price/ft² is the most misleading spec in sound deadening. The performance ratio between good stuff and bad is 6:1 or more. It's not unreasonable to assume that this stuff would actually cost you the equivalent of $12/ft² to get the job done. Claims of: "As good as Dynamat" should be a big red flag for consumers. You want butyl and aluminum foil in a CLD, but even that doesn't guarantee a good product. Foil thickness and type and adhesive formulation are critical. Both components need to be carefully tuned to get good results.

I was willing to give this guy the benefit of the doubt (ignorant not deceptive) but:



> It's not made by the company dynamat, but work just as good as the stuff.





> Dynamat Charges more for the name then, the product. (advertising)





> Average trunk needs about 30Sq Feet, so 50-70 bucks to dynamat your trunk. (Which is the same as buying the deluxe pack @ quality auto sound/ cartoys for $300+ tax


and finally:


> Tags: JL JBL MTX Alpine Pioneer Premier Rockford Fosgate Kicker Infinity Dual Jensen Focal Boston Acoustics Pyle Monster RMS PEAK Watts Subs Subwoofers Amp Amps Bass Loud Flex Hard


bite me.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

I've got a SWEET "Dynamat alternative" that I've been using in my car that's costing me <$1 per sqft. If anyone's interested, I'll sell you the idea for $19.99.


----------



## falkenbd (Aug 16, 2008)

FoxPro5 said:


> I've got a SWEET "Dynamat alternative" that I've been using in my car that's costing me <$1 per sqft. If anyone's interested, I'll sell you the idea for $19.99.


oooh oooo wat's ur paypals?


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

falkenbd said:


> oooh oooo wat's ur paypals?


Don't forget shipping for that idea - believe it's $39.95.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

Bang for the buck for an actual decent/good product is RAAMmat.IMO


----------



## bjayjr5679 (Nov 8, 2007)

I love it when Rudeboy swoops in on the deadener questions. 




Rudeboy said:


> It's definitely not Dynamat Xtreme and it's not Peel & Seal (uses a paper release liner). It does look like the Mylar faced eDead,in which case he paid $1/ft². It could also be R-Blox which is Mylar faced asphalt which costs even less than eDead.
> 
> It could be asphalt - virtually worthless as a vibration damper. It looks to have a Mylar facing which seriously compromises performance even if the adhesive is butyl - to the point of being almost as ineffective as asphalt.
> 
> ...


----------



## falkenbd (Aug 16, 2008)

Short answer, you CAN go wrong with that stuff...

read the site in Rudeboy's signature... It will at least tell you what stuff will survive in a car.... 

that is only the first step in determining the quality of this stuff... it actually has to be able to damp vibrations..


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Agreed 100% I can tell you now that if that stuff is the eDead that I put in a vehicle once before, I can tell you you'll be doing it twice with something actually GOOD later or you'll never get what you want. 

If you want cheap but really good, go with RAAMmat (which incidentally is $1.82 sq ft!), or go with SecondSkin for even higher performance (potentially), for a slightly higher premium.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

falkenbd said:


> oooh oooo wat's ur paypals?


Have your people contact my people.

Here's a teaser pic for free in the mean time. This is just part of Colonel Fox's eleven special spices in the secret recipe. Mass loading FTW? :surprised:


----------



## machinehead (Nov 6, 2005)

Is that why you were calling around to see how much half a truck of cement is?


----------



## falkenbd (Aug 16, 2008)

FoxPro5 said:


> Have your people contact my people.
> 
> Here's a teaser pic for free in the mean time. This is just part of Colonel Fox's eleven special spices in the secret recipe. Mass loading FTW? :surprised:


its kind of hard to tell if you are serious sometimes... Dead Pancakes ?? LOL?


----------



## blamus (Mar 9, 2009)

Thx guys, RAAAAAA! it is.


----------



## Fiercetimbo17 (May 17, 2007)

falkenbd said:


> its kind of hard to tell if you are serious sometimes... Dead Pancakes ?? LOL?


Concrete works wonders, also weight a ton too..


----------



## mjgonegm (Jun 21, 2008)

does not look to bad but u can tell it's not the good ****. the good **** is never sold on rolls, It's sold on flat sheets


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

mjgonegm said:


> does not look to bad but u can tell it's not the good ****. the good **** is never sold on rolls, It's sold on flat sheets


Please tell me you are are joking.

So if I roll up a sheet of SS pro and sell it to you it automatically becomes not as good.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

falkenbd said:


> its kind of hard to tell if you are serious sometimes... Dead Pancakes ?? LOL?


True. I'm never always serious. 

Hey, how did you know!?!? :worried: You're good man....real good....care to guess the syrup?? 

But I'm off to get my rolling pin out and roll it flat so it's officially _the good ****_. As pictured it's about 1/4 thick...which works well for it's current door application.

it ain't no not cement neither


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Genxx said:


> Please tell me you are are joking.
> 
> So if I roll up a sheet of SS pro and sell it to you it automatically becomes not as good.


If it was rolled during manufacturing you'd have a tough time using it. When a laminated product that thick, with foil that thick is is run onto a roll, the outer layer, in this case the foil, is longer than the inner layers. When you tried to flatten it out to use it, you'd have a crinkly mess on your hands.

If it's manufactured flat and you try to roll it up to sell to mjgonegm, the foil is going to want to fold instead of roll so you'll end up with a square or triangular roll instead.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

You're right

RAAMmat does look a little like a Sharpei puppy when it is unrolled. Not too bad though.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> If it was rolled during manufacturing you'd have a tough time using it. When a laminated product that thick, with foil that thick is is run onto a roll, the outer layer, in this case the foil, is longer than the inner layers. When you tried to flatten it out to use it, you'd have a crinkly mess on your hands.
> 
> If it's manufactured flat and you try to roll it up to sell to mjgonegm, the foil is going to want to fold instead of roll so you'll end up with a square or triangular roll instead.


I tell you what you send me some I will roll it tape the squares together and we will see if it is a triangle when I am done. Apply some commonsense to this.

I have used SS, RAAMmat, Cascade, Dynamat, edead, FoxPro if I left one out let me know.LOL

I am confident I can roll any of it up into a roll. SS pro is some thick **** but I can roll it I am positive about that. Will it look good rolled up probably not but I can roll it up.

A flat sheet does not make a product better. I can take RAAMmat off the roll and make a square out of it. Then re-sell it for double the price and say its better because it is it sheet form.

That is what I am getting at. You cannot make a blanket statement that because it is square/sheet that it is better based on that alone. Because someone like ed will start making their **** in sheet form and then some idiot will read a thread like this and think it is the same as SS, Cascade, Dynamat Xtreme and it is not.

Rudeboy-Me and you both know what makes a product better. Foil thickness, butyl based, adhesion properties, ability to be formed where applied ect.


----------



## mjgonegm (Jun 21, 2008)

God can i say anything without say anything lol

*"MOST"* Manf.'s don't roll their products because they don't want to crinkle it and by rolling it they put crinkles in it and it would be thin in said spot.

god sry

More of what i was saying is that that most of the manf.'s you guys approve of sell their stuff in flat sheets.


----------



## ANT (Oct 15, 2005)

Genxx said:


> I tell you what you send me some I will roll it tape the squares together and we will see if it is a triangle when I am done. Apply some commonsense to this.
> 
> I have used SS, RAAMmat, Cascade, Dynamat, edead, FoxPro if I left one out let me know.LOL
> 
> ...


 
Actually, there is more truth to the statement that needs to be pointed out.

Industry secret.
If it comes on a roll from the manufacturer, it is not a vibration damper.
There is not a sound deadening manufacturer inthe industry that puts their CLVED on a roll right off the line.
NONE!

Companies that make foild backed vibration mats for the purpose of vibration damping do not put them on rolls. 

Companies that make flashing tape and gutter sealants do.

Many companies buy roofing products fromthe manufacturer and resell them as a vibration damper becuase most people do not know the difference, and will never seek out the means to learn the truth. The stuff looks very similar and it works decently well so they get away with it.

If it comes on a roll from the manufacture it was never designed to go in a car. There is no exeption to this rule when it comes to Foil backed constraint layer visco elastic vibration dampers. 
Companies that manufacture CLVED mats make the product in flat sheets.

Thats just how it is.

ANT


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

OK, but to that effect we have the black sheep RAAMmat, which is not roofing material (no asphalt that I know of currently), but is on a roll. And of course I would dare say that most of us would consider RAAMmat a decent if not excellent deadening choice especially if price is a consideration. I prefer secondskin, but I'm not afraid to suggest RAAMmat for installs, as long as it is the new stuff that is butyl.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> OK, but to that effect we have the black sheep RAAMmat, which is not roofing material (no asphalt that I know of currently), but is on a roll. And of course I would dare say that most of us would consider RAAMmat a decent if not excellent deadening choice especially if price is a consideration. I prefer secondskin, but I'm not afraid to suggest RAAMmat for installs, as long as it is the new stuff that is butyl.


It isn't roofing material because it is thicker and the butyl formulation is different from standard roofing materials, but it is manufactured on machines that are intended for roofing material production. It uses a 2 mil foil in a plastic laminate that is intended to be rolled. If 2 mill foil has that sharpei look when flattened out, imagine what 6 mil foil would look like. Rolling requires a more viscous adhesive than is optimal and a thinner foil than is optimal.

What it looks like is really secondary. All of the manufacturers who make what we consider premium products also do OEM, aerospace and industrial production. Materials used for those markets are die cut for specific applications so there is no reason to roll it. What Anthony said is true - the best stuff is flat. That doesn't mean that rolled stuff can't be decent, because it can - as we've seen. It can also be crap - as we've also seen.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

Genxx said:


> A flat sheet does not make a product better. I can take RAAMmat off the roll and make a square out of it. Then re-sell it for double the price and say its better because it is it sheet form.


All else equal, like Ant said....I really think it does. Think about it, BXT is all wrinkled up and takes a lot of rolling to get it flat, right? More wrinkles = more rolling = more pressure = more work. It's only a 2 mil foil so you have to be careful that you don't cut right into it with your standard wooden roller's edge because if you do, you'll start smearing the "butyl" all over the place. 

I haven't used every single damn CLD mat ever made, but laying down some VMax with their applicator tool is pure heaven to me.  If it came on a roll all wrinkled, it would be pure hell.


----------



## falkenbd (Aug 16, 2008)

FoxPro5 said:


> True. I'm never always serious.
> 
> Hey, how did you know!?!? :worried: You're good man....real good....care to guess the syrup??
> 
> ...



The link to the picture says dead pancakes in it... Whats the syzurp? Some of that elastomeric roofing white-out? Adding some foil to that too???

Why are you divulging secrets all of a sudden??? Some kind of change of heart? If this really works, I'd like to hear about it...


----------



## smellygas (Feb 21, 2008)

I'm actually surprised that nobody has mentioned *Cascade Audio's B-Quiet ULTIMATE (not extreme).* It dampens vibration BETTER than Dynamat Xtreme at 86F, almost as good at 68F, and equivalent at 50F. It's also very similar to Dynamat Extreme - viscoelastic butyl (not asphalt) with aluminum layer. In an magazine article (Fast Car 1999):
http://www.b-quiet.com/test.pdf 
The older version called "Brown Bread" (now discontinued, replaced with B-quiet ultimate) beat out all the other dampening sheets tested (although they didn't test a lot of the ones available today). 

B-Quiet Ultimate is $2.60/sq ft + s/h for 50 sq feet. The last time I looked, Dynamat Extreme was >$4/sq ft. 

I actually used B-quiet Ultimate and I can tell you that the stickiness of the adhesive is outstanding. When you warm up the viscoelastic layer, it molds very easily over irregular surfaces, and it's very easy to apply. I've tried the stuff from Parts Express and McMaster-Carr, but they both had problems with cheap adhesive. The asphalt-containing products had a very bad odor, but this goes away after you air out the sheets for a few days before installing. Good luck.

SG


----------



## ANT (Oct 15, 2005)

smellygas said:


> I'm actually surprised that nobody has mentioned *Cascade Audio's B-Quiet ULTIMATE (not extreme).* It dampens vibration BETTER than Dynamat Xtreme at 86F,


 
wait.. wut !?!?!?

I think you are confused


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

smellygas said:


> I'm actually surprised that nobody has mentioned *Cascade Audio's B-Quiet ULTIMATE (not extreme).* It dampens vibration BETTER than Dynamat Xtreme at 86F, almost as good at 68F, and equivalent at 50F. It's also very similar to Dynamat Extreme - viscoelastic butyl (not asphalt) with aluminum layer. In an magazine article (Fast Car 1999):
> http://www.b-quiet.com/test.pdf
> The older version called "Brown Bread" (now discontinued, replaced with B-quiet ultimate) beat out all the other dampening sheets tested (although they didn't test a lot of the ones available today).
> 
> ...


The only point I can agree with is that the stickiness is outstanding. Brown Bread was an asphalt product made in the UK and that magazine review is suspect. In any case, the products in the comparison don't give us any way to compare what is a product they no longer sell with anything currently available. Brown Bread and BQ Ultimate are entirely different products produced by different manufacturers.

ASTM E756 results have to be taken with a huge grain of salt when they are published without supporting documentation. There is enough variation in Oberst bar testing that it is completely meaningless without the methodology used. FatMat used to publish results that were just a hair below Dynamat Xtreme's. Since DX doesn't show the entire report either, even those numbers can't be taken as a fixed standard. It is *extremely[/i] unlikely that that if the same procedure had been used for the tests that the results would be as close as they are. BQ Ultimate has 2 mil foil which precludes that kind of performance. Not saying it is bad stuff, but the "good as DX" red flag applies here too.*


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

DIYMA said:


> wait.. wut !?!?!?


Yeah, not to mention that Cascade doesn't make it


----------



## azncarjunkie (Jan 21, 2009)

my installer said dynamat can stink for a few days when installed. damplifier second skin doesn't smell at all from what I could tell from being at the shop during install. That's the route that i'm going to go for sure.


----------



## smellygas (Feb 21, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> Yeah, not to mention that Cascade doesn't make it


LOL my bad. Clarification:
- You're right. Cascade doesn't make B-quiet. Brain fart.
- It's a good point that B-Quiet Ultimate uses a different compound than Brown Bread, so the admittedly cheesey magazine review probably isn't very helpful. 
- I agree that you have to take the manufacturer's ASTM results with a grain of salt, but here's the thing. The manufacturers are actually providing test results using a standardized and comparable methodology (ASTM E756) at a given frequency and temperature. They never claimed that it was done by an indepedendent 3rd party lab, which would be obliged to provide a so-called certification sheet. I'm pretty sure the tests were done internally by the manufacturer. NOW, whether or not you think the manufacturers completely falsified their data is up to you, especially keeping in mind that they could be exposed to litigation. (not that this stops some companies)

SG


----------



## smellygas (Feb 21, 2008)

Just as an aside, somebody really needs to do some controlled vibration tests that compare the various brands out there. It doesn't even need to be done at a certified lab...just a methodology that sort of replicates ASTM E756. It is completely beyond me how people can make such strong recommendations for one vibration product over another when absolutely nobody has objective measurements of the most important quality of a vibration dampening material - its ability to dampen vibration.

SG


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

smellygas said:


> LOL my bad. Clarification:
> - You're right. Cascade doesn't make B-quiet. Brain fart.
> - It's a good point that B-Quiet Ultimate uses a different compound than Brown Bread, so the admittedly cheesey magazine review probably isn't very helpful.
> - I agree that you have to take the manufacturer's ASTM results with a grain of salt, but here's the thing. The manufacturers are actually providing test results using a standardized and comparable methodology (ASTM E756) at a given frequency and temperature. They never claimed that it was done by an indepedendent 3rd party lab, which would be obliged to provide a so-called certification sheet. I'm pretty sure the tests were done internally by the manufacturer. NOW, whether or not you think the manufacturers completely falsified their data is up to you, especially keeping in mind that they could be exposed to litigation. (not that this stops some companies)
> ...


I know for a fact that Dynamic Control has had testing done externally, which isn't to say they haven't acquired the ability to do it in-house since then. The ASTM standard leaves more room for variability than you may think. Beyond that, the results aren't simply a matter of reading a level off of some sort of meter. The testing procedure is complex and the numbers we see involve a huge amount of interpolation, extrapolation and interpretation  Proper testing requires an enormous investment in equipment and requires personal with a lot of skill and experience. On the other hand, you can have a single material tested for around $600.



smellygas said:


> Just as an aside, somebody really needs to do some controlled vibration tests that compare the various brands out there. It doesn't even need to be done at a certified lab...just a methodology that sort of replicates ASTM E756. It is completely beyond me how people can make such strong recommendations for one vibration product over another when absolutely nobody has objective measurements of the most important quality of a vibration dampening material - its ability to dampen vibration.
> 
> SG


As you are suggesting, Oberst bar testing measures displacement of a mechanically excited sample. It does this in an open termination configuration that isn't completely analogous to a closed termination vehicle panel. It does seem to be a good predictor. I once proposed that any sound deadener seller who wanted to participate in a fair test could submit samples and pay the testing fee directly to a testing lab and give the lab permission to send me a copy of the results for publication. None were interested.

I've come up with a test that seems to be accurate and matches well with the Oberst bar test results I've seen that I know to be reliable. The test is repeatable and results in easily comparable data. The results are pretty dramatic but I'm not sure I'll ever release them - just getting too old to deal with the constant legal threats I've received for my past explorations. 

A simple test that anyone can do is get samples of products they are interested in. Cut identical areas of each. Get some identical sheet metal blanks (onlinemetals.com sells 12"x12" 22 gauge steel quite inexpensively). Apply a sample to each blank. Hang them all up by their corners and hit them with a stick. You don't get the nice graphs and numbers we like, but you can hear very big differences between most products.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

falkenbd said:


> The link to the picture says dead pancakes in it... Whats the syzurp? Some of that elastomeric roofing white-out? Adding some foil to that too???
> 
> Why are you divulging secrets all of a sudden??? Some kind of change of heart? If this really works, I'd like to hear about it...


Oh, guess I didn't look at the thread link. :blush:

Check your email.


----------



## machinehead (Nov 6, 2005)

When it comes to dynamat or somthing else, I can't comment cuz im not an audio expert. But chip foose is!


----------



## ANT (Oct 15, 2005)

machinehead said:


> When it comes to dynamat or somthing else, I can't comment cuz im not an audio expert. But chip foose is!


I am no expert either but something about this picture is dead sexy..


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

DIYMA said:


> I am no expert either but something about this picture is dead sexy..


Are your pants on backwards or is your ass in the front?


----------



## machinehead (Nov 6, 2005)

Must be Chip's twinkle in his eye


----------



## smellygas (Feb 21, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> The ASTM standard leaves more room for variability than you may think. Beyond that, the results aren't simply a matter of reading a level off of some sort of meter. The testing procedure is complex and the numbers we see involve a huge amount of interpolation, extrapolation and interpretation


This is very good to know. The next question then is how useful are ASTM results when the tests are done by different parties? Perhaps not much. So we're really back to square one when it comes to comparing different dampening materials, unless there is a single third party that can perform the controlled tests on various dampening prorducts.



> I once proposed that any sound deadener seller who wanted to participate in a fair test could submit samples and pay the testing fee directly to a testing lab and give the lab permission to send me a copy of the results for publication. None were interested.


I'm not surprised. This industry is all about profits and marketing and less about true quality and performance.



> I've come up with a test that seems to be accurate and matches well with the Oberst bar test results I've seen that I know to be reliable. The test is repeatable and results in easily comparable data. The results are pretty dramatic but I'm not sure I'll ever release them - just getting too old to deal with the constant legal threats I've received for my past explorations.


What exactly would you be doing that is against the law?

BTW, I've seen your site a few times before. I think it is a great service to car audio enthusiasts. It's so hard to get 3rd party product comparisons that are actually useful in car audio.

SG


----------



## azncarjunkie (Jan 21, 2009)

look how happy he is because he uses dynamat!


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

smellygas said:


> What exactly would you be doing that is against the law?


I've been threatened with legal action twice for pointing out that a seller's claims were very obviously false. I was threatened another time for not updating the site quickly enough to satisfy another seller. I've received death threats from ED fans. Nothing has come of any of this, but it's damn annoying. It's a jungle out here


----------



## smellygas (Feb 21, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> I've been threatened with legal action twice for pointing out that a seller's claims were very obviously false. I was threatened another time for not updating the site quickly enough to satisfy another seller. I've received death threats from ED fans. Nothing has come of any of this, but it's damn annoying. It's a jungle out here


No kidding! Well, so out of curiosity, which product did you choose for your car? Is this also what you would recommend? Thanks! 

SG


----------

