I bet I could get Don to test his CLD tiles with this testing method...
Damping Technologies, Inc.
The SAE J1637 style test is the only fair way to compare deadeners. Just because one product is thicker than the other does not mean it will preform better, it truly comes down to the adhesive. The SAE J1637 cost $600 per sample to have it tested. I had them test 10+ samples (my own and several other brands) for me in the past, IMO it is the only real way to compare deadeners. It compares how they preform against each other acoustically.
[email protected] or check the AT section there is two threads with the SAE J1637 style tests comparing a few companies (please note I have not posted results for every sample I have tested but have posted the test results for SS, Dynamat, and AT).
I do not want to clutter this thread.
We know that it is not all about the thickness of the CLD that determines its effectiveness in actual dampening... as you know there are also 2 parts to deadening, controlling resonance of the panel AND mass loading, in which the thicker butyl layer weighing more is almost always going to be more effective.
Especially in the Car audio arena the idea is to stop/prevent flex as much as possible as well as just control resonance.
We've heard of Damping Technologies, and the test were already planning to be done. Thanks for the insight
I'm pleased everyone is back on topic, it's a perfect opportunity for a discussion about it and other products. It was never my intention to make
other sound deadeners look bad, nor make MurderMat look "the best". I've stated this 3 times previously. I pulled the specifications in the graphs
off of each co respective websites and compared what Dynamat, FatMat, SecondSkin and Audio Technix wrote, that's it. What you seen in the
graph's was never a matter of personal opinion. I can't help it if the numbers specified by the companies referring to their ''premium versions'',
Dynamat Extreme, FatMat MegaMat, SecondSkin Pro, and Audio Technix Pro were all "surpassed" by MurderMat's standard 87 mil BL version.
My personal experience with MurderMat is that it's a great product, but is it the best? Who know's, I'll leave that to you guys to figure out.
---------- Post added at 11:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:31 PM ----------
here. So are we to understand the comparison chart you made I posted does not reflect
the testing you paid for of those products then? Or was what you just posted here additional. Thanks.
The chart you posted from the AT section is similar to yours. It is a chart showing what manufactures said the thickness of there products were. Then I went out and purchased every product on the chart. Next I measured each sample with a micro-meter (which you can get at a hardware store for $25-50) to see if each sample was as thick as the manufacture claimed.
Forgive my noob question, but are the higher numbers or the lower numbers better with the temp/hz chart?