My deadener > yours...

no you got peel and seal with a sweet blue logo....
my deadener is > 2 layers of damp on inner and outer, layer of egay on both skins, 1/2 gallon per door of sludge and 2 layers on overkill on inner skin on on outer
if your doors aren't deadened enough yet, can i recommend concrete?

 
BH5 is meant to line home speaker boxes and is moisture resistant. For use in a car door you'll want to be sure that what you have is water proof. Since it is a vibration damper/OCC/MLV barrier/OCC sandwich, there's a lot of volume to hold water. Anything that waterproofs also diminishes the ability to absorb sound. The integrated MLV barrier is it's distinguishing characteristic but to get any benefit from it you will need 100% coverage with no gaps in between the tiles.

 
to get any benefit from it you will need 100% coverage with no gaps in between the tiles.
Preach!

It's a well-engineered product, but grotesquely over-priced. A good alternative would be Whispermat, but it only has the decoupled barrier and the OCF, so you'd need a layer of deadener down first. Again, with the OCF, you're looking at moisture issues, so you'd want to film-face it with foil or mylar and hit it with some sealant.

 
Preach!
It's a well-engineered product, but grotesquely over-priced. A good alternative would be Whispermat, but it only has the decoupled barrier and the OCF, so you'd need a layer of deadener down first. Again, with the OCF, you're looking at moisture issues, so you'd want to film-face it with foil or mylar and hit it with some sealant.
and you may not even need a full layer of deadener. I just ran a series of tests using a very crude version of the standardized tests we have been screaming for and it actually seems to be working. It looks like my previous attempts to devise a home brew vibration damping test procedure where over-thought.

I started with painted 12"X12" aluminum sheet metal blanks and drilled a hole in the corner of each so they could be suspended by string - like a percussionist's triangle. I hung one up, hit it in the center with a drum stick and rang like a cheap cymbal and had a nice long sustain. I then covered the corner farthest from the hole with a 6"X6" square of Dynamat Xtreme. To my surprise, it was dead as hell - just a ping with no audible sustain. I repeated this with new blanks and Cascade V-Max, SS Damplifier and Damplifier Pro and all responded similarly. I'm pretty sure that if I had started with smaller pieces I might have found differences between these products, but excellent deadeneing with 25% coverage represents a threshold I found interesting.

Then I moved on to Peel & Seal, curious about the performance of asphalt vs. butyl. This should be the same result you'd get with FatMat. 6" square applied like the others and while there was an audible drop in the resonant frequency, the decay time was not noticeably shortened. I kept adding more until after adding the equivalent of 4 6" squares, the resonant frequency had dropped significantly (but still audible) and the decay was shorter, but still present. 4 times as much Peel & Seal didn't perform as well as the products that met the threshold test.

I moved on to eDead v1SE² - butyl adhesive with a Mylar facing instead of aluminum foil. It took 3 6" squares to get something close to 4 of the Peel & Seal. Again, not as good as the first batch of products - 3 times as much material and inferior results.

I'm waiting for some liquid deadener to fully cure, but it looks like it's performance is going to be somewhere between the extremes I saw above. People are obviously going to attack this procedure and I welcome them to try to find something better, but it seems absolutely clear to me that butyl adhesive and heavy aluminum foil are a winning combination and that the point of diminishing returns occurs much earlier than I expected.

 
Very cool.

Now if you could find the RF of that sheet somehow and analyze the decay in like ms or something, that would be sweet.

Also, just as a control, take the weight equivalent in a material that has the mass but no viscoelasticity and fasten it to it and see what happens. I like duct tape and rocks, personally. Many are addicted to this mass loading idea and just don't buy it. I like to use NHMC for a mass loader due to it's ease of application and density, so it would be interesting to see what would happen if you switched the CLD out for NHMC and matched the mass. To me, NHMC doesn't really possess much elasticity (it's pretty plastic) but my senses tell me it might do a good job because it's still in a semi-liquid (viscous) state.

And it would be good to do a test just with the butyl and not the foil. You can get the foil off of VMax, but it's not pretty.

I think you'll get less rubuttal if you put the exact amount of mass on the sheet for each product. The PnS zealots will argue all day that mass is mass and cheaper is better. Of course they are wrong, but it would be fun to shut them up with something. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 
i spent 400 shipped off a guy on here for 4 dynamat extreme bulk paks.... i think i got a better deal.
i got an extreme bulk pack once for $20. kid had bought two for his car, only used one and gave me the other for $20 when i bought his subs (for $500)//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif:D

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
Old Thread: Please note, there have been no replies in this thread for over 3 years!
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.

About this thread

photocrazy8

10+ year member
Probably doesn't like you
Thread starter
photocrazy8
Joined
Location
CA
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
50
Views
3,069
Last reply date
Last reply from
Rudy
IMG_20260506_140749.jpg

74eldiablo

    May 22, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
design.jpeg

WNCTracker

    May 22, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top