Niagara Protective Coatings Epoxy Floor System

[rjones241]

Hey Guys,

Just wondering if some of the more knowledgeable people could take a gander at the spec sheets for a couple of floor coating products. I've learned enough here to look for a 100% solids, but when we start getting into abrasion resistance, compressive strength, I'm not sure what good numbers are.

The product that I'm specifically looking at is the following:

http://www.niacoat.com/PDF/NPCProdInfoKROMOTEX.pdf
http://www.niacoat.com/Pages/Kromotex.html

One thing that I noticed was they spec out a thickness of 50-85mils! This seems much thicker than what people are quoting around here, and I'm wondering if I'm missing something.

I'm also up for considering alternatives (specifically Wolverine coatings), but the attractive part of these guys is they are also in the great white north, so I avoid duty charges.

Thanks all!
Richard

 

[AlphaGarage]

For some reason I can't get the pages to open (probably operator error due to currently working on a strange (for me) system), so I can't address the specific product. Although there are plenty of situations that require that depth of coverage, it is quite extreme for a typical home or shop location. I do know that Wolverine specs for a 5/12/5 system for most all DIY jobs. That would be 5 mils of primer, 12 mils of body, and 5 mils of clear or top coat. That ratio has proven to be a good balance of price/performance.

As a side issue, and this is just my personal viewpoint, one of the limitations of spec sheets is that the data is all over the place and somewhat unreliable. Of primary concern the testing is usually done in-house, so the objective, third party, impartiality is seriously lacking. Check out factory claims of horsepower compared to car magazine test results, often times it's as if they're testing different models.

Even if they do strive to be honest and open, the testing procedures and facilities are extremely sensitive and if not carefully calibrated a small error can lead to very gross incorrect results and conclusions. Many of the tests and calibration procedures require destructive processes, so accurate tests can be costly, which means many times shortcuts are taken.

And then even independent 3rd party tests are subject to subjective interpretation. Just check out the controversies surrounding many Consumer Report reviews.

One place where these tests can be extremely helpful is in-house research and development. There one's often looking for relative results between two samples as opposed to the absolute measurements of either one.

However as soon as those numbers are used for comparisons outside that closed loop environment the figures should be taken with a grain of salt. Or two.