Comparing MicroSeal to a common fiber protector is,…well, like comparing a New Ferrari to a 1966 Studebaker…
|
MicroSeal
|
Common Fiber Protectors
|
|
1. Penetrates complete fiber and will survive many professional cleanings and normal wear |
1. Does not penetrate fiber, but coats only where spray hits. Cleaning or normal wear easily fractures the fiber protection and you must pay for re-application |
|
2. Reduces sunfading by nearly 100% on most fabrics – Independent laboratory verification |
2. No protection against sunfading. If they make the claim, no independent laboratory verification |
|
3. MicroSeal has been thoroughly tested by independent laboratories from around the world |
3. No independent laboratory tests
|
|
4. Reduces smoke density |
4. No protection. In fact, most fiber protectors are highly toxic when they burn |
|
5. Reduces flame spread |
5. No claims of reducing flame spread |
|
6. If flame retardant is applied to fabrics, retardant is sealed in so normal everyday cleaning won’t remove |
6. No protection for flame retardant |
|
7. Colorfast-has no effect on color or texture of treated fabrics |
7. Have been known to “yellow” light colored fabrics over time or when sprayed |
|
8. Mildew and static electricity resistance |
8. No protection |
|
9. MicroSeal only attaches to fibers and will not seal in anything non-fibrous, so fabric / carpet does not have to be clean before application |
9. Many products will seal both fibrous and non-fibrous particles. Therefore, dirty fabrics treated with these chemicals will have dirt, stains, etc., sealed in at time of treatment. |
|
10. Does not damage woodwork, metal |
10. Will spot woodwork, metal and glass. Can cause problems if not removed quickly |
|
11. Can be used on any material with a fibrous nature including suedes and smooth finished leathers |
11. Cannot be used on some types of fabrics, such as suede or smooth finished leathers |
|
12. MicroSeal is non-toxic and non-allergenic – |
12. EPA test reports have cited health and environmental concerns with fiber protectors that use flurochemicals and PTFE Resin – 95% of fabric protectors are either fluorochemical or co-polymer / polymer (plastic) based |
The Bead Test Comparison
A simple bead test of a coater (fluorochemical or polymer based fabric protectors) vs. MicroSeal will sometimes result in the “apparent superiority of the coater. This is because the coater will cover more of the space between the fibers while MicroSeal will penetrate and seal the individual fibers only. Further testing after cleaning and wear will result in the coater breaking up and permanent stains on the fibers occurring thereafter. Even ordinary dirt can be difficult to vacuum because the broken coater material “hangs on” to the dirt. MicroSeal will not break up, wear off, or clean off and will continue to protect the fibers from permanent stains and sun fading for many years. Don’t be fooled by competitors who have suddenly started marketing their product as “nano-technology”, “permanent” or “long lasting” in response to MicroSeal’s performance. If their product is a fluroochemical or polymer, it is a coater that will fracture and clean or wear off easily and needs to be reapplied after each cleaning. This poor product performance combined with the EPA’s 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program (a heavy verdict against the flurochemical industry) makes the choice clear.
MicroSeal will always win the most important test of all…THE TEST OF TIME. More than words, 25 years in the aerospace industry, and worldwide independent laboratory testing speaks for itself.
