The Brew Cabin

Unfortunately we had an experience where one of our competitors otained the report and then doctored it as if it were about his product. It was very time consuming and costly to stop this so, unfortunately, we no longer send out copies of the report and only leave copies with professional specifiers. We, therefore, generally rely on our reputation & testimonials to do the talking for us - I do hope you understand.

In brief MTC tested our super & ultra against one of the then market leading products which they identified as INS. They then applied our products alongside some competitors products and reported on the relative condition every 3 months over a 12 months period. We attach a brief extract from their conclusions


RESULTS OF THE TEST PROGRAM



When judged against control, only SUPER and ULTRA can be considered to have met the criteria set and thus judged as suitable for purpose.



Of the 8 criteria set in control, INS failed to meet 6 and of the remaining 2, can only be said to have satisfied 1, resistance to lime bloom. Slip resistance on the block paved was unchanged after treatment and on the pattern imprinted concrete it was reduced by the application of the INS coating.









CONCLUSIONS



Both SUPER and ULTRA performed well although the clear leader was ULTRA. The performance of INS is well below that felt to be acceptable.



Some loss of gloss from the coating is inevitable as the surface is trafficked as such contact creates micro abrasions in the resin surface that reduce the ability of the surface to refract light however 12 months after application ULTRA retained a high degree of sheen.



....... Strength of lamination and UV resistance are fundamentally important as without them the coating will have no possibility of achieving the other 6 control features as it will have worn away and this was the basic problem with INS.