But it made a huge difference.
Everyone says there is diminishing returns past %25
There was a controlled test done of all sound deadener products to compare effectiveness. Most tests done were %25-%30 coverage.
But they also did a %29 vs %95 coverage.
It was using a different product but the concept is the same.
Seeing what difference if any the extra coverage would make.
The test was done with and without the dampening product on bare metal then overlayed for comparison.
Here's the overlay of bare metal vs. %29 damped metal frequency response.
The bare metal has the large peak at the resonant freq.

And here's the overlay of the bare metal vs. %95 coverage.

Damped metal waterfall plot%29 coverage

Damped metal waterfall plot %95 coverage

The decay plot is definitely better with the 95% coverage on the main resonant frequency.
It decays faster on the waterfall plot, and almost completely flattens out. It is also a significant reduction in the immediate response.



















Leave a comment: