Madico vs. 3M

docscustoms · July 26

Hey guys,

I’m just getting back into automotive window tint, having worked at a professional shop/in the home garage years ago. What I ended up doing at that time on my own was using the shop’s methods but with different material (Sungard at the time, rather than 3M at the shop).

The Sungard products (now under the Madico umbrella) are much more cost effective than 3M, great quality, and I didn’t mind working on too much. I only have 2 complaints, like I used to. One is that during install, the film wants to fold in on itself, as opposed to the 3M. This is particularly annoying while draping a quarter window’s film over my hand, for example.

The other difference is that since the film is much thicker/stiffer (?) it’s less sensitive to heat, for example it takes much more heat for the film to react during shrinking compared to 3M. The problem I have with this is covering up imperfections post install. When it comes to contamination, I used to torch/press out and eliminate the visible pocket of air at each dust spot. With the Madico film I haven’t had any luck with this method which is frustrating.

Have any of you run into similar issues, or could steer me towards a film that would behave more like 3M did but at a lower price point? Any advice in general would help.

Thanks very much in advance,

Happy Tinting,

Mitch

TintDude · July 26

Back in the stone age when I was using 3M, curling was my bitter complaint. I could deal with most other idiosyncrasies, but curling was the worst. Second to that was a coating that had to literally be rinsed off right after pulling the liner. Any little bit left over looked like snot under the film. :facepalm That was a long time ago though, just mentioned it because curling would be such a pain in the butt. Every time it curls it brings contamination and the possibility of creasing.

I've never used Madico, so I can't speak to that, but I can tell you the highest spoken of film on this forum tends to be Global.

docscustoms · July 26

3 minutes ago, TintDude said:

Back in the stone age when I was using 3M, curling was my bitter complaint. I could deal with most other idiosyncrasies, but curling was the worst. Second to that was a coating that had to literally be rinsed off right after pulling the liner. Any little bit left over looked like snot under the film. That was a long time ago though, just mentioned it because curling would be such a pain in the butt. Every time it curls it brings contamination and the possibility of creasing.

I've never used Madico, so I can't speak to that, but I can tell you the highest spoken of film on this forum tends to be Global.

Thanks for your reply. I don’t remember anything about a weird coating under the liner on 3M, that’s funny. Seemed okay to me.

I have been reading a lot of stuff on here about Global I’ll have to check them out. I guess right now what I’m most curious about are films that allow the dust to be hidden like I mentioned.

TintDude · July 26

34 minutes ago, docscustoms said:

I don’t remember anything about a weird coating under the liner on 3M, that’s funny. Seemed okay to me.

I should have been more clear, this was in the '80s. :thumb

docscustoms · July 26

Just now, TintDude said:

I should have been more clear, this was in the '80s.

Back in a time I didn’t exist! 😂

Makes sense that they have made improvements since then.

TintDude · July 26

OK, now get off my lawn. :oldman :lol just kidding

docscustoms · July 26

17 minutes ago, TintDude said:

OK, now get off my lawn. just kidding

Hahaha it’s an honor, I’m sure you’ll lay some more wisdom on me in the future 🫡

Dano · July 26

That detack solution was terrible!!

To hide dirt, use a carbon/color stable film.

Yes the Global products are really good. Also not area restricted like some of the big names names, but definitely on par. The only failures I've had since using it have been "installer error"....ahemm...cough...cough.

docscustoms · July 27

40 minutes ago, Dano said:

That detack solution was terrible!!

To hide dirt, use a carbon/color stable film.

Yes the Global products are really good. Also not area restricted like some of the big names names, but definitely on par. The only failures I've had since using it have been "installer error"....ahemm...cough...cough.

Hey Dano!

Is that the difference? “Color stable” for example is what the 3M film I was using named, I guess that’s an actual term across different brands?

(If that counted as English^)

And those dang installers!! Get some sunlight and deal with those flaws! Lol.

DynamicATL · July 27

3M has come a long way if you haven't used it in years. 3M Obsidian replaced the FX series, which is a higher-quality, color-stable film, whereas FX had some failures. 3M Color Stable (confusing name) is a Carbon film that is amazing but is pricey for a film that does not block much heat. 3M Ceramic IR is my favorite film on the lineup—great color and amazing performance. Everyone at our shop has installed it on their vehicles over the more well-known option, Llumar IRX, which we also carry. 3M Crystalline is the same as before but is being updated very soon.

With that being said, I would probably check out Global over 3M. Every 3M film is harder to shrink/install, so it always takes more time. Besides Ceramic IR, it is very pricey when compared to other mannys. Also, if you can't install Crystalline, I'd skip it for sure, as that is the most known 3M film.

Color Stable is a general term for films that are not supposed to fade or change color. Take XPEL CS (Color Stable), their entry-level dyed film. 3M named their Carbon line this because, I assume, their entry-level FX series was not color stable. However, it is a full Carbon film that utilizes their patented carbon polyester, unlike films like Suntek Carbon, which has very little in it.